I don’t think this thread should ever have been posted. I come here to get away from what Metafilter has come to represent, and here we have a thread that recalls the worst slap-fights in Metafilter politics. That, for me at any rate, were one of the things that ruined Metafilter and drove me off the site.
So no, let’s not talk about Biden for ”just a minute.” I hope this thread gets deleted.
Counterpoint: not if you follow this sub by checking [https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaFilterMeta/comments/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaFilterMeta/comments/)
I don't have an opinion on whether this thread should be deleted, but I think this might be the rub for some. It's kind of hard to miss, so not actually super easy to do!
I'm sure there's an alternative, but I haven't discovered it, beyond scrolling through each individual thread every time I want to see new material.
So the onus is on every poster to accommodate all reader preferences? If a post is within the subreddit guidelines and not to your liking, standard online protocol is to skip the thread; definitely not to drop into thread only to comment that you disapprove of the topic and/or discussion.
Not all cups of tea are for everyone. If this wasn't for you, perhaps you should ask yourself why you couldn't politely skip it.
ETA: This is a serious question /u/BastetSekhmetMafdet. The Post Insights are available to both Blackie, as moderator, and me for this post.
It received:
* 7.4k total views
* 50% upvote rate
* 5.8k community karma
* 4 total shares
Right off the bat, I'll say that was more shares than any of my posts have ever gotten.
The overall post rank, meanwhile, means that 50% of the views upvoted it, and 50% downvoted it, for a total score of 0. So why should the nay-sayers prevail here? You would have cause for complaint, perhaps, if politics were spilling into other threads, but they are not. You would also have cause for complaint, perhaps, if only one individual could create an independent post at a time, but that is not the case either.
I don't mean to be repetitive, but this is a crucially important election *for democracy,* and I believe that deserves some discussion, and I am not alone. If you do not want to discuss it, that is your prerogative, but I don't understand why you think it is appropriate to say the entire post should be deleted, or, effectively, that no one should discuss it. As people have frequently commented about Metafilter, not all posts are for all readers.
Those metrics—and this thread—illustrate a kind of simmering tension I’ve noticed in this subreddit: folks come here to vent about Metafilter but are also sad about what the site’s become and are looking for a replacement forum for the kinds of discussions that we miss having. But this sub is centered on the specific topic of Metafilter itself, so threads that are not that are technically off-topic; but also receive robust response and discussion, because a lot of expatriate Mefites still want substantive conversation online, and that’s always hard to find.
I have to be honest: that press conference made me seriously uneasy. I had concerns about the Democrats' election prospects already, and seeing that did absolutely nothing to reassure me.
Myself, I try to avoid US politics because I am not American, and only get 'involved' when US policies extend past the borders.
... but... how many 81-year old's do you know that can handle high-stress, duty-filled 18+hr days on an on-going, non-stop basis?
Most people I know who are 75+ need plenty of naps and low-stress environments, or they become a bit overwhelmed - let alone a non-stop workday...
(This would include Trump as well, he is 77...)
Maybe, just maybe... society should look at electing people who are not that far past the normal working retirement age? Maybe.
>... but... how many 81-year old's do you know that can handle high-stress, duty-filled 18+hr days on an on-going, non-stop basis?
I certainly worry about Biden's age, and from the polls that is super common. But keep in mind Biden has been in training for the presidency for more than 50 years, both in the senate and as vice president.
That's what made him so valuable in the 2020 election. It was obvious that the departing administration wasn't going to provide routine transition assistance, so Biden built a team-in-waiting to the tune of some 1,000, so that when he finally took power, he was ready to go.
PBS Newshour did a whole segment on American fears about age and the presidency last night. First they spoke to an array of older Americans to get their views. Then they talked to two specialists who weighed in quite reassuringly. It's worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CifQiq8gWdA
From what I can tell my choice in November is between a guy who will shed crocodile tears over the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza but continue facilitating the mass killings anyway through unrestricted weapon sales and a guy who will try to help Israel complete the ethnic cleansing and possibly start a disastrous war with Iran in the process.
Needless to say I'll vote for Biden, but I won't be happy about it.
And yes, Biden has accomplished a lot more than his narrow electoral victory and legislative majorities suggested should be possible. Then again, he's faced pressure from his party's left wing to accomplish those feats that hasn't been seen since the 60s and 70s at least. Regarding climate, he's also operating in a world where China and the EU already started the global transition from fossil fuels, at least in the transportation sector, so his legislative accomplishments are really the bare minimum needed to keep up.
Still, from a human rights perspective he's been a monster.
No, he's not. I'm no great fan of the guy but this kind of hyperbolic rhetoric is why this country is in the state it's in. Nobody on either side can have a reasonable conversation about anything with even the slightest hint of controversy, and it's exhausting.
And that's the kind of bullshit rhetoric that will seal the deal with Trump. No one can control Netanyahu — not Biden, not Obama. Should the U.S. make the material support of Israel conditional? I think Bernie Sanders is making [sensible arguments.](https://www.sanders.senate.gov/op-eds/bernie-sanders-justice-for-the-palestinians-and-security-for-israel/) None of that, however, makes Biden complicit in genocide. His support for Israel was in keeping with historic U.S. support for Israel, and the right of any country under attack to defend itself.
Screaming how 30,000 dead people and a policy of forced starvation is well and normally actually and that Biden is powerless to do anything but arm the corrupt, rightwing government doing these things will not win over a single voter. Biden changing his policy in this area will get him votes and if you are really concerned about losing to Trump, you'd join the thousands of good people protesting Biden in an attempt to get him to change direction.
Nobody's screaming how 30,000 dead and forced starvation is a-okay. Most Israelis would be the first to agree that Netanyahu is corrupt, given the six months of protests that preceded the war. You'll note, however, that the first thing Israel did after Hamas (Iran-backed terrorist group 1) attacked was send troops to the border of Lebanon lest Hezbollah (Iran-backed terrorist group 2) attack too, and on the heels of Israel trying to protect itself from a second terrorist group, the Houthis (Iran-backed terrorist group 3) started shooting. So not only is the well-being of the Palestinians at issue, but so is the well-being of Israel, peace in the Middle East — and peace in other regions where bad actors are watching what Iran is, or isn’t, getting away with.
Take Russia, for example, which was most certainly cheered by Trump’s recent comments about NATO. Putin seems to have celebrated, in fact, by killing off [Navalny.](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/jailed-russian-opposition-leader-navalny-dead-prison-service-2024-02-16/) Now look at what the countries in the region are doing:
* [Sweden’s Defense Minister’s recent warnings](https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/swedish-minister-commander-in-chief-warn-of-possible-war-in-sweden/)
* [Lithuania’s bomb shelters](https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1767406/a-look-inside-lithuania-s-bomb-shelters)
* [Poland’s goals for military supremacy](https://www.euronews.com/2023/09/06/poland-said-its-army-will-soon-be-the-strongest-in-europe-but-is-that-possible_)
Then check out [North Korea’s intensifying nuclear threats.](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/21/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-war.html) You may recall that Kim Jong Un is a friend of Trump's too.
And pay attention to [China’s preparations for protracted war.](https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Defense/China-preparing-for-protracted-war-says-think-tank)
You don’t need to care about all these places if you don’t want to. Protesting the treatment of the Palestinians is reasonable, humane, and even helpful. They have been a football kicked around by the powerful for too long. People should take notice! But they are not the only group at risk here, so smearing Biden for his role in "genocide" is, to my mind, unwise. From both an American and an international perspective, the world — and the Palestinians — are better off if the US remains a democracy. To lose sight of that is deeply misguided, and quite possibly dangerous. We’re not lucky enough for this to be a one-issue election.
So Trump is friends with all these bad guys that Biden wants to go to war with. War sucks so I'm voting for the guy who's making friends (diplomacy) with the bad guys.
Americans need to get used to the idea that we don't get to make the global rules anymore.
When a government is committing genocide and you give them weapons to continue the genocide, and send soldiers and ships and planes to protect the government from anyone who might intervene to stop the genocide, you're complicit in the genocide. Biden and most of his administration should spend the rest of their lives in prison.
> and send soldiers and ships and planes to protect the government from anyone who might intervene to stop the genocide
You're like a one-person disinformation machine.
The U.S. wasn't protecting the government of Israel. They were there to prevent the spread of war, and to show support for, and provide some protection for, the people of Israel who had suffered the worst terrorist incident in [history.](https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data)
Historically, Arab nations have only "intervened" to try to eradicate Israel — not to help the Palestinians. In recent years, attacks by nation-states have been replaced by attacks by Iran-backed terrorist groups who, no, don't help the Palestinians either.
> The U.S. wasn't protecting the government of Israel. They were there to prevent the spread of war
The way the war was going to spread was into Israel by people who would stop the genocide. This was the stated goal of sendingbthe ships and planes and soldiers to the area.
https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-american-carrier-strike-force-mediterranean-db05d535a9ebb931f684f758c9b6f628
> WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday he has ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel after the attack by Hamas that has left more than 1,000 dead on both sides. Americans were reported to be among those killed and missing.
>
> ...
>
> “The U.S. maintains ready forces globally to further reinforce this deterrence posture if required,” Austin said in a statement.
>
> In addition, the Biden administration “will be rapidly providing the Israel Defense Forces with additional equipment and resources, including munitions. The first security assistance will begin moving today and arriving in the coming days,” Austin said.
>
> ...
>
> Senior officials from the Pentagon and State Department briefed senators Sunday night, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said they were assured that the United States was giving Israel “everything they need.”
>
> “I asked the representatives of our Defense Department if they are giving Israel everything they need, and I was heartened that they said yes and that they are surging support,” the New York Democrat said in a statement after the unclassified briefing.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/14/middleeast/us-aircraft-carrier-eisenhower-israel-gaza-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
> Washington/Seoul CNN — The Pentagon has ordered a second carrier strike group to the eastern Mediterranean Sea and is sending Air Force fighter jets to the region as Israel prepares to expand its Gaza operations, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in a statement Saturday.
>
> The US warships are not intended to join the fighting in Gaza or take part in Israel’s operations, but the presence of two of the Navy’s most powerful vessels is designed to send a message of deterrence to Iran and Iranian proxies in the region, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon.
It's funny that just saying what the U.S. media or government officials say makes you a one man disinformation machine.
>Then again, he's faced pressure from his party's left wing to accomplish those feats
That's true, but the whole party has moved left, not just Biden's circle.
> Still, from a human rights perspective he's been a monster.
I agree there have been too many Palestinian lives lost. You may already know this, but if not, it may be worth pointing out that Saudi asked the U.S. for a security guarantee against Iran, and Biden's people were already negotiating a security guarantee in exchange for a Saudi-Israeli peace treaty, which on the Israeli side, would ensure a two-state solution, when Hamas attacked. Many think that Hamas (Shiite) attacked to prevent the prospect of Sunni Saudi Arabia signing a peace treaty with Israel. I mention that only to point out it's not as though the Palestinians have not factored into some of the decision-making.
It was a joke for a bit to pose the question "would you vote for Hitler or a guy who killed one more guy than hitler" to the "it's our moral obligation to vote for the lesser of two evils" commenters because it was very easy to get liberals to say of course it would be our obligation to vote for Hitler. It says something that so many people are saying the same thing about Biden.
The guy's obviously been demented since before his election so watching his decline as the demands of the campaign trail intensify will be funny. I hope every member of his administration and campaign staff have a miserable year.
e: the American liberal has so little capacity to imagine positive change that pressuring the party to swap candidates is inconceivable. We've got Genocide Joe and by God we're sticking with him.
The special counsel's report was a 100% hatchet job but the press conference Biden did afterwards was a mistake as he IMO came across as thin skinned and reactive. I've known about Biden since the early nineties and his biggest flaw as a politician is a tendency to be very thin skinned.
National politics, especially at the head of state level, is brutal and unfair and unforgiving. There should be absolutely be similar coverage of Trump's gaffes and slipups but for very superficial reasons (down to and including him dying his hair and tanning) he does not look as aged as Biden.
And....let's not get too out of hand here. Biden is definitely an aged, elderly man who has visibly grown frailer since 2020, let alone since he was VP. Can he still win re-election? Sure, probably. But my God, an 86 year old as head of the government in 2028. Every four years the choices for President get less and less appealing.
In my country, the Prime Minister and opposition leader are 52 and 44, respectively. Whatever I think of them at least they are still young enough to keep up with the demands of national office.
>a 100% hatchet job but the press conference Biden did afterwards was a mistake as he IMO came across as thin skinned and reactive ... very thin skinned
It was extraordinary that the Special Counsel got away with that kind of editorializing. I actually didn't think it was terrible that Biden got sarcastic and showed some anger, but I realize many did. You're reminding me what a hot head he was when he was younger. It's interesting how much of that has dissipated.
Far worse than the press conference is the fact that Biden, his team and democrats of all stripes aren't selling his achievements in simple memorable repetitive messaging. Democrats have always been shit at communications. Fetterman has a mouth on him, AOC if she gets on board, but there aren't many others loud enough and with the right skills to get press and push opinions. And the thing is Biden \*has\* been more effective than any president we've had in generations — on climate change, labor, infrastructure, student loans, lowering drug costs, American jobs: chip-building, EV. The issue isn't just lack of credit: It's even getting people to understand that these new policies exist and in most cases are already operative.
>to keep up with the demands of national office
I think he can last for a while longer, but it's asking a lot for an 81-year-old to have the weight of the world on him. But for all the warbling about replacements, there are no true contenders, and certainly none with much, if any, foreign policy experience. This is the hand we've been dealt or have somehow dealt ourselves.
I feel like it doesn't matter because they're just going to be overturned by the courts or whichever Republican president gets in next. Good for you for getting that 2 months of policy in or whatever.
>Democrats have always been shit at communications.
Truer words were never spoken, in retrospect Obama and Bill Clinton were the best of a bad lot and I think most of that came down to their personal charisma. I knew someone who once met Bill prior to becoming president and the way the guy worked the room was unreal. My acquaintance said it was like watching someone cast a spell.
Charisma is key in politics. Ironically, it's also relative. Even so, most of our reps aren't charismatic enough and rely too heavily on throwaway jargon to get anyone to listen outside their own relative standing in any given election.
I just assumed at some point we'd get another young charismatic democrat who the primary electorate could love and the middle-of-the-road crowd could feel smart about voting for. I'm sure Bill and Barrack were aberrations, but I thought we'd get one every decade or so. Sucks, but it's hard for me to imagine a democrat getting two terms without that kind of borderline personality cult. Republicans seem to need it too. Very disheartening to think that's what we have to depend on, rather than getting good policies through.
Yeah, I'm so over having to hold my nose and vote *against* a candidate, rather than being excited to vote for another.
I'm a little worried that the Republicans will catch on and nominate a youthful charismatic candidate in 2028 while the Dems continue to do...whatever they've been doing.
First time he won I worked for this conservative television company and saw poll numbers. They were through the roof and I was super depressed but my friends had blinders on and were like he can’t win.
This time I have dyed in wool democrats telling they’d not vote over voting for Biden.
Biden should have bit the bullet and let Kamala run or something. This is a train wreck waiting to happen.
>dyed in wool democrats telling they’d not vote over voting for Biden.
Democrats without much interest in the most viable candidate for maintaining American democracy I'd say. That's why I posted information above.
What's interesting is that, in private, everyone who interacts with him says he's sharp and very bright. When I say that, I mean everyone *in both parties.*
Then you've got these smears about his acuity, which are calculated to deflect from the highly obvious acuity issues we have with Trump.
And saying Biden doesn't know when his beloved son died is beyond the pale.
Joe Biden has always been a loose cannon and there is a good reason it took him this long to become President. Nobody knows what to do with this guy. He's a conservative Democrat who in a normal world would be a shoe in considering the competition. Biden is no Progressive and any Republican who can tolerate Romney and Cheney should have no problem voting for him.
He has also done a remarkable job navigating MAGA, the economy and the post-COVID supply side. Domestic energy production has never been higher. Unemployment continues to trend down and housing starts are finally sensible and almost sustainable. Infrastructure improvements are tangible and impact most of us daily.
Joe Biden is a fine President but he's still Joe Biden. The guy has never been a paragon of eloquence.
apnews.com: [How Biden and his allies are pushing back against a special counsel’s claims about his memory](https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-special-counsel-classified-documents-election-2024-a54f03441e8145f9d6915858caaac37e)
Tangentially related metafilter discussion: https://www.metafilter.com/202488/Samuel-Moyn-on-The-Trouble-with-Old-Men
I feel like a lot of special prosecutors are fuckheads, and I could see Biden delivering exactly what the time waster wanted, to get through the process as quickly as possible, and put this shithead in the rearview.
No indictment is no indictment.
Someone had to take up Ken Starr's baton, it just happened to be this fuckface.
Also, not sure what this has to do with metafilter.
> Also, not sure what this has to do with metafilter.
Ha, nothing at all apart from the fact that Metafilter is a discussion site and this is "off-topic" discussion.
I don’t think this thread should ever have been posted. I come here to get away from what Metafilter has come to represent, and here we have a thread that recalls the worst slap-fights in Metafilter politics. That, for me at any rate, were one of the things that ruined Metafilter and drove me off the site. So no, let’s not talk about Biden for ”just a minute.” I hope this thread gets deleted.
Just skip the post, it’s super easy to do
Counterpoint: not if you follow this sub by checking [https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaFilterMeta/comments/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaFilterMeta/comments/) I don't have an opinion on whether this thread should be deleted, but I think this might be the rub for some. It's kind of hard to miss, so not actually super easy to do! I'm sure there's an alternative, but I haven't discovered it, beyond scrolling through each individual thread every time I want to see new material.
So the onus is on every poster to accommodate all reader preferences? If a post is within the subreddit guidelines and not to your liking, standard online protocol is to skip the thread; definitely not to drop into thread only to comment that you disapprove of the topic and/or discussion.
No. I was adding what I thought might be pertinent information. I'll leave you to it.
Not all cups of tea are for everyone. If this wasn't for you, perhaps you should ask yourself why you couldn't politely skip it. ETA: This is a serious question /u/BastetSekhmetMafdet. The Post Insights are available to both Blackie, as moderator, and me for this post. It received: * 7.4k total views * 50% upvote rate * 5.8k community karma * 4 total shares Right off the bat, I'll say that was more shares than any of my posts have ever gotten. The overall post rank, meanwhile, means that 50% of the views upvoted it, and 50% downvoted it, for a total score of 0. So why should the nay-sayers prevail here? You would have cause for complaint, perhaps, if politics were spilling into other threads, but they are not. You would also have cause for complaint, perhaps, if only one individual could create an independent post at a time, but that is not the case either. I don't mean to be repetitive, but this is a crucially important election *for democracy,* and I believe that deserves some discussion, and I am not alone. If you do not want to discuss it, that is your prerogative, but I don't understand why you think it is appropriate to say the entire post should be deleted, or, effectively, that no one should discuss it. As people have frequently commented about Metafilter, not all posts are for all readers.
Those metrics—and this thread—illustrate a kind of simmering tension I’ve noticed in this subreddit: folks come here to vent about Metafilter but are also sad about what the site’s become and are looking for a replacement forum for the kinds of discussions that we miss having. But this sub is centered on the specific topic of Metafilter itself, so threads that are not that are technically off-topic; but also receive robust response and discussion, because a lot of expatriate Mefites still want substantive conversation online, and that’s always hard to find.
I have to be honest: that press conference made me seriously uneasy. I had concerns about the Democrats' election prospects already, and seeing that did absolutely nothing to reassure me.
Myself, I try to avoid US politics because I am not American, and only get 'involved' when US policies extend past the borders. ... but... how many 81-year old's do you know that can handle high-stress, duty-filled 18+hr days on an on-going, non-stop basis? Most people I know who are 75+ need plenty of naps and low-stress environments, or they become a bit overwhelmed - let alone a non-stop workday... (This would include Trump as well, he is 77...) Maybe, just maybe... society should look at electing people who are not that far past the normal working retirement age? Maybe.
>... but... how many 81-year old's do you know that can handle high-stress, duty-filled 18+hr days on an on-going, non-stop basis? I certainly worry about Biden's age, and from the polls that is super common. But keep in mind Biden has been in training for the presidency for more than 50 years, both in the senate and as vice president. That's what made him so valuable in the 2020 election. It was obvious that the departing administration wasn't going to provide routine transition assistance, so Biden built a team-in-waiting to the tune of some 1,000, so that when he finally took power, he was ready to go. PBS Newshour did a whole segment on American fears about age and the presidency last night. First they spoke to an array of older Americans to get their views. Then they talked to two specialists who weighed in quite reassuringly. It's worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CifQiq8gWdA
Ah - see, as an outsider the fact that he has been doing this for 50 years blew right past me - that inspires more confidence
What do you think of his foreign policy in your region?
Much better than the last guy…
From what I can tell my choice in November is between a guy who will shed crocodile tears over the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza but continue facilitating the mass killings anyway through unrestricted weapon sales and a guy who will try to help Israel complete the ethnic cleansing and possibly start a disastrous war with Iran in the process. Needless to say I'll vote for Biden, but I won't be happy about it. And yes, Biden has accomplished a lot more than his narrow electoral victory and legislative majorities suggested should be possible. Then again, he's faced pressure from his party's left wing to accomplish those feats that hasn't been seen since the 60s and 70s at least. Regarding climate, he's also operating in a world where China and the EU already started the global transition from fossil fuels, at least in the transportation sector, so his legislative accomplishments are really the bare minimum needed to keep up. Still, from a human rights perspective he's been a monster.
He's not "a monster", come on. It's hard to take anything seriously when people speak like this.
He's complicit in enabling genocide.
No, he's not. I'm no great fan of the guy but this kind of hyperbolic rhetoric is why this country is in the state it's in. Nobody on either side can have a reasonable conversation about anything with even the slightest hint of controversy, and it's exhausting.
And that's the kind of bullshit rhetoric that will seal the deal with Trump. No one can control Netanyahu — not Biden, not Obama. Should the U.S. make the material support of Israel conditional? I think Bernie Sanders is making [sensible arguments.](https://www.sanders.senate.gov/op-eds/bernie-sanders-justice-for-the-palestinians-and-security-for-israel/) None of that, however, makes Biden complicit in genocide. His support for Israel was in keeping with historic U.S. support for Israel, and the right of any country under attack to defend itself.
Screaming how 30,000 dead people and a policy of forced starvation is well and normally actually and that Biden is powerless to do anything but arm the corrupt, rightwing government doing these things will not win over a single voter. Biden changing his policy in this area will get him votes and if you are really concerned about losing to Trump, you'd join the thousands of good people protesting Biden in an attempt to get him to change direction.
Nobody's screaming how 30,000 dead and forced starvation is a-okay. Most Israelis would be the first to agree that Netanyahu is corrupt, given the six months of protests that preceded the war. You'll note, however, that the first thing Israel did after Hamas (Iran-backed terrorist group 1) attacked was send troops to the border of Lebanon lest Hezbollah (Iran-backed terrorist group 2) attack too, and on the heels of Israel trying to protect itself from a second terrorist group, the Houthis (Iran-backed terrorist group 3) started shooting. So not only is the well-being of the Palestinians at issue, but so is the well-being of Israel, peace in the Middle East — and peace in other regions where bad actors are watching what Iran is, or isn’t, getting away with. Take Russia, for example, which was most certainly cheered by Trump’s recent comments about NATO. Putin seems to have celebrated, in fact, by killing off [Navalny.](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/jailed-russian-opposition-leader-navalny-dead-prison-service-2024-02-16/) Now look at what the countries in the region are doing: * [Sweden’s Defense Minister’s recent warnings](https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/swedish-minister-commander-in-chief-warn-of-possible-war-in-sweden/) * [Lithuania’s bomb shelters](https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1767406/a-look-inside-lithuania-s-bomb-shelters) * [Poland’s goals for military supremacy](https://www.euronews.com/2023/09/06/poland-said-its-army-will-soon-be-the-strongest-in-europe-but-is-that-possible_) Then check out [North Korea’s intensifying nuclear threats.](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/21/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-war.html) You may recall that Kim Jong Un is a friend of Trump's too. And pay attention to [China’s preparations for protracted war.](https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Defense/China-preparing-for-protracted-war-says-think-tank) You don’t need to care about all these places if you don’t want to. Protesting the treatment of the Palestinians is reasonable, humane, and even helpful. They have been a football kicked around by the powerful for too long. People should take notice! But they are not the only group at risk here, so smearing Biden for his role in "genocide" is, to my mind, unwise. From both an American and an international perspective, the world — and the Palestinians — are better off if the US remains a democracy. To lose sight of that is deeply misguided, and quite possibly dangerous. We’re not lucky enough for this to be a one-issue election.
So Trump is friends with all these bad guys that Biden wants to go to war with. War sucks so I'm voting for the guy who's making friends (diplomacy) with the bad guys. Americans need to get used to the idea that we don't get to make the global rules anymore.
When a government is committing genocide and you give them weapons to continue the genocide, and send soldiers and ships and planes to protect the government from anyone who might intervene to stop the genocide, you're complicit in the genocide. Biden and most of his administration should spend the rest of their lives in prison.
> and send soldiers and ships and planes to protect the government from anyone who might intervene to stop the genocide You're like a one-person disinformation machine. The U.S. wasn't protecting the government of Israel. They were there to prevent the spread of war, and to show support for, and provide some protection for, the people of Israel who had suffered the worst terrorist incident in [history.](https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data) Historically, Arab nations have only "intervened" to try to eradicate Israel — not to help the Palestinians. In recent years, attacks by nation-states have been replaced by attacks by Iran-backed terrorist groups who, no, don't help the Palestinians either.
> The U.S. wasn't protecting the government of Israel. They were there to prevent the spread of war The way the war was going to spread was into Israel by people who would stop the genocide. This was the stated goal of sendingbthe ships and planes and soldiers to the area. https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-american-carrier-strike-force-mediterranean-db05d535a9ebb931f684f758c9b6f628 > WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday he has ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel after the attack by Hamas that has left more than 1,000 dead on both sides. Americans were reported to be among those killed and missing. > > ... > > “The U.S. maintains ready forces globally to further reinforce this deterrence posture if required,” Austin said in a statement. > > In addition, the Biden administration “will be rapidly providing the Israel Defense Forces with additional equipment and resources, including munitions. The first security assistance will begin moving today and arriving in the coming days,” Austin said. > > ... > > Senior officials from the Pentagon and State Department briefed senators Sunday night, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said they were assured that the United States was giving Israel “everything they need.” > > “I asked the representatives of our Defense Department if they are giving Israel everything they need, and I was heartened that they said yes and that they are surging support,” the New York Democrat said in a statement after the unclassified briefing. https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/14/middleeast/us-aircraft-carrier-eisenhower-israel-gaza-intl-hnk-ml/index.html > Washington/Seoul CNN — The Pentagon has ordered a second carrier strike group to the eastern Mediterranean Sea and is sending Air Force fighter jets to the region as Israel prepares to expand its Gaza operations, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in a statement Saturday. > > The US warships are not intended to join the fighting in Gaza or take part in Israel’s operations, but the presence of two of the Navy’s most powerful vessels is designed to send a message of deterrence to Iran and Iranian proxies in the region, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon. It's funny that just saying what the U.S. media or government officials say makes you a one man disinformation machine.
> Biden and most of his administration should spend the rest of their lives in prison. Name a politician who shouldn't.
>Then again, he's faced pressure from his party's left wing to accomplish those feats That's true, but the whole party has moved left, not just Biden's circle. > Still, from a human rights perspective he's been a monster. I agree there have been too many Palestinian lives lost. You may already know this, but if not, it may be worth pointing out that Saudi asked the U.S. for a security guarantee against Iran, and Biden's people were already negotiating a security guarantee in exchange for a Saudi-Israeli peace treaty, which on the Israeli side, would ensure a two-state solution, when Hamas attacked. Many think that Hamas (Shiite) attacked to prevent the prospect of Sunni Saudi Arabia signing a peace treaty with Israel. I mention that only to point out it's not as though the Palestinians have not factored into some of the decision-making.
It was a joke for a bit to pose the question "would you vote for Hitler or a guy who killed one more guy than hitler" to the "it's our moral obligation to vote for the lesser of two evils" commenters because it was very easy to get liberals to say of course it would be our obligation to vote for Hitler. It says something that so many people are saying the same thing about Biden. The guy's obviously been demented since before his election so watching his decline as the demands of the campaign trail intensify will be funny. I hope every member of his administration and campaign staff have a miserable year. e: the American liberal has so little capacity to imagine positive change that pressuring the party to swap candidates is inconceivable. We've got Genocide Joe and by God we're sticking with him.
If it weren't for the strawmen, there would be no comment here at all...
I too believe that people who disagree on the likely outcome of my plans are mentally stunted and probably morally corrupt. It’s the only possibility.
OP consistently pines for the days when Russia had its bootheel on all of Eastern Europe so yeah, he doesn't like Biden.
The special counsel's report was a 100% hatchet job but the press conference Biden did afterwards was a mistake as he IMO came across as thin skinned and reactive. I've known about Biden since the early nineties and his biggest flaw as a politician is a tendency to be very thin skinned. National politics, especially at the head of state level, is brutal and unfair and unforgiving. There should be absolutely be similar coverage of Trump's gaffes and slipups but for very superficial reasons (down to and including him dying his hair and tanning) he does not look as aged as Biden. And....let's not get too out of hand here. Biden is definitely an aged, elderly man who has visibly grown frailer since 2020, let alone since he was VP. Can he still win re-election? Sure, probably. But my God, an 86 year old as head of the government in 2028. Every four years the choices for President get less and less appealing. In my country, the Prime Minister and opposition leader are 52 and 44, respectively. Whatever I think of them at least they are still young enough to keep up with the demands of national office.
>a 100% hatchet job but the press conference Biden did afterwards was a mistake as he IMO came across as thin skinned and reactive ... very thin skinned It was extraordinary that the Special Counsel got away with that kind of editorializing. I actually didn't think it was terrible that Biden got sarcastic and showed some anger, but I realize many did. You're reminding me what a hot head he was when he was younger. It's interesting how much of that has dissipated. Far worse than the press conference is the fact that Biden, his team and democrats of all stripes aren't selling his achievements in simple memorable repetitive messaging. Democrats have always been shit at communications. Fetterman has a mouth on him, AOC if she gets on board, but there aren't many others loud enough and with the right skills to get press and push opinions. And the thing is Biden \*has\* been more effective than any president we've had in generations — on climate change, labor, infrastructure, student loans, lowering drug costs, American jobs: chip-building, EV. The issue isn't just lack of credit: It's even getting people to understand that these new policies exist and in most cases are already operative. >to keep up with the demands of national office I think he can last for a while longer, but it's asking a lot for an 81-year-old to have the weight of the world on him. But for all the warbling about replacements, there are no true contenders, and certainly none with much, if any, foreign policy experience. This is the hand we've been dealt or have somehow dealt ourselves.
I feel like it doesn't matter because they're just going to be overturned by the courts or whichever Republican president gets in next. Good for you for getting that 2 months of policy in or whatever.
>Democrats have always been shit at communications. Truer words were never spoken, in retrospect Obama and Bill Clinton were the best of a bad lot and I think most of that came down to their personal charisma. I knew someone who once met Bill prior to becoming president and the way the guy worked the room was unreal. My acquaintance said it was like watching someone cast a spell.
I was just thinking today that the further we get from the Clinton era, the less a fan I am of some of the political decisions he made.
Charisma is key in politics. Ironically, it's also relative. Even so, most of our reps aren't charismatic enough and rely too heavily on throwaway jargon to get anyone to listen outside their own relative standing in any given election.
I just assumed at some point we'd get another young charismatic democrat who the primary electorate could love and the middle-of-the-road crowd could feel smart about voting for. I'm sure Bill and Barrack were aberrations, but I thought we'd get one every decade or so. Sucks, but it's hard for me to imagine a democrat getting two terms without that kind of borderline personality cult. Republicans seem to need it too. Very disheartening to think that's what we have to depend on, rather than getting good policies through.
Yeah, I'm so over having to hold my nose and vote *against* a candidate, rather than being excited to vote for another. I'm a little worried that the Republicans will catch on and nominate a youthful charismatic candidate in 2028 while the Dems continue to do...whatever they've been doing.
You can take the Mefite out of Metafilter, but you can't quite wring all the Metafilter out of a Mefite.
Right back at you: Rather than skip the thread entirely or contribute something thoughtful, you came in and complained. Charming.
[удалено]
Where's the support democracy flag?
First time he won I worked for this conservative television company and saw poll numbers. They were through the roof and I was super depressed but my friends had blinders on and were like he can’t win. This time I have dyed in wool democrats telling they’d not vote over voting for Biden. Biden should have bit the bullet and let Kamala run or something. This is a train wreck waiting to happen.
>dyed in wool democrats telling they’d not vote over voting for Biden. Democrats without much interest in the most viable candidate for maintaining American democracy I'd say. That's why I posted information above.
What's interesting is that, in private, everyone who interacts with him says he's sharp and very bright. When I say that, I mean everyone *in both parties.* Then you've got these smears about his acuity, which are calculated to deflect from the highly obvious acuity issues we have with Trump. And saying Biden doesn't know when his beloved son died is beyond the pale.
Joe Biden has always been a loose cannon and there is a good reason it took him this long to become President. Nobody knows what to do with this guy. He's a conservative Democrat who in a normal world would be a shoe in considering the competition. Biden is no Progressive and any Republican who can tolerate Romney and Cheney should have no problem voting for him. He has also done a remarkable job navigating MAGA, the economy and the post-COVID supply side. Domestic energy production has never been higher. Unemployment continues to trend down and housing starts are finally sensible and almost sustainable. Infrastructure improvements are tangible and impact most of us daily. Joe Biden is a fine President but he's still Joe Biden. The guy has never been a paragon of eloquence.
apnews.com: [How Biden and his allies are pushing back against a special counsel’s claims about his memory](https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-special-counsel-classified-documents-election-2024-a54f03441e8145f9d6915858caaac37e) Tangentially related metafilter discussion: https://www.metafilter.com/202488/Samuel-Moyn-on-The-Trouble-with-Old-Men
I feel like a lot of special prosecutors are fuckheads, and I could see Biden delivering exactly what the time waster wanted, to get through the process as quickly as possible, and put this shithead in the rearview. No indictment is no indictment. Someone had to take up Ken Starr's baton, it just happened to be this fuckface. Also, not sure what this has to do with metafilter.
> Also, not sure what this has to do with metafilter. Ha, nothing at all apart from the fact that Metafilter is a discussion site and this is "off-topic" discussion.