They seem to do a lot of things "magically".TheStorm said:Yeah, the way I understand it is that they magically voted in each state last night to transfer all the primary delegates won by Biden over to "Sliced Bread"*...packgrad said:
I was in the mountains for an extended weekend and did not keep up with everything. Just read your linked article from Fox News. I can't believe she has enough delegates to be the Democratic candidate. I can't believe they're actually putting their eggs in that basket. Lol. What a disaster.
(*as in "best thing since")
The Biden Administration..V3
1,095,144 Views |
10965 Replies |
Last: 2 hrs ago by Werewolf
Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
He hasnt been seen in public since Friday. He pulled out of the race on Sunday through Twitter. He isnt addressing that until tomorrow. If a Republican President did the same thing, every single media outlet would be on the front yard of the beach house screaming for updates.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
I dont think its unfair to address any of this. Its unprecedented in modern politics and its radio silence from the President. Thats not a good look no matter what spin you try to put on it.
Are we even sure that HE pulled out of the race? For all we know, some intern tweeted that.
Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
The disappearing government officials...Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
Austin, now Biden...
Who is running the country? Dementia ridden Moron #1 hasn't been seen since Wednesday. Cackling Hyena Moron #2 did not meet the PM of Israel and instead of going to his address to Congress, is going to talk to a Black sorority convention.caryking said:The disappearing government officials...Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
Austin, now Biden...
Reagan was seen waving on a balcony 2 or 3 days after getting shot and almost dying. Joe has not been seen in almost 6 days due to Covid.
Again I ask, who is running the country? The USA looks even more weak right now than they did after the debate and I did not think that was possible.
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
🚨#BREAKING: President Joe Biden appeared in public for the first time in six days since his week-long COVID diagnosis, during which he remained silent and was not heard from. Later, as he boarded Air Force One in Delaware en route to the White House, he announced the suspension… pic.twitter.com/GeMonwkowS
— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) July 23, 2024
SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
ncsupack1 said:🚨#BREAKING: President Joe Biden appeared in public for the first time in six days since his week-long COVID diagnosis, during which he remained silent and was not heard from. Later, as he boarded Air Force One in Delaware en route to the White House, he announced the suspension… pic.twitter.com/GeMonwkowS
— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) July 23, 2024
Phew. What a cliffhanger.
Without clicking on the tweet I was certain it said "...he announced the suspension...of democracy and life in this country as we know it."
Glad it's all working out OK.
It's farcical to watch democrats now act surprised about Joes poor health.
"Young swing voters" so you're just making **** up at this point? Lol. Provide the link that shows these young swing voters have switched from Trump to Harris within a day.
Here he is. Joe Biden just called into Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
BREAKING: Joe Biden calls in Human Events Daily! Wow! pic.twitter.com/yqmVyAYzff
— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 23, 2024
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Trump up big, so it would seem that Harris is a detriment to the democrats. Plenty of democrats are not happy with having Harris shoved down their throats. That's why she is struggling out of the gates. She wasn't popular 4 years ago and has only become less popular since.
I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Wufpack17 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Trump up big, so it would seem that Harris is a detriment to the democrats. Plenty of democrats are not happy with having Harris shoved down their throats. That's why she is struggling out of the gates. She wasn't popular 4 years ago and has only become less popular since.
And you're upset about this because you want to help the Democrats? Lol, got it!
You definitely don't sound scared sh**less at all.
Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance. Imagine being someone who thought they could vote for their nominee, now they can't. Your response to them is "tough, it was done differently 60 years ago!". That's dumb.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
NATO, much like most things in this world, is funded by the US tax payer. Trump suggesting that some NATO countries pull their own weight, is a good thing. Frankly, I'm tired of funding everyone else.Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
Bill Weld was legitimate contender in the 2020 republican primaries when Trump was the incumbent? Man you just make up **** as you go.
Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Putin clearly miscalculated how much Trump had hobbled NATO, and clearly underestimated Biden's ability to rally NATO behind Ukraine and make the alliance stronger then ever. Putin thought Ukraine would be a weekend stroll, and instead got absolutely punched in the teeth.
SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Putin clearly miscalculated how much Trump had hobbled NATO, and clearly underestimated Biden's ability to rally NATO behind Ukraine and make the alliance stronger then ever. Putin thought Ukraine would ne a weekend stroll, and instead got absolutely punched in the teeth.
Hobbled more by having other countries pay more? Baltic countries said he made it stronger. Those damn right winged Baltic countries!
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-nato-baltic-allies-stronger-1639290
Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
Bill Weld was legitimate contender in the 2020 republican primaries when Trump was the incumbent? Man you just make up **** as you go.
I guess you skipped past my "unless your guy sucks" clause.
SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
Bill Weld was legitimate contender in the 2020 republican primaries when Trump was the incumbent? Man you just make up **** as you go.
I guess you skipped past my "unless your guy sucks" clause.
And you said see Trump like you were implying Trump had a legitimate challenger when he was the incumbent
Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Putin clearly miscalculated how much Trump had hobbled NATO, and clearly underestimated Biden's ability to rally NATO behind Ukraine and make the alliance stronger then ever. Putin thought Ukraine would ne a weekend stroll, and instead got absolutely punched in the teeth.
Hobbled more by having other countries pay more? Baltic countries said he made it stronger. Those damn right winged Baltic countries!
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-nato-baltic-allies-stronger-1639290
lol
Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Putin clearly miscalculated how much Trump had hobbled NATO, and clearly underestimated Biden's ability to rally NATO behind Ukraine and make the alliance stronger then ever. Putin thought Ukraine would ne a weekend stroll, and instead got absolutely punched in the teeth.
Hobbled more by having other countries pay more? Baltic countries said he made it stronger. Those damn right winged Baltic countries!
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-nato-baltic-allies-stronger-1639290
Lol, you clearly didn't read your own article. They said Trump privately threatened to pull the US out of NATO several times, had openly said he wouldn't honor the mutual defense agreement, and was generally a belligerent a**hole to our allies.
But NATO spending targets agreed during the Obama era were slowly reached, so technically NATO had more money by the end of Trump's term, which of course he tried to take credit for.
Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
Bill Weld was legitimate contender in the 2020 republican primaries when Trump was the incumbent? Man you just make up **** as you go.
I guess you skipped past my "unless your guy sucks" clause.
And you said see Trump like you were implying Trump had a legitimate challenger when he was the incumbent
I was referring to 2024. Shouldn't Dear Leader have ran unopposed? Apparently your "incumbent" sucked.
SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:I'm genuinely curious...Civilized said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:SmaptyWolf said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:CoachCase said:Civilized said:Gulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:Same here. I don't like watching people become a shell of their former selves, it's depressing. AndGulfstream4 said:Wufpack17 said:I am suggesting he is unwell and didn't make this decision on his own. This isn't a delusion, it's coming from the horses mouth.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
1st, It was a Tweet. 2nd, it's a photo copy. 3rd, it's not on official letterhead. 4th, he's never signed his signature with line under his signature.
It's not coming from the President. It's coming from others. If it were really his decision, there would have been somehing far more official than a freaking tweet.
So what are you suggesting?
He's being held hostage in his beach house basement?
He's all tubes and respirators now? Laid up in some hospital bed, half man, half machine?
What exactly is your paranoid Biden delusion du jour?
"Frank Biden made comments to both CBS and ABC News, telling CBS 'in my humble opinion absolutely' the president's health was part of Biden's decision to announce that he wouldn't run for reelection - endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in the process.
'Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we has left,' Frank Biden told CBS.
"
That doesn't sound good for President Biden. I hope I'm wrong.
Frankly, shame on those around him for letting it get to this point.
He wasn't fit in 2020 but the perks for the First Lady and the business opportunities for Hunter and the family were to enticing to pass up.
His successes this term fly in the face of the "unfit the last four years" argument.
You obviously disagree with him politically but his adminstration has been unusually productive at implementing their agenda.
Civ, serious question. Please list/describe some of the successes that the Biden administration has been able to accomplish? Thank you in advance.
Asked and answered in various threads over the last few days.
Now you do Trump. Compare his campaign promises to legislative successes.
Lol! I'm sorry that I didn't catch the questions and answers in previous threads. I was just hoping for a few bullet points if nothing else. And I wasn't asking necessarily for campaign promises versus successes but what you liked about his administration. As for Trump, in bullet point answers: (1) economy and unemployment better, (2) national security (esp border) better defined and clear and (3) America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries. Some of our allies were offended when Trump demanded that they pay the same that America was in partnerships such as NATO -which I think Trump's stance is fair. Unfortunately, I don't think Biden/Harris administration can hold a candle to the three issues I listed.
Would it really make a difference to point out why your assertions about the economy/unemployment, our national security, and our respect worldwide are at best highly debatable and at worst total nonsense? Somehow I doubt it.
Thanks for your input. Sorry to ruffle feathers and ask serious questions hoping for a civil discussion. Obviously that was a mistake.
I was being civil, but have seen this movie over and over in the Water Cooler.
Ok, fine, let's start with (3) "America was more respected worldwide when it came to our adversaries." What are you basing that assertion on, aside from what Trump and conservative media have repeated a thousand times? Which adversaries are you talking about?
America's traditional enemies - Russia, N Korea, China - didn't like Trump, but they respected him which created fear and the unknown as to what America would do if they became an aggressor. That is certainly not the case now. Trump has been fair when it came to our allies, but he insisted that they pay their fair share and uphold their end of support when it came to agreements such as NATO.
Why would Putin and Kim be scared of someone that verbally fellated them every chance he got? Trump didn't scare anyone, he just seemed half-cocked and unpredictable which isn't really a virtue.
And maybe more importantly can you speak to our relationship with our allies under Trump? How were our relationships in the G7/UN/NATO with him at the helm?
Why has Putin invaded countries during Democrat rule?
I liked the 4 years where the US wasn't funding someone else war. But I guess Dem Warmongers are going to Warmonger.
Putin was very stressed about NATO.
Trump had promised to dismantle NATO, and made progress on that front.
Trump lost, so Putin invaded Ukraine, because he was very stressed about NATO.
Is this math equation really that hard for you?
P.S. Dismantling NATO is an EXTREMELY bad idea if you care about U.S. national security, as opposed to Russian national security. Voting for the guy who apparently only cares about the latter is a bad idea, too.
So he was so stressed about NATO he decided to piss NATO off even more by invading a country? Yeah sounds like he's very worried about NATO.
Putin clearly miscalculated how much Trump had hobbled NATO, and clearly underestimated Biden's ability to rally NATO behind Ukraine and make the alliance stronger then ever. Putin thought Ukraine would ne a weekend stroll, and instead got absolutely punched in the teeth.
Hobbled more by having other countries pay more? Baltic countries said he made it stronger. Those damn right winged Baltic countries!
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-nato-baltic-allies-stronger-1639290
Lol, you clearly didn't read your own article. They said Trump privately threatened to pull the US out of NATO several times, had openly said he wouldn't honor the mutual defense agreement, and was generally a belligerent a**hole to our allies.
But NATO spending targets agreed during the Obama era were slowly reached, so technically NATO had more money by the end of Trump's term, which of course he tried to take credit for.
It also said how they used those funds to build up the border on Ukraine. But Trump cares more about Russias national security then ours.
You're cherry picking and leaving out how the Baltic countries praised Trumps admin. for increasing the security in their area.
SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wolfpack8602 said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:Civilized said:SmaptyWolf said:Wufpack17 said:The President isn't a monarch. He answers to the people and no one else. Frankly, what's transpired is pure disrespect of the American people and democracy itself. Tucking his tale and disappearing while non-democratically electing a nominee to take his place.Civilized said:Wufpack17 said:
The people should know what is going on. We don't.
A random tweet and then a recorded phone call isn't driving home confidence right now. Who is in charge?
Presidents don't owe you blow-by-blow updates on their health and I doubt the administration cares about your confidence as Biden recovers from COVID. How is that information actionable for you? They were clear last week he was returning home to isolate, rest, recover, and work.
His doc said yesterday his symptoms were abating and he was carrying out his duties.
They owe you an update if the President's health becomes precarious or worrisome but beyond that it's just tabloid fodder.
This is not democracy.
You guys are too much. Don't you blather endlessly about how we're a Republic, not a Democracy... but this Biden thing has you in tears about how undemocratic it is?
Here's a fun fact! Before the 1970's the voters never got the final say on who the candidates would be. The current primary voting system is a modern custom, but ultimately political parties can basically do what they want to pick their candidates.
Let's get real. The only people pushing for an open Dem primary with 3 months left in the race are Republicans and certain news outlets, both of whom would greatly benefit from another month of Dem chaos.
Exactly.
The party primary system is most certainly not "a democracy." Does the Constitution even have political parties in it?
And to whatever extent you want to try to impose democratic or representative norms on the primary system, Biden stepping down and Kamala stepping up is clearly what the people want. We're only in this situation because...
a. the Dems didn't have a competitive open primary. There were no real challengers to Biden, and...
b. very clearly the large majority of Democrats wanted Biden to step down, and are also in favor of Kamala being the candidate, and...
c. Biden's decline wasn't widely known until the debate.
There is no argument to be made that Biden stepping down or Kamala stepping up are not the will of the majority of Democrats at this point.
And frankly it's not up to one party to tell the other party how to select their candidate, as long as the selection abides by pertinent election law. This isn't some conspiracy. Democrats didn't ask for Biden's health to get to the point where he clearly can't go 4 more years but for that to not become widely recognizable until after the primary.
And it's not like the party had already nominated Biden. But even if they had y'all remember what happened when the *****-grabber-in-Chief had his *****-grab tape come out? The Republicans with courage/dignity/a conscience said he should step down. And that was AFTER he was the official nominee, only a few weeks before the election.
I didn't see Democrats lining up to pontificate about how anti-democratic such a move would be. They just agreed with the Republicans that were saying he should step down.
Like you said, Republicans beating this drum are either just being contrarians or they're sowing chaos. They're not going to get it, though - nobody believes any legal challenges would hold up, and the party is united behind a candidate that thus far looks very well-funded and well-supported by the Democrat base and leadership, and also by many young swing voters that were on the sidelines with Biden at the helm.
No, but plenty of states choose their nominee through primary voting. That didn't happen in this instance.
A. The dems didn't have a legitimate primary and boxed out any opposition from going up against Biden
B. There is no evidence to suggest dems prefer Harris over an alternative (which they've not been offered)
C. Bidens decline has been known for at least a year. You may not have wanted to accept the truth, but that's what it is.
The only contrarian is the person who screams "We have to defend democracy!" and then subsequently is fine with what is happening within their own party.
Dems want their cake and eat it to. "Democracy be damned! We have to be Trump!"
Care to take a guess how often an incumbent president has had a "legitimate" primary before his second term? Hint: Unless your guy sucks (see Trump) it never happens.
And given that basically every elected Dem in the country (who one assumes talks to their constituents) has lined up behind Harris, that sure seems like some evidence.
Bill Weld was legitimate contender in the 2020 republican primaries when Trump was the incumbent? Man you just make up **** as you go.
I guess you skipped past my "unless your guy sucks" clause.
And you said see Trump like you were implying Trump had a legitimate challenger when he was the incumbent
I was referring to 2024. Shouldn't Dear Leader have ran unopposed? Apparently your "incumbent" sucked.
Trump was holding office in 2024? What position? You don't know what incumbent means.
Also Trump won 54 contests to 2. That's a legitimate contender? LOL.
Featured Stories
See All
8:34
10h ago
632
IPS IN 5: Spend Your Money How You Want To Spend It
by James Henderson
11:05
1d ago
742
POSTGAME HOOPS TALK: Rider
by James Henderson
6:19
1d ago
682
IPS IN 5: Takeaways From The Rider Win
by James Henderson
9:04
2d ago
856
Kevin Keatts: "Our Week Was Well Spent"
by Daniel Wilson
4:24
2d ago
466
LOCKER ROOM REPORT: Wolfpack Players
by Rob McLamb