The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

[gandalfe]

Well….Trump ambiguous statements do lend themselves to multiple meanings. I blame Trump 100% for that, and I do believe it is often calculated and deliberate.

Various perspectives offered in this piece. I think it is well worth mentioning, that it is very true that Trump is well known by now for ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in more than one way:

“Erica De Bruin, a professor of government at Hamilton College whose research focuses on civil-military relations, civil war and policing, said, “Trump frequently makes these kinds of deliberately ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.”

But she added that “to understand what another Trump presidency would involve, I think it is more useful to look at his past behavior than to attempt to parse what might be the ‘true meaning’ of any individual set of remarks he makes.” She pointed out that the last time he was in office, “he attempted to subvert the outcome of an election and remain in power longer than the American public voted to keep him there.”

Also:
“Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University, and co-author of “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” also said that while he didn’t think Trump’s recent comment was “indicative of an organized plot to end elections in the United States,” it did represent yet another sign that “the guy has got authoritarian reflexes.”

“Over the course of 10 or 15 years,” Levitsky added, a growing number of Republicans “convinced themselves that they weren’t going to be able to win elections in this new, multiracial America. I’m not so sure that’s true, but they were deeply fearful that was true. And so Trump, I think more than anything else, he senses … where they’re going and they’re feeling”.

And, absolutely this:

“Levitsky’s co-author, Daniel Ziblatt, also a professor of government at Harvard, put a finer point on the significance of Trump’s comment. “I can’t think of a major candidate for office in any democracy on Earth since at least World War II who speaks in such overtly authoritarian ways,” said Ziblatt. “Not Victor Orban in Hungary, not Recep Erdogan in Turkey. Nowhere.”

And:

Jennifer Mercieca, a communications professor at Texas A&M University and author of “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump,” said in an email that she interpreted Trump’s comment as an attempt to address the “double bind” that supposed “strongmen” leaders face……

……“I think Trump is here promising Christians that he will actually solve the problems that he has promised them he’ll solve (a full abortion ban … and various ‘culture war’ issues) and so with all of the problems solved, they won’t feel like the world is so chaotic that they have to vote to save the nation.”


“It’s a big promise,” she added, “and he doesn’t give specific details here.”

https://wapo.st/3yjn478

As noted, I did not immediately think “he won’t leave office”, but, hey, he already tried it once!! I don’t even understand how the hell he’s even allowed to run again after trying to overthrow the government. Naw, he means it. Just put him in that Oval Office, and he’ll leave the day he dies, not one day sooner….Not ONE day sooner….

See, I thought he meant "I won't be running again, so there's no reason to vote."

 

[Bucknutz]

He is a terrible option. The antivax garbage is just the part of his crazy conspiracy takes. The antivax stuff was terrible though and directly lead to deaths.

View: https://x.com/holden_culotta/status/1819147126883955100?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ

He also has no experience. Which is the main reason you stated you would not vote Harris.

This is incorrect. My reasons against Harris is that she was chosen for you. There are better options for the Democrats which has more experience, more depth of knowledge and has more charisma. But it seems like very few people here recognize my opinion correctly.

It’s fine that you feel that RFK is a terrible option, that’s your opinion. At least there is another option than Harris and Trump.

 

[Ron Mexico]

View: https://x.com/holden_culotta/status/1819147126883955100?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ



This is incorrect. My reasons against Harris is that she was chosen for you. There are better options for the Democrats which has more experience, more depth of knowledge and has more charisma. But it seems like very few people here recognize my opinion correctly.

It’s fine that you feel that RFK is a terrible option, that’s your opinion. At least there is another option than Harris and Trump.

He can say whatever he wants but his actions have spoken much louder. Obviously he is trying to change his tone to attract more voters. He is directly responsible for spreading false information that lead to a measles breakout in Samoa that killed many people. This one of many incidents from him.

As far as your other statement that's fine you can change why you don't like Harris. But this is your direct quote "I don’t like her because she has no accomplishments, limited experience."

She hasn't been chosen yet but she is overwhelmingly the favorite and extremely well supported. She set a record for funds raised. She is the most supported and liked candidate by far.

 

[Red]

As if we needed more confirmation that he is a dyed in the wool racist and all-around bigot. He would be the leader of the proud boys or KKK if he could.

Yeah, at one time he put out an ad calling for the execution of innocent blacks and Latinos. Done more for blacks since Lincoln. “I am the least racist person….” Uh huh.

Donald Trump and the Central Park Five: the racially charged rise of a demagogue

In 1989 five black and Latino boys were wrongfully convicted of raping a woman jogging in New York City. Leading the charge against them was a real estate mogul whose divisive rhetoric can be found in his presidential campaign today

www.theguardian.com

Yusef Salaam was 15 years old when Donald Trump demanded his execution for a crime he did not commit.

Nearly three decades before the rambunctious billionaire began his run for president – before he called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States, for the expulsion of all undocumented migrants, before he branded Mexicans as “rapists” and was accused of mocking the disabled – Trump called for the reinstatement of the death penalty in New York following a horrific rape case in which five teenagers were wrongly convicted.

The miscarriage of justice is widely remembered as a definitive moment in New York’s fractured race relations. But Trump’s intervention – he signed full-page newspaper advertisements implicitly calling for the boys to die – has been gradually overlooked as his chances of winning the Republican nomination have rapidly increased. Now those involved in the case of the so-called Central Park Five and its aftermath say Trump’s rhetoric served as an unlikely precursor to a unique brand of divisive populism that has powered his rise to political prominence in 2016.

“He was the firestarter,” Salaam said of Trump, in his first extended interview since Trump announced his run for the White House. “Common citizens were being manipulated and swayed into believing that we were guilty.”

 

[Bucknutz]

He can say whatever he wants but his actions have spoken much louder. Obviously he is trying to change his tone to attract more voters. He is directly responsible for spreading false information that lead to a measles breakout in Samoa that killed many people. This one of many incidents from him.

As far as your other statement that's fine you can change why you don't like Harris. But this is your direct quote "I don’t like her because she has no accomplishments, limited experience."

She doesn’t have any accomplishments and she is limited, again to OTHER DEMOCRAT OPTIONS. You keep leaving this out.

She hasn't been chosen yet but she is overwhelmingly the favorite and extremely well supported. She set a record for funds raised. She is the most supported and liked candidate by far.

If she hasn’t been chosen for you, what other Democrat option can you vote for in the primary? I got to vote in the primary, but my choice didn’t win.

You still haven't answered who you think would be a great President and leader for the USA that's female.

Business - Karen Lynch
Democrat - Maura Healey is the closest, yet she is still inexperienced as a governor
Republican - None - closest would be Sarah Sanders, still not there yet, in my opinion

Again, I look for governing as my top priority. If it’s in business or government. You say RFK is inexperienced, yet he has owned and ran many successful businesses.

 

[Ron Mexico]

She doesn’t have any accomplishments and she is limited, again to OTHER DEMOCRAT OPTIONS. You keep leaving this out.

I completely disagree and have pointed out her accomplishments many times.

 

[Ron Mexico]

If she hasn’t been chosen for you, what other Democrat option can you vote for in the primary? I got to vote in the primary, but my choice didn’t win.

Like it or not all candidates are chosen by their parties to represent their parties.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Business - Karen Lynch
Democrat - Maura Healey is the closest, yet she is still inexperienced as a governor
Republican - None - closest would be Sarah Sanders, still not there yet, in my opinion

Thanks for answering. I can see you find almost no women experienced enough.

If the business is so important than the last 4 years are great for you. The economy is booming and industry is better than ever, which is a huge accomplishment when almost every other country in the world is on a big down swing. Harris was a huge part of that decision making. Every major decision with Biden she was apart of.

 

[Bucknutz]

Like it or not all candidates are chosen by their parties to represent their parties.

Are you saying primaries dont count and parties are the ones that choose the candidate?

 

[Ron Mexico]

Are you saying primaries dont count and parties are the ones that choose the candidate?

2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Bucknutz]

Thanks for answering. I can see you find almost no women experienced enough.

For President? No.
Hillary was the most experienced but she didn’t win.

I’ll throw the question right back at you, what business woman, republican woman and democrat woman would be a great leader a president of the USA?

If the business is so important than the last 4 years are great for you. The economy is booming and industry is better than ever, which is a huge accomplishment when almost every other country in the world is on a big down swing. Harris was a huge part of that decision making. Every major decision with Biden she was apart of.

What decisions did Biden make that affected the economy? To make it this great? This is a generic with no substance. Are you saying it’s Kamala who raised the interest rates now making housing unaffordable? Or was it letting in millions of people who took away low cost housing? Are those interest rates hurting people in debt, in the form of credit cards? Are credit card default rates, the highest in 12 years and climbing, a Kamala decision? What about a 13 year high in auto loan delinquencies? That was her? What about the highest amount of Americans working 2 jobs to just afford life? Was that caused by her decisions.

What about this recent news?

US hiring fell sharply in July, an unexpected setback for the economy stoking recession fears

The U.S. economy suffered an unexpected setback in July, as hiring fell sharply and the unemployment rate rose for the fourth straight month in a sign that higher interest rates may be taking a bigger toll on businesses and consumers.

apnews.com

“The unemployment rate has risen for four consecutive months. It’s jump to 4.3% in July crossed a tripwire that historically has signaled that the United States is in recession”

This is Kamala?

 

[fishonjazz]

Are you saying primaries dont count and parties are the ones that choose the candidate?

This is actually a fact. Delegates and super delegates pick the presidential nominee.
Now having said that, they will almost always go with who the voters voted for. But it's never "X" candidate got this many primary votes which was more than the others so that is the nominee.

If fact before 1972 (I believe that was the year) delegates often went against the voters and chose a nominee who didn't get the votes.

I'm glad that you would like to see us be more democratic though and let the voters decide. I would too. I think we should not even have delegates or electors. I think we should vote and tally them sum bitches up and have the winner decided that way.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk