Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

mcmoustache

landofthetree wrote: »

I am pro open borders.

I am pro free trade.

Racists like the Democrats arent.

Dis you?

landofthetree wrote:

The election is all but over. Trump has won.

Republicans need to get to work so they can change the law and allow Trump to go for a third term. The Democrats are stupid enough to support it so Obama can run again.

landofthetree

Deleted User wrote: »

What does that (incorrect awful final statement) have to do with what I said? Are you going to reply to my last comment or not?

You are of the opinion that immigrant children should never be separated even if there is significant evidence of human trafficking, that that child's life is in danger if they are not separated etc. That such separation should never happen just so that the current administration can say that they never separated children.

Would you like to explain your rationale behind your way of thinking?

I am not pro Trump. His trade policy was a bad idea. Unfortunately now Biden and the Democrats support most of it and will probably even stick with the China tariffs.

If we had open borders we wouldn't have these problems. Biden is against open borders. :rolleyes:

landofthetree

landofthetree wrote: »

I am not pro Trump. His trade policy was a bad idea. Unfortunately now Biden and the Democrats support most of it and will probably even stick with the China tariffs.

If we had open borders we wouldn't have these problems. Biden is against open borders. :rolleyes:

You are not answering any of my questions.

You brought up the fact that Obama's administration did separate children as if it was a bad thing. I explained to you that this was only done in exceptional circumstances when it was believed that the child's life was in danger.

Can you explain why you believe instead that that should never be done instead of going off on a tangent about other things that I didn't mention?

astrofool

landofthetree wrote: »

I am not pro Trump. His trade policy was a bad idea. Unfortunately now Biden and the Democrats support most of it and will probably even stick with the China tariffs.

If we had open borders we wouldn't have these problems. Biden is against open borders. :rolleyes:

So trump shouldn't get a second term now? There is plenty of candidates to the left of Biden that you can support.

landofthetree

Deleted User wrote: »

You are not answering any of my questions.

You brought up the fact that Obama's administration did separate children as if it was a bad thing. I explained to you that this was only done in exceptional circumstances when it was believed that the child's life was in danger.

Can you explain why you believe instead that that should never be done instead of going off on a tangent about other things that I didn't mention?

Obama refused to open the borders with Mexico. Free movement of people and we wouldn't have people and children locked up and beaten half to death.

Open borders now. Free trade now.

mcmoustache

landofthetree wrote: »

Obama refused to open the borders with Mexico. Free movement of people and we wouldn't have people and children locked up and beaten half to death.

Open borders now. Free trade now.

I'm finding your schtick to be a little less than honest.

landofthetree

astrofool wrote: »

So trump shouldn't get a second term now? There is plenty of candidates to the left of Biden that you can support.

I am pro free trade. :rolleyes:

Left wing parties hate free trade.

Look at our own left wing parties trying to block free trade with Canada. :mad:

Im digusted to the pit of my stomach that the EU,USA etc puts tariffs on goods from places like Western Sahara.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

landofthetree wrote: »

Obama refused to open the borders with Mexico. Free movement of people and we wouldn't have people and children locked up and beaten half to death.

Open borders now. Free trade now.

I don't think any candidate from either side promised that, could be wrong.

I think the amount of anti-Isamic anti-immigratant xenophobic rhetoric that Trump spouted compeltely destroyed any possibility of that happening regardless of who got in.

landofthetree

landofthetree wrote: »

Obama refused to open the borders with Mexico. Free movement of people and we wouldn't have people and children locked up and beaten half to death.

Open borders now. Free trade now.

So you're not going to answer my question and instead are going to make up things?

Do you think that if a child's life was in danger because their parents are dangerous that there are instances where there that child should be taken away from said parents, regardless of whether that child is an illegal immigrant or not?

landofthetree

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I don't think any candidate from either side promised that, could be wrong.

I think the amount of anti-Isamic anti-immigratant xenophobic rhetoric that Trump spouted compeltely destroyed any possibility of that happening regardless of who got in.

The Libertarian candidate did.

But of course Joe Biden and Trump blocked her from taking part in debates.

https://reason.com/2020/02/26/libertarian-presidential-candidates-champion-open-borders/

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

landofthetree wrote: »

The Libertarian candidate did.

But of course Joe Biden and Trump blocked her from taking part in debates.

https://reason.com/2020/02/26/libertarian-presidential-candidates-champion-open-borders/

Fair point - forgot about he Libertarians! I didn't think her economic policies were sound though, when I researcher her, but that was some time ago and I can't remember why not.

But as I said - Americans are now so terrified of foreigners, it's never going to happen.

landofthetree

Deleted User wrote: »

So you're not going to answer my question and instead are going to make up things?

Do you think that if a child's life was in danger because their parents are dangerous that there are instances where there that child should be taken away from said parents, regardless of whether that child is an illegal immigrant or not?

Who says their dangerous? Some racist cop?

landofthetree

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Fair point - forgot about he Libertarians! I didn't think her economic policies were sound though, when I researcher her, but that was some time ago and I can't remember why not.

But as I said - Americans are now so terrified of foreigners, it's never going to happen.

Im not surprised they are. Everything movie and TV show seems to portray Mexicans as drug dealing gangsters.

Google this. A very interesting PHD on it.

ANGRY WHITE MEN: HOW BREAKING BAD AND THE WALKING DEAD
PREDICTED THE TRUMPIAN ZEITGEIST
Graeme J. Wilson

landofthetree

landofthetree wrote: »

Who says their dangerous? Some racist cop?

So you don't think there would ever be the case that a children's life would be in danger if they continued to be with the people they illegally crossed the border with, be they their parents or not? You are just going to assume that whenever that was decided to be the case that the person who decided it must have been racist or something similar is that right?

TomTomTim

landofthetree wrote: »

Im not surprised they are. Everything movie and TV show seems to portray Mexicans as drug dealing gangsters.

Google this. A very interesting PHD on it.

ANGRY WHITE MEN: HOW BREAKING BAD AND THE WALKING DEAD
PREDICTED THE TRUMPIAN ZEITGEIST
Graeme J. Wilson

This sounds like something you'd read on Tumblr, not on a peer reviewed site.

The archetypal protagonist of the modern “Golden Age of Television” is a maladjusted, White male struggling with feelings of marginalization. While this description applies to characters such as Breaking Bad’s Walter White, it is also used by political commentators to characterize what is popularly perceived to be the prototypical male supporter of President Donald Trump. When considering the cultural zeitgeist of the angry White man, are there any cultural and rhetorical connections between White, male Trump supporters who exhibit irrational feelings of marginalization and dramas such as Breaking Bad whose protagonists similarly exhibit and are motivated by such feelings? As a theorist and critical scholar of televised rhetoric and discourses, I am interested in analyzing such programming to determine whether these prestige antihero series invited viewers to contribute to the current masculinist movement under Trump and reassert dominance in response to perceived losses to women and minority groups. The specific episodes that will serve as case studies for this research into the relationship between modern prestige television and the cultural zeitgeist of Trump’s America will be drawn from Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead, due to their cultural influence and visibility. My research will demonstrate that these series have operated as textual artifacts that contributed to forming the zeitgeist of the masculinized cultural moment which Trump serves as a figurehead of. Such research is relevant to modern American political and social discourse, thus providing a rich opportunity to expand on preexisting research into televisual influence on masculinity within a fresh context.

If I started ranting about angry black men, like the above has done about white men, everyone one of you would be outraged.

TomTomTim

TomTomTim wrote: »

This sounds like something you'd read on Tumblr, not on a peer reviewed site.

Probably because it's not on a peer reviewed site. It's simply the thesis of someone who did a PhD in media studies and no peer reviewed articles ever came from it for obvious reasons.

The fact that OP found such an insignificant, obscure thesis is impressive. I can only imagine the sites he is on or the things he Googles.

Cody montana

mcmoustache wrote: »

Dis you?

Well that’s embarrassing.

paw patrol

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Does Biden differ from Trump on policy at all?

What's Biden's stance on selling arms to Saudi Arabia, and supporting their war in Yemen?

trump started no new wars which is to his credit, he also tried to remove troops from places where they were ensconced. You can't just remove the troops without consequence or walk away no matter how anti war you are.

comparing Biden to Trump is fun but ultimately a lost cause. Biden is supposedly this great hero to rescue us all and he isn't. he was VP during the obama years and all the great and good that did us all.

Firstly i wish we could ignore America but due to their imperialism and the dollar hegemony in world trade, we cant. Also their culture seeps over here eventually. Good tv but sh1t social politics.

Secondly, I do like Trump he is brilliant at times but not perfect - he isn't my god. If i had a hero of American politics at the highest level , it would be Ron Paul.
The media hatchet job of him when he tried to run in 2012 did the whole world a disservice especially Americans themselves.

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

trump started no new wars which is to his credit, he also tried to remove troops from places where they were ensconced. You can't just remove the troops without consequence or walk away no matter how anti war you are.

comparing Biden to Trump is fun but ultimately a lost cause. Biden is supposedly this great hero to rescue us all and he isn't. he was VP during the obama years and all the great and good that did us all.

Firstly i wish we could ignore America but due to their imperialism and the dollar hegemony in world trade, we cant. Also their culture seeps over here eventually. Good tv but sh1t social politics.

Secondly, I do like Trump he is brilliant at times but not perfect - he isn't my god. If i had a hero of American politics at the highest level , it would be Ron Paul.
The media hatchet job of him when he tried to run in 2012 did the whole world a disservice especially Americans themselves.

Your American political hero is Ron Paul, a man who:

• is a massive racist
• is against gay marriage
• wants to define life as starting at conception
• wants to end birthright citizenship
• wants to deny funding to any organization which "presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style"
• wants the US to withdraw from the UN
• wants to end NATO
• believes in New World Order conspiracy theories
• believes that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control
• denounces evolutionary theory in favour of creationism
• opposes the separation between church and state
• voted against an amendment to protect net neutrality
• believes that the Panama Canal should be owned by the US

That Ron Paul?

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Your American political hero is Ron Paul, a man who:

• is a massive racist
• is against gay marriage
• wants to define life as starting at conception
• wants to end birthright citizenship
• wants to deny funding to any organization which "presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style"
• wants the US to withdraw from the UN
• wants to end NATO
• believes in New World Order conspiracy theories
• believes that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control
• denounces evolutionary theory in favour of creationism
• opposes the separation between church and state
• voted against an amendment to protect net neutrality
• believes that the Panama Canal should be owned by the US

That Ron Paul?

Ron makes The Donald look like Jeremy Corbyn.

duploelabs

paw patrol wrote: »

trump started no new wars which is to his credit, .

This line is the biggest load of sh!te I've heard trotted out in the defense of trump. He sold billions of arms to saudi and UAE who are currently participating in the biggest sectarian massacre of Shias in Yemen. Just because no american's pulled any triggers doesn't mean america doesn't have blood on its hands or isn't participating in any (Cold) wars. Trump is no peacemaker, and that doesn't go near the shafting of the Kurds because he was personally blackmailed over the Kashoggi Killing by Turkey to withdraw american troops from the border areas so the Turkish army destroy them.

And before you say 'but Biden', he stopped arms and munition sales to those two countries last week

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/joe-biden-suspends-arms-sales-to-saudi-arabia-and-uae-1.4470264

dwayneshintzy

duploelabs wrote: »

This line is the biggest load of sh!te I've heard trotted out in the defense of trump. He sold billions of arms to saudi and UAE who are currently participating in the biggest sectarian massacre of Shias in Yemen. Just because no american's pulled any triggers doesn't mean america doesn't have blood on its hands or isn't participating in any (Cold) wars. Trump is no peacemaker, and that doesn't go near the shafting of the Kurds because he was personally blackmailed over the Kashoggi Killing by Turkey to withdraw american troops from the border areas so the Turkish army destroy them.

And before you say 'but Biden', he stopped arms and munition sales to those two countries last week

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/joe-biden-suspends-arms-sales-to-saudi-arabia-and-uae-1.4470264

I've not seen a single pro-Trump poster address this Saudi Arabia/Yemen issue, even when called out directly on it.

paw patrol

Deleted User wrote: »

Your American political hero is Ron Paul, a man who:

• is a massive racist
• is against gay marriage
• wants to define life as starting at conception
• wants to end birthright citizenship
• wants to deny funding to any organization which "presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style"
• wants the US to withdraw from the UN
• wants to end NATO
• believes in New World Order conspiracy theories
• believes that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control
• denounces evolutionary theory in favour of creationism
• opposes the separation between church and state
• voted against an amendment to protect net neutrality
• believes that the Panama Canal should be owned by the US

That Ron Paul?

LOLz

yup. that guy.
I'd vote for most of those myself , i'll leave you to figure out which ones.


I'll take your word for all those "allegations",
How dare he have opinions that are opposed to yours. :rolleyes:

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

I'd vote for most of those myself , i'll leave you to figure out which ones.

So there are some of those that you oppose yourself, but of all the politicians in America, he is your hero is that right?

paw patrol wrote: »

I'll take your word for all those "allegations",

The fact that you didn't actually know about some of these very well-known facts about your so-called American political hero makes think that you don't know much about American politics at all.

Professor Moriarty

paw patrol wrote: »

LOLz

yup. that guy.
I'd vote for most of those myself , i'll leave you to figure out which ones.


I'll take your word for all those "allegations",
How dare he have opinions that are opposed to yours. :rolleyes:

The word 'most' indicates at least half. No matter how kind I try to be in allocating 'most' of those policies and beliefs, you still come out as a loon. No offence intended.

bewareofthedog

I'd say some of them are no less looney than some of the wokism the modern Democrat party endorse, I'll leave that to the imagination but I'd say most people can figure it out.

Leroy42

bewareofthedog wrote: »

I'd say some of them are no less looney than some of the wokism the modern Democrat party endorse, I'll leave that to the imagination but I'd say most people can figure it out.

No go on, for those of us with a lack of imagination, spell it out for us.

duploelabs

bewareofthedog wrote: »

I'd say some of them are no less looney than some of the wokism the modern Democrat party endorse, I'll leave that to the imagination but I'd say most people can figure it out.

Why don't you debate the points you favour rather than bad faith debating like 'I'll leave that to your imagination'?

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

I'll take your word for all those "allegations"

Well you'll be glad to know that I've gone to the effort of providing sources of my "allegations" for your pleasure.

• is a massive racist
• is against gay marriage
• wants to define life as starting at conception
• wants to end birthright citizenship
• wants to deny funding to any organization which "presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style"
• wants the US to withdraw from the UN
• wants to end NATO
• believes in New World Order conspiracy theories
• believes that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control
• denounces evolutionary theory in favour of creationism
• opposes the separation between church and state
• voted against an amendment to protect net neutrality
• believes that the Panama Canal should be owned by the US

I'll add some more while I'm at it:

• does not believe education is a human right
• wants to repeal the law banning guns in school zones
• is a climate change denier
• believes sexual harassment shouldn't be illegal
• introduced legislation (twice) to reintroduce school segregation

Would you like to defend these opinions of your American political hero?

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

LOLz

yup. that guy.
I'd vote for most of those myself , i'll leave you to figure out which ones.


I'll take your word for all those "allegations",
How dare he have opinions that are opposed to yours. :rolleyes:

In fairness, he violates his own libertarian principles with plenty of those beliefs. Then others are simply conspiracies..

Igotadose

So it seems like the GOP leadership in the HoR wants Greene off of her committees rather than a vote on the floor to do so. Fine. Great. But they want Ilhan Omar off, too, since she said bad things about Israel. Not fine. Madness. False equivalence nonsense. All else fails, attack the attractive black woman is all this is.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-gop-lawmakers-seek-to-remove-omar-committee-assignments-amid-taylor-greene-uproar

theguzman

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

I've not seen a single pro-Trump poster address this Saudi Arabia/Yemen issue, even when called out directly on it.

What Trump did by supporting the Saudi's was absolutely disgusting and Joe Biden is spot-on to divest the USA out of that. I support Joe in this and I hope he can maintain a relative peace and neutrality and the last thing anyone wants Democrat or Republican in another overseas war unless you are John Bolton.

Igotadose

GOP to be freaking over Bernie chairing the Senate Budget Committee.

https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/majority-leader-schumer-announces-senate-democratic-committee-memberships-for-the-117th-congress

namloc1980

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it true,they rolled back on the 2000 dollar cheques to the poorest americans??

Yes it's true, the Republicans blocked the $2,000 cheques unfortunately and only agreed to $600. Dems now trying to get $1,400 through to bring it back up to $2,000.

everlast75

Nancy laying the smackdown

https://twitter.com/JoshNBCNews/status/1357065678696636417?s=19

wes

Igotadose wrote: »

So it seems like the GOP leadership in the HoR wants Greene off of her committees rather than a vote on the floor to do so. Fine. Great. But they want Ilhan Omar off, too, since she said bad things about Israel. Not fine. Madness. False equivalence nonsense. All else fails, attack the attractive black woman is all this is.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-gop-lawmakers-seek-to-remove-omar-committee-assignments-amid-taylor-greene-uproar

Some democrats are to blame for the hatred against IIlan Omar as well. They went after her, after her mild criticism of Israel. They painted the target on her back, that the much worse republicans are now exploiting to after her.

12gauge dave

Bidens education nominee under heat from rand paul regarding transgenders competing in women's sports.

https://youtu.be/ld7CX07Crh4

Before anyone lists any scandals of rand or his father to try and completely dismiss what he says, would you not all agree with what he said at least?

I found it interesting when he said
In as many words..

Where are all the feminists gone?

No outroar from them.

I don't see how anyone can defend or argue its okay letting biologically born males compete in female sports with a solid scientific based argument.
I'd be willing to listen and have my mind changed if anyone feels up to it though?

Tell me how

12gauge dave wrote: »

Bidens education nominee under heat from rand paul regarding transgenders competing in women's sports.

https://youtu.be/ld7CX07Crh4

Before anyone lists any scandals of rand or his father to try and completely dismiss what he says, would you not all agree with what he said at least?

I found it interesting when he said
In as many words..

Where are all the feminists gone?

No outroar from them.

I don't see how anyone can defend or argue its okay letting biologically born males compete in female sports with a solid scientific based argument.
I'd be willing to listen and have my mind changed if anyone feels up to it though?

No. He tried to paint this as every single formerly 'female' event or race is now going to be won by a transgender. If he had spoken about the impact of testosterone on muscle development throughout puberty which can impact on physical size and strength and as a consequence that that would create an unlevel playing field, I would think he was at least a little bit genuinely concerned.
But, as expected, he's concerned solely because it is deemed to be a liberal initiative.

What do you think of the suitability of the nominee versus the person who was last appointed to the role via confirmation?

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

Bidens education nominee under heat from rand paul regarding transgenders competing in women's sports.

https://youtu.be/ld7CX07Crh4

Before anyone lists any scandals of rand or his father to try and completely dismiss what he says, would you not all agree with what he said at least?

I found it interesting when he said
In as many words..

Where are all the feminists gone?

No outroar from them.

I don't see how anyone can defend or argue its okay letting biologically born males compete in female sports with a solid scientific based argument.
I'd be willing to listen and have my mind changed if anyone feels up to it though?

There is actually a lot of outroar from feminists and others about that. You're trying to make out that this is a partisan opinion and that you've found a "look Biden is bad, gotcha!" moment. Unlike the GOP, democrats do not all agree with what a sitting president has ordered just because it was the president that ordered it and have the backbone to voice their own opinions on matters.

I see that you have liked paw patrol's posts about Ron Paul so I assume you are also a fan of him. Would you like to defend his opinions or would you also prefer to put your fingers in your ears?

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

I see that you have liked paw patrol's posts about Ron Paul so I assume you are also a fan of him. Would you like to defend his opinions or would you also prefer to put your fingers in your ears?

It says a lot about a person when they won't say what they believe in because they don't want to, or can't, stand over it.

Quantum Baloney

Deleted User wrote: »

I see that you have liked paw patrol's posts about Ron Paul so I assume you are also a fan of him. Would you like to defend his opinions or would you also prefer to put your fingers in your ears?

Which opinions are you referring to? How many decades are we going back?

ohnonotgmail

Quantum Baloney wrote: »

Which opinions are you referring to? How many decades are we going back?

post #1689 has a good summary

12gauge dave

As suspected no solid scientific based argument given just dragging Ron Paul into it and which I suspected as well as highlighting a post i liked.

I was expecting more as ye do love to have your facts and sources ready to go on the offensive.

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

As suspected no solid scientific based argument given just dragging Ron Paul into it and which I suspected as well as highlighting a post i liked.

I was expecting more as ye do love to have your facts and sources ready to go on the offensive.

I am against the order, as are many democrats. There are some republicans who approve the order. What is it that you want us to say to you? You're very clearly just trawling the web looking for anything that you think makes Biden look weak and just posting it without any purpose.

12gauge dave

Deleted User wrote: »

I am against the order, as are many democrats. There are some republicans who approve the order. What is it that you want us to say to you? You're very clearly just trawling the web looking for anything that you think makes Biden look weak and just posting it without any purpose.

We finally agree on something so 🙂

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

We finally agree on something so 🙂

So you're not answering any of my questions then?

12gauge dave

Deleted User wrote: »

So you're not answering any of my questions then?

Excellent questions but I'll have to circle back to you on them.

For today I'm just glad we have found common ground and both disagree on Bidens transgenders in female sports order.

Some of that unity Biden was looking for in action.

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

Excellent questions but I'll have to circle back to you on them.

For today I'm just glad we have found common ground and both disagree on Bidens transgenders in female sports order.

Some of that unity Biden was looking for in action.

Dude it's very clear you have no intention of answering anyone's questions and do not wish to have any form of a discussion on a discussion forum. My recommendation for you is is to stick with Facebook where you can keep posting your random news articles without any personal input.

12gauge dave

Deleted User wrote: »

Dude it's very clear you have no intention of answering anyone's questions and do not wish to have any form of a discussion on a discussion forum. My recommendation for you is is to stick with Facebook where you can keep posting your random news articles without any personal input.

Dude what questions are you on about?
Why I support Ron Paul?

Could you quote where I said I was in support of Ron Paul in anyway?

Or are you assuming I'm a Ron Paul fan because I am a Donald trump fan?

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

Dude what questions are you on about?
Why I support Ron Paul?

Could you quote where I said I was in support of Ron Paul in anyway?

Or are you assuming I'm a Ron Paul fan because I am a Donald trump fan?

No, I am asking you if you are a Ron Paul fan. Are you?