Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1309310312314315695

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Well back to this, healthcare worker shortage expected in NYC shortly, due to the vaccine mandate kicking in. Good enough to put themselves at risk for the past 2 years and most likely have natural immunity but now they are selfish, disgusting people. Intentionally creating a medical staff shortage during a pandemic seems like a great idea.


    It's teachers next. Wait until it's the entire country we will be fucked. Mandates were never considered a good idea before and there's a reason for that.





  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yes, they were always selfish, disgusting people. There should not be unvaccinated health care workers, full stop. If they want to keep their job, they can get vaccinated. If they don't trust medicine, especially FDA approved medicine, they should not be working in the field of medicine. They should also lose any certifications or state licenses that they have and therefore be ineligible for rehire.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,593 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    I wonder what peoples attitudes would be it they were held personally responsible for others getting the illness because they opted not to vaccinate?

    Or they attitudes if they get sick themselves, is it correct that they shouldn't have access to the states medical facilities?

    Americans love all this 'freedom' rubbish, yet they never consider the huge amount of state help they all get each and everyday (like all citizens).

    I do wonder how many of these medical workers are actually front line covid patient facing staff. It would strike me as amazing that anyone that has faced the realities of covid on a daily basis would refuse to take a vaccine that has been proved to work. Apart from "I don't want to because of Freedom", what is their problem with taking a vaccine that is proven to be not only effective but safe (to the extent that any drug is 'safe')



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    But they are already subject to a whole raft of other "vaccine mandates" so opposing the Covid one on the basis of "Freedom" is complete crap.

    It's sad pathetic politics , nothing more nothing less.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,498 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    It’s funny how Biden never takes questions from the press, yet I see him take questions pretty regularly. It’s almost as if you only see what you want to see.


    https://www.reddit.com/r/MadeMeSmile/comments/pwo7fn/3rd_jab_by_biden/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,241 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    In this day of advancing technology and Covid I wonder why it is so important for Biden or Harris to physically visit the border? Cannot see how such anecdotal visits improve decision making in an advanced nation of 330 million people. To me it is only a photo op for appearances sake.



  • Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Josephfromdowntheroad


    Indeed as you say in this day of covid it is paramount to secure borders to ensure the safety of citizens.

    Since Biden and Harris have failed so miserably at that there is a growing sense that this administration doesn't give a damn so would be nice to see them go and visit the border to those poor border patrol officers dealing with record numbers due to this administrations blatant incompetence.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Indeed as you say in this day of covid it is paramount to secure borders to ensure the safety of citizens.

    That poster did not say anything like that, and in fact your following sentence is the exact opposite of what that poster said.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    'owning the libs' (Melania did this to troll the cheating husband):



    The visit took place /after/ Trump had already reverse his child separation enforcement policy (there are still children split from their families in 2021) so I don't think the visit did anything to affect policy either.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,241 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    When examining historical demographics and population changes in the USA, I recall studies that concluded that America would have reached zero population growth back in the 80s if not for illegal immigrants crossing the southern border, with about two million per year staying.

    If any of the Republican or Democrat administrations had been successful in blocking this flow, America would now be in population decline as has been occurring in several EU nations today.

    How this decline might have affected the American domestic version of capitalism is problematic. Domestic population growth appears to fuel customer growth, profits, and shareholders equity in USA.

    If Biden fails to stop the southern flow, as did Trump fail, as did Obama, as did Bush2, as did Clinton, etc, etc.; aside from all the political rhetoric, to what extent has this flow been beneficial to the existing American capitalist system?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,569 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Of course, but that is pretty much a pyramid scheme. It might be that form of capitalism is unsustainable in the long run regardless.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,241 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    I am tired of the oversimplified circle of blame that occurs regarding the USA southern border and illegal immigration. All administrations have failed, regardless of party, not just Biden-Harris. They all look incompetent.

    Furthermore, I thought that immigration reform was a congressional legislative matter, which when passed, and signed, was the responsibility of the Biden (and prior administrations to executively implement). Biden does not legislate as president, only signs or does not. It appears obvious the past and current immigration policy is lacking, and Congress avoids action to resolve it, beyond finger pointing during elections.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,593 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    When successive administrations fail to deal with it, even Trump who made it one of his signature issues, then one must start to consider why?

    If it is so massively important then politically it would have been dealt with. But Trump would appear to show that whilst it is easy to demand a solution, like with gun violence, the US citizens are not actually prepared to pay the price.

    Be it the cost of properly patrolling the border itself, having to deal with the millions of illegals already in the country, the massive shortage of people to do jobs currently done by immigrants, and lots more besides.

    The vast majority of immigration comes in through airports and legal means, overstay their visa. Harris visiting the Southern border won't stop that.

    Trump visited the border a number of times yet somehow that visit didn't lead to any actual difference yet some are calling for Harris to visit as if that will achieve anything



  • Registered Users Posts: 493 ✭✭BobHopeless


    Harris couldn't find the border on a map and if she did she'd just laugh. God help America when Biden steps down and she becomes president.



  • Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Josephfromdowntheroad


    But it's okay because she hasn't been to Europe either.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Harris visits Guatemala, one of the biggest sources of US migrants, as well as Mexico to discuss the migrant issue with the relevant politicians. Republicans: "Yeah but she only went to these places for a photo op. What, did he think should fix the border crisis with these visits or something?! Pfft."

    Harris doesn't stand within 5 centimetres of the border. Republicans: "Wtf?! Why didn't she visit the actual border? She could have figured out how to fix everything if she did! The tens of thousands of photos and videos publicly available of the entire border don't show the true issue at hand, only if she stands at one particular border crossing on one particular day will she truly understand!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Yeah.

    Her father was a lecturer and her mother was a cancer researcher. After studying political science and economics in college she earned a law degree. A right dumbass ffs

    Are you intentionally lazy with your insults or does it come naturally?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    She's unintelligent because she's a Democrat, duh. Even though only 6% of US scientists are Republicans, and even though there is a very obvious trend with Republicans in this thread of having bad grammar, of link dumping, of not citing their sources, of being incapable of reading more than the headline, of being terrified of a research paper, and on disappearing when they are losing an argument, Dunning–Kruger will always make them believe they are the intelligent ones.

    John Cleese summed it up pretty well.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,191 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    I would genuinely pay to see a geographical quiz between Hopeless and Harris. If I was a betting man I know where my money would be placed. 😆



  • Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Josephfromdowntheroad


    Judging those with a lesser education than your own says so much very more about you than those your judging.

    When frontline workers kept us alive and well over the last 2 years many with little education and no health insurance and your on here judging these people as if you are somewhat better than them.

    The government are making an extra bank holiday in their honor and on that holiday when it comes I hope you raise a glass in gratitude for their heroic efforts and order a nice slice of humble pie and have a good think about things.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    you're*

    Claiming that those who are more intelligent than you are incapable of doing something as mundane as point out a country on a map implies that you have no argument to make and instead can only resort to making up nonsense.

    As for your edit, I am very thankful to the overwhelming number of vaccinated frontline workers and would never suggest otherwise. And I am also very thankful to every person who vaccinated themselves for the benefit of those around them. To quote yourself, I hope you raise a glass in gratitude for their heroic efforts and order a nice slice of humble pie and have a good think about things. But you can take that discussion to the relevant thread.



  • Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Frontline health workers (nurses and doctors) in this country are all educated to degree level and higher, or have to have equivalent training. Roles like EMTs require specific educational standards and additional specific training and courses

    No where in the post you quoted did the poster mention health care workers.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think he's trying to imply that I don't give healthcare workers the recognition they deserve because I said in an earlier post that I believe that the small minority of such workers who have not been vaccinated should lose their jobs. Even though, of course, that doesn't make the slightest bit of sense and, on top of that, even though I have previously worked in the healthcare sector myself. And even though, most importantly, the majority of healthcare workers agree that all healthcare workers should be vaccinated and therefore, if he in fact cared about healthcare workers, he should be agreeing with me rather than disagreeing with me.

    Alas, Dunning-Kruger and all...



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,625 ✭✭✭✭extra gravy


    An extra bank holiday in their honour that they'll have to work anyway while everyone else is off, yeah aren't they so lucky. You can sit back and raise your glass all you want but no frontline worker will care. Perhaps you could have a good think about how out of touch you are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    In actual Biden news, here is some testimony from the Defense Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff debunking the criticism of the Afghanistan withdrawal.

    It's behind a paywall so here are some snippets.

    Biden’s critics will have a hard time explaining why a limited force left indefinitely in Afghanistan would have been a viable alternative. There has been no evidence that the status quo was sustainable. Miley acknowledged, “The Taliban [in 2020] strengthened its positions around several provincial capitals in anticipation of the departure of foreign forces and, over this time period, enemy-initiated attacks increased by over 50 percent and were above previous seasonal norms.” He added, “The Taliban controlled approximately 78 districts in February of 2021. This rose to over 100 in mid-June and surpassed 200 by mid-July, with fighting occurring on the outskirts of 15 provincial capitals.”


    The notion that the Taliban would have halted its advance if the United States kept a few thousand troops in the country defies logic. Indeed, Milley conceded, “On the first of September, we were going to go to war again with the Taliban. Of that, there was no doubt.”


    As Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) wrote in an op-ed earlier this month, “If Biden had reneged on this deal, there would be a ferocious response from the Taliban. Two thousand five hundred troops would have never been nearly enough to repel the reaction from a jilted Taliban."


    The U.S. military could not secure both Bagram airfield and [Hamid Karzai International Airport] with the troops available. All together securing Bagram would have required approximately 5-6,000 additional troops assuming no indigenous partner force was available. These forces are in addition to those that would be required to secure Kabul and HKIA in the event of a [noncombatant evacuation operation]. As Gen. [Austin S.] Miller has previously testified, HKIA would always be the center of gravity of any NEO due to the population that would need to be evacuated was mostly in Kabul.”


    Austin also explained, “[Retaining Bagram] would have contributed little to the mission that we had been assigned: to protect and defend our embassy some 30 miles away. That distance from Kabul also rendered Bagram of little value in the evacuation.


    Finally, the widespread declaration that the administration’s airlift was a “failure” was exaggerated and lacked context. Austin and Milley conceded there were a couple of days of chaos, but tens of thousands more Afghans were evacuated than thought possible.


    We planned to evacuate between 70,000-80,000 people. They evacuated more than 124,000,” Austin said. He also noted, “At the height of this operation, an aircraft was taking off every 45 minutes. And not a single sortie was missed for maintenance, fuel, or logistical problems. It was the largest airlift conducted in U.S. history, and it was executed in just 17 days.” Critics who said the United States would not be able to evacuate anyone after the military left were wrong. The military was able to evacuate 6,000 Americans and, with subsequent extractions, has removed the vast majority of Americans who wanted out. (After months of warnings, assistance and advice, it is hard to think what more the administration could have done.)


    With regard to the Afghans we failed to extract, the sad reality is that when a nation loses a war, it simply cannot get everyone whom it wants out. The expectation that we could have saved hundreds of thousands of Afghans from Taliban rule was never realistic.


    President Biden's critics are left exasperated. How could the United States not have done better? Certainly, Milley, Austin and other officials should have known that Afghan forces and the civilian government were hollow. But even had they foreseen an immediate collapse, a mass evacuation on any timeline would have likely had the same result (i.e., a rush to the exits). For those who wanted an indefinite war, it is time to admit there was no way to preserve the status quo without loss of more American lives. For those who wanted a “clean” and swift end, it is time to acknowledge wars do not end that way.


    Moreover, the military officials’ emphasis on the disastrous Doha deal negotiated with the Taliban under President Donald Trump was a proper corrective to the hypocritical blame Republicans heaped on Biden. My colleague Aaron Blake writes, “Both Austin and Milley cast the deal as largely a failure, particularly when the Afghan military — which the United States had tried to prop up for 20 years — quickly collapsed and allowed the Taliban to take control.”




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,703 ✭✭✭Celticfire


    Stephanopoulos asked Biden: “Your military advisors did not tell you, ‘No, we should just keep 2,500 troops. It’s been a stable situation for the last several years. We can do that. We can continue to do that’?” Biden responded, “No. No one said that to me that I can recall.”


    Under questioning by Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Jim Inhofe (R-OK), U.S. Central Command commander Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie said, “I recommended that we maintain 2,500 troops in Afghanistan.”

    McKenzie added, “I also had a view that the withdrawal of those forces would lead inevitably to the collapse of the Afghan military forces and eventually the Afghan government.”

    He also said he was “confident” Biden heard all recommendations and had listened to the previous U.S. commander in Afghanistan Army Gen. Scott Miller “very thoughtfully.”


    Under questioning from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Mark Milley admitted that it was also his assessment that there should be a “steady state of 2,500” forces in Afghanistan.

    Asked whether Biden’s statement to Stephanopoulos that no military leader advised him to leave a small troop presence in Afghanistan was true, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said, “Their input was received by the president and considered by the president for sure.”

    Milley also told Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE), “I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that the military voice was heard and it was considered.”

    When Fischer asked him, “It was considered but not followed, correct?” Milley responded, “We have — presidents are elected for reasons.”

    So yes it was recommended that 2,500 troops should be kept there. Did Biden lie or just forget this tiny but somewhat important detail?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Biden didn't lie nor forget that detail. He was given several different options, one of which one was to leave 2,500 troops there indefinitely. And it seems like he made the correct choice.

    The notion that the Taliban would have halted its advance if the United States kept a few thousand troops in the country defies logic. 



Advertisement