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

Celticfire · 29-09-2021 10:51am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953195#Comment_117953195

How are you getting that from what i posted?? He was asked a straightforward question on TV and answered that he wasn't given that option. (that he could recall). So how can you claim that he did when he himself said that he didn't?

29-09-2021 11:01am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953224#Comment_117953224

He said he did not recall anyone saying the statement "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." which is not the same thing as what you're stating. He could be disagreeing that he was advised that it was a stable situation or any part of that comment.

Do you believe that Biden made the incorrect decision and the he should have gone against the agreement made with the Taliban by the previous administration? What do you believe keeping 2,500 troops in Afghanistan would have achieved, given that 75% of Afghanistan was under Taliban control by April?

Celticfire · 29-09-2021 11:18am

He said he did not recall anyone saying the statement "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." which is not the same thing as what you're stating. He could be disagreeing that he was advised that it was a stable situation or any part of that comment.

So this is the level of pedantry we are at. Actually by his blanket answer he disagreed with the whole comment. He didn't break the answer up to answer each part of the question individually but answered it as a whole thereby by default answering No to the question he was asked about keeping 2,500 troops there.

29-09-2021 11:24am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953356#Comment_117953356

I asked you a question and I answered it. I have now asked you a question, I will gladly respond to this comment when you have answered my question.

It's quite evident by the fact that you ignored my question that you agree with Biden's decision to withdraw all troops as promised. What's instead grinding your gears, however, is not what Biden did, but the fact that you believe Biden cannot recall being suggested to do something else, even though you yourself agree that Biden was correct in not doing that something else.

In other words, you are a kettle of faux outrage.

nolivesmatter · 29-09-2021 11:25am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953224#Comment_117953224

I don't know if Biden was lying or not but it's always a red flag when someone answers "I don't recall".

Celticfire · 29-09-2021 11:36am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953387#Comment_117953387

I love how you can claim that by me not answering you (after your BS) answer is somehow evidence that I agree with something. It's always about claiming that a poster has "faux outrage" or an "agenda" with you . Why would I waste my time answering your questions when you can't even admit that Biden lied or forgot he was recommended to keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan?

29-09-2021 11:41am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953441#Comment_117953441

That's twice now you have ignored a very basic question.

I have told you that I will respond to you when you reply to my question, as I did for you. It's called an adult conversation.

Each time you do not answer my question, you are demonstrating that you lack critical thinking skills because it's seemingly impossible for you to admit that you agree with something that Biden did.

Rather than saying "I'm glad Biden withdrew the troops as promised", what's making you furious is "why doesn't Biden remember an option that I'm glad he didn't take?! 😡😡😡"

Embarrassing.

Celticfire · 29-09-2021 11:49am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953457#Comment_117953457

Make it three times now. "adult conversation "...... You're having a laugh. So I'm furious as well now? What's embarrassing was the childish answer you gave.

29-09-2021 11:53am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953490#Comment_117953490

Again, no opinion given about Biden's decision. I answered your question. I have also said that I will respond to your follow up question. But no, you are completely incapable of answering even a single question. "I want your opinion but I'm not giving you my opinion on anything and that's that." And, from what I recall, you've done that every time I've had a discussion with you. Absolute brick wall.

Leroy42 · 29-09-2021 12:04pm

CelticFire, it would seem that Biden gave a pretty vague answer and made the caveat that he couldn't recall. It is a classic attempt to avoid answering the question directly whilst giving space for changing stance at a later stage.

From the testimony alluded to in the post above, it would seem that far more than 2500 would be needed, given that the Taliban had made such big advances and that the old position would no longer be practiable.

What are you actually annoyed about? That Biden didn't leave the 2500 troops even though they would have required more and could potentially have been overrun?

Celticfire · 29-09-2021 12:25pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953558#Comment_117953558

Why is someone "annoyed" "faux outraged" "have an agenda" "furious" when they point out that the POTUS possibly lied or forgot something pretty important on national TV in the midst of a chaotic withdrawal ?

At the time these generals recommended that 2,500 troops be kept along with the Airbase. I'm no expert but I think that not sneaking out in the middle of the night and abandoning the airfield would have instilled confidence in the Afghani army that there would be air support and backup there . They were taught to fight with the aid of this air support. Once the Americans abandoned the air base the Afghani army folded like a house of cards.

29-09-2021 12:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953650#Comment_117953650

Why is someone "annoyed" "faux outraged" "have an agenda" "furious" when they point out that the POTUS possibly lied or forgot something pretty important on national TV in the midst of a chaotic withdrawal ?

Because it highlights that you are being disingenuous. You don't care if Biden made the right or wrong decision, you only care about focusing on something you believe makes Biden look bad.

So, you agree that Biden should have ignored the deal made by the previous administration. That took a lot an unnecessary amount of effort to get from you.

The reason the previous administration kept 2,500 troops in Afghanistan was purely for political reasons. They were not there to maintain stability and they would not have been able to stop a Taliban takeover, not even close. They were there purely so that the previous administration would not have to commit to a full withdrawal, a full withdrawal which was always going to be messy and that was always going to result in negative media attention. Those 2,500 troops were left for the following administration to take the fall for the full withdrawal. 2,500 troops is such a small number that keeping them there is nothing but a political statement, a political statement that would cost many US lives.

eagle eye · 29-09-2021 4:08pm

Is it possible everybody is lying to cover their own backsides? It wouldn't be the first time.

Black Swan · 29-09-2021 5:12pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117952121#Comment_117952121

Photo OPS are the solution for Biden-Harris. Stand on the border and make sure the news media airs it.

Appearances are more important that actions for Biden-Harris. Promise repeatedly that a 2000 mile wall is needed and Mexico will pay for it.

Harris should not travel to meet with Central American leaders to seek their help, or fund anything that might solve why so many of their citizens flee their countries to illegally migrate to the USA.

And whatever Biden-Harris does they should not bother influencing the US Congress to do their job by legislative solution to this immigration problem that has existed for decades regardless of which party controlled Congress and the Executive branches of USA.

29-09-2021 5:49pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117955165#Comment_117955165

Harris should not travel to meet with Central American leaders to seek their help, or fund anything that might solve why so many of their citizens flee their countries to illegally migrate to the USA.

Biden-Harris should be looking at long term solutions to fixing the migrant issue by tackling the problem at the source rather than by putting a bandage over the issue with things like walls in the hopes that the wound underneath can be permanently ignored. That's a particularly bad approach when that bandage doesn't even do a particularly good job of keeping the wound at bay.

(Also I've noticed that you're thanking your own posts in this thread. Just letting you know as I assume you're doing that unintentionally.)

Black Swan · 29-09-2021 6:10pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117955369#Comment_117955369

You do not recommend a Biden-Harris Great Wall of Mexico? Especially one today that is in reality a fence rather than a wall that any fool can climb over? Or a fence that is a thousand miles too short and is now falling down in places?

And would you recommend that Biden-Harris pay for this fence-wall with a misappropriation of Pentagon funds because Mexico will not pay a peso for your Great Wall, no matter how many times someone claimed they would at rallies?

29-09-2021 6:23pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117955460#Comment_117955460

I suggest putting thousands of signs near the border saying Mexico is this way, thereby confusing migrants into thinking they lost track of their direction and causing them to turn around.

Igotadose · 29-09-2021 6:38pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117955460#Comment_117955460

No! Privately finance it, via a grift, and have it collapse, or force the gates open to prevent collapse in heavy rains!

markodaly · 30-09-2021 1:38am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117953268#Comment_117953268

Nah, Biden was caught out in a lie it seems. Certainly, ABC have called him out on it and the WH presser was very coy about it all. Seems like the wheels are starting to come off a bit with Biden. It is going to be long winter for him.

Screen Shot 2021-09-30 at 10.35.10 am.png

Half the country now disapproves of him. To put it into context, only Trump and Ford had worse numbers at this stage of their presidency. Both one-term presidents. If he can't get his $3.5 Trillion stimuli through, he will be a lame-duck president.

Brian? · 30-09-2021 6:18am

Can people stop using “lame duck” wrong? A lame duck is someone who’s successor is already elected not a POTUS who’s party doesn’t hold the senate or house.

The Dems are going to lose the house abs senate next year, I’ve no doubt about that. And the likelihood of Biden being a 1 term president is getting bigger. Although, if the GOP are stupid enough to nominate Trump Snr the Dems will walk the general

30-09-2021 8:58am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957384#Comment_117957384

To put it into context, only Trump and Ford had worse numbers at this stage of their presidency.

That's not putting it into context. That's the opposite of putting it into context. Putting it into context would be stating things like the previous president incorrectly claiming that the current president committed election fraud. Any gullible Republicans (and there's seemingly a lot of them) who believe anything a Republican president says are going to automatically disapprove of the current Democratic president, no matter who that president is, because they incorrectly believe that he is a criminal.

Putting it into context would be highlighting that only an incident like 9/11 could make a recent president have something like 90% approval rating, and that comparing the approval rating of a 21st century president to any 20th century president is pointless because of how partisan the American political system is today.

https://gfycat.com/illinformedcompletekoi

Josephfromdowntheroad · 30-09-2021 9:34am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957461#Comment_117957461

Donald trump is now favourite to win the 2024 us presidential election with skybet at 7/2.

He was 7/1 when I last checked a couple months ago.

Afghanistan has wounded this administration heavily.

duploelabs · 30-09-2021 9:37am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957839#Comment_117957839

In a binary decision, even 7/2 odds aren't good at all

30-09-2021 9:38am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957839#Comment_117957839

And yet the odds across betting agencies in general have barely changed at all since Biden became president.

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2024/winner

But sure you keep believing what you want to believe, but you should probably take it to the Trump thread.

osarusan · 30-09-2021 9:39am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957839#Comment_117957839

Whatever happens in the 2024 election, Afghanistan will have next to nothing to do with it. It'll be long forgotten by then.

Christy42 · 30-09-2021 10:09am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117957839#Comment_117957839

He was heavily favoured by the bookies part way through counting. Bookies don't predict political elections, nor do they try. If people want to bet big on politics just invest in whatever industries they support and get more money. Bookies just react to what way the betters are betting and try to ensure they get a cut either way.