US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
Celebrate Nite said:
Whaaaaaaaaaa??? CNN fixing their own debate so Biden looks good????

How could this have haaaaaaaaappeeeeeeened??? 😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱

/sarcasm
Click to expand...

The issue is how insane they are at it. This isn't the usual biased moderator and one side being given the questions ahead of time( 100% Biden is practicing the whole debate that will only be responding to questions his team has had for a month, and an ear piece to help him along with it).

They are trying to have 100% control over what leaves the building. Visually and audibly. They want to be able to edit out gaffs, pauses, saying out loud what he's told to do, etc, and only have second hand retellings of how he really was on stage. Facts that they can label misinformation.
 
Sniperwoof said:
I don't expect Biden do do virtually any debating at all. Any time Trump makes a point the moderator is just going to cut him off and say that all economic indicators are up and the border is secure.
Click to expand...
Which is a gift to the right to be honest. Those who have been strongly skeptical of the left and media will have their skepticism validated.

People who are starting to have doubts are going to move to skepticism.

I was watching Tucker interview Tiabbi and one thing they were talking about is that trying to think about these things in a rational way is pointless because they are all beyond being rational. They are incompetent zealots.

No one worth the air they breathe would let Biden debate Trump under any condition. Their best tactic is to just bury him in the basement, drag him out to the beach every couple of weeks to prove he is alive, and keep him shut the fuck up. Just run old interviews and speeches.

I saw some video of him from 2019 and it is shocking how he has declined. He was pretty bad then and now he is just a bubbling puddle of shit in a diaper and a nice suit wearing a poorly fitting Biden mask.
mandatorylurk said:
View attachment 6130542

View attachment 6130544

.....are they trying to Red Wedding this whole fucking thing?
Click to expand...
Nah. They just want to make sure no one records Biden's incoherent rambling or any good points Trump makes in any form.
 
Rykel22 said:
There is no audience, beyond CNN staff running the thing and the staffs of the candidates/Secret Service. Between that and the 1-2 min broadcast delay, its clear they're doing things to minimize Biden gaffs getting out.
Click to expand...
Will 2 minutes even be enough? Unless they plan to cut to commercials every time there's a gaff that time is going to run out very quickly.


Actually, I think what happened is that the entire thing is scripted and they have a weeks worth of recordings of Biden answering each question. Every time there's a gaff they plan to cut to prerecordings of Biden answering questions.

In fact, the questions and Biden are probably all pre-recorded and they will simply stitch in moments where Trump is responding to something unrelated to make him look bad.

So the recordings will have the question be about one thing but in reality Trump gets asked something different, so they stitch in him giving a response that is entirely inappropriate for the recording's question.

Trump better be wearing a wire or have someone secretly recording the whole thing.
 
Sniperwoof said:
I don't expect Biden do do virtually any debating at all. Any time Trump makes a point the moderator is just going to cut him off and say that all economic indicators are up and the border is secure.
Click to expand...

I think Biden will be preforming a speech, with the moderators asking him only prepared discussions, with an ear piece in place of a teleprompter, and CNN to throw a huge charade to dress it up as a debate. Probably a couple prepared responses to obvious points of attack like the economy and immigration, but Biden will have very little response to what Trump says.

Edit: in a late reply to @Betonhaus I think being able to cut in prerecorded responses is there wet dream, but there will be too many unfriendly witness to get away with it. Covering up how much he stuttered, rambled, and paused is one thing, they can argue that is just Republican attendees exaggerated subjective opinion on Bidens performance, and controlling they feed they can use that to ignore anything that didn't make it to the broadcast.

But outright faking it is too ludicrous for even them.
 
Last edited:
Polyboros2 said:
They are trying to have 100% control over what leaves the building. Visually and audibly. They want to be able to edit out gaffs, pauses, saying out loud what he's told to do, etc, and only have second hand retellings of how he really was on stage. Facts that they can label misinformation.
Click to expand...
Which should not be surprising to anyone that's been paying attention to the things CNN has been doing for like a decade or more. Everyone knows they are the most psychotic news channel out of all mainstream media.

CNN pulling something like this is as surprising as the sun rising in the morning and seting in the evening.
 
I forgot a post:
Screenshot-20240627-144406.png

I'm not sure if this has been posted:
ALERT: White House Correspondents Association says CNN is keeping the press' neutral pool camera OUT of tonight's Presidential Debate. WHCA states that:

WHCA is deeply concerned that CNN has rejected our repeated requests to include the White House travel pool inside the studio. Through conversations and advocacy, we urged CNN to grant access to at least one print pool reporter for the duration of the debate. WHCA has been informed that one print reporter will be permitted to enter the studio during a commercial break to briefly observe the setting. That is not sufficient in our view and diminishes a core principle of presidential coverage. The White House pool has a duty to document, report and witness the president’s events and his movements on behalf of the American people.

The pool is there for the “what ifs?” in a world where the unexpected does happen.

The pool reporter works on behalf of the entire White House press corps. Print pool reports are an important part of the historical record. Further, the pool is screened by the US Secret Service and travels with the president on Air Force One so there is no security issue. The Biden campaign told WHCA it supports our request. The Trump campaign told WHCA it would not oppose the inclusion of the White House pool reporter. The Trump campaign has a separate press corps.

Tonight’s debate will have no audience present and includes format rules that can silence candidates’ microphones. We don’t know how this will play out in real time. A pool reporter is there to observe what is said and done when microphones are off or when either candidate is not seen on camera but may speak, gesture, move, or engage in some way.

WHCA believes this principle of coverage matters. The White House travel pool has been included in past presidential debates and we believe that standard of access is essential.
Precedent matters for future debates.
Click to expand...
 
Polyboros2 said:
Edit: in a late reply to @Betonhaus I think being able to cut in prerecorded responses is there wet dream, but there will be too many unfriendly witness to get away with it. Covering up how much he stuttered, rambled, and paused is one thing, they can argue that is just Republican attendees exaggerated subjective opinion on Bidens performance, and controlling they feed they can use that to ignore anything that didn't make it to the broadcast.

But outright faking it is too ludicrous for even them.
Click to expand...
That would be much more difficult to pull off. And how would they do it when they only have two minutes to play with?

Say they cut off Biden freezing or mumbling for a minute. What will they do? Will they cut the stream and show a wait screen? That will be obvious and that much dead air would be a disaster. Will they cut it out and inch closer to live until they can't anymore? They will run out of time to play with in the first five minutes. Will they cut to a pre-recorded answer from Biden? That is probably the easiest as they can have things queded up and switch over before Biden asnwers. Or will they do as I said and gaslight anyone who says that it was faked?
 
Betonhaus said:
That would be much more difficult to pull off. And how would they do it when they only have two minutes to play with?

Say they cut off Biden freezing or mumbling for a minute. What will they do? Will they cut the stream and show a wait screen? That will be obvious and that much dead air would be a disaster. Will they cut it out and inch closer to live until they can't anymore? They will run out of time to play with in the first five minutes. Will they cut to a pre-recorded answer from Biden? That is probably the easiest as they can have things queded up and switch over before Biden asnwers. Or will they do as I said and gaslight anyone who says that it was faked?
Click to expand...
People are making too much of this. I firmly believe the 1-2 minute delay is entirely because CNN staffers are afraid Trump is going to call for an insurrection live, and the two commercial breaks are there just in case he does. It's nonsense of course but CNN has moved far away from reality at this point.
 
Betonhaus said:
That would be much more difficult to pull off. And how would they do it when they only have two minutes to play with?

Say they cut off Biden freezing or mumbling for a minute. What will they do? Will they cut the stream and show a wait screen? That will be obvious and that much dead air would be a disaster. Will they cut it out and inch closer to live until they can't anymore? They will run out of time to play with in the first five minutes. Will they cut to a pre-recorded answer from Biden? That is probably the easiest as they can have things queded up and switch over before Biden asnwers. Or will they do as I said and gaslight anyone who says that it was faked?
Click to expand...
That kind of live TV editing has been in practice for decades, and 1-2 minutes of buffer is nothing for them to cut to Trump or the Moderators to cover up.
 
Already this is going swimmingly with no controversy whatsoever.
But really, even a random retard can tell when the rules of a game are a bit sussy, this is going to be hilarious.
 

You Knew, So Why Did You Do It?

Biden was aware of warnings from people who knew best that encouraging NATO expansion east was provocative and a dangerous crossing of Russia’s reddest of red lines. He knew because he knew the people who gave the warnings. Robert Gates said that “trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching” and that it was “recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests.” Gates was Secretary of Defense when Biden was vice president and busily midwifing the coup in Ukraine. William Burns said, “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite” and warned that, if NATO expanded to Ukraine, “There could be no doubt that Putin would fight back hard.” Burns is the former ambassador to Russia and currently Biden’s Director of the CIA.

More reckless still, Biden didn’t need to be told by the Russia experts. As the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he already knew of the dangers of NATO’s continued eastward expansion. In a 1977 speech, Biden said, “I think the one place that the greatest consternation would be caused in the short term…would be to admit the Baltic States now in terms of NATO-Russian, U.S.-Russian relations. And if there was ever anything that was going to tip the balance…in terms of a vigorous and hostile reaction in Russia—I don’t mean military—it would be that.”

Since Biden knew how seriously Russia viewed NATO expansion eastward as a threat, why did he so uncompromisingly insist on endorsing NATO’s 2008 promise to one day admit Ukraine into NATO and on enforcing NATO’s open door policy? Why, in the weeks before the war, when Russia delivered proposals on security guarantees to the United States demanding no NATO expansion into Ukraine, did the U.S. refuse to even put it on the table for negotiations?

Why Not Even Try to Negotiate?

That prewar refusal to negotiate would not be the last time Biden would refuse to negotiate the end of the war in Ukraine. He would refuse to negotiate, not only in the days leading up to the war, but in the first days after the invasion, before all the horrific loss of life and land. The Biden administration would go on encouraging Ukraine to fight Russia, instead of finding a lasting peace, in defense of the “core principle” that, like every country, Ukraine “has a sovereign right to determine for itself with whom it will choose to associate in terms of its alliances.”

When talks between Russia and Ukraine came tantalizingly close to a diplomatic settlement in Istanbul in the early days of the war, the U.S. chose, not to encourage and nurture them, but to discourage them. There is now an overwhelming chorus of first hand testimony that the U.S. and its allies discouraged, and even blocked, the diplomatic process instead of midwifing it. The chorus includes participants in the talks like former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennet, former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, Turkish officials and Davyd Arakhamiia, who led the Ukrainian negotiating team, as well as reporting on the intervention of then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. A recent article in The New York Times adds that “American officials were alarmed at the terms” and patronizingly asked the Ukrainians, who had agreed to the terms, whether they “understand this is unilateral disarmament.” America’s Polish partners moved to derail the talks because they “feared that Germany or France might try to persuade the Ukrainians to accept Russia’s terms.”

Even now, when Russian President Vladimir Putin is offering to “immediately…cease fire and begin negotiations” on terms not very different from the terms that the two sides were so close to finalizing in Istanbul, the Biden administration refuses to explore the possibility as Ukraine continues to lose kilometers of land and thousands of lives.

What is the Endgame?

Biden insists on keeping NATO’s door open to Ukraine, and he has discouraged negotiating an end to the war. So, with Russia seemingly winning the war, with Ukraine losing land and running out of men, what is the endgame?

When interviewers from Time asked Biden that very question on May 28—”So what is the endgame though in Ukraine and what does peace look like there?”—Biden gave the shocking answer that the endgame is not NATO membership for Ukraine: “We have a relationship with them like we do with other countries, where we supply weapons so they can defend themselves in the future.” But that relationship, he explained, “doesn’t mean NATO.”

The truth is that, since the war began, no one has been willing to offer Ukraine the NATO membership that they were promised and that they are fighting for. Despite the war for “core principles,” the U.S. continues to offer only that “Ukraine will become a member of NATO when all Allies agree and when conditions are met.”

In the most recent edition of NATO’s promise to the Ukrainians who are dying for NATO’s open door policy, the upcoming NATO summit in July will offer Ukraine only “a bridge to their membership.” Ukraine will be offered an “irreversible path” to NATO without “bringing Ukraine any further along the path” to NATO.

Biden should be asked again what the endgame is if he will neither negotiate away Ukraine’s NATO membership nor grant it.

Superpower Responsibility in a Nuclear World

Biden keeps encroaching closer and closer to Russia’s red lines made bold by the belief that Putin is only bluffing when he threatens to enforce them.

Recently, the Biden administration extended the permission “to use American air defense systems, guided rockets and artillery to fire into Russia only along Ukraine’s northeastern border, near Kharkiv,” which is already encroaching on Russia’s red lines, to firing American weapons “anywhere that Russian forces are coming across the border from the Russian side to the Ukrainian side to try to take additional Ukrainian territory.”

Biden had long insisted that American missiles will never be fired into Russian territory because “the idea—the idea that we’re going to send in offensive equipment…and American crews, just understand… that’s called ‘World War Three.’ Okay? Let’s get it straight here, guys.” “We will not,” he has insisted, “fight the third world war in Ukraine.” Nonetheless, the latest encroachment on Russia’s red lines, is “the first time an American president had allowed the limited use of American weapons to strike inside the borders of a nuclear-armed adversary.”

It is reckless to base America’s military policy on the assumption that Putin is bluffing about the enforcement of red lines. The invasion of Ukraine itself was the enforcement of Russia’s “brightest of all red lines.” But even if Putin had not yet enforced a red line, it is reckless to act provocatively on the assumption that the leader of a nuclear power will not enforce his red lines if existentially threatened.

Leaders of superpowers have a responsibility to the world they lead. Biden seems to have forgotten what American statesmen have remembered since the beginning of the nuclear cold war. Nuclear powers possess nuclear weapons for a reason. And remembering that reason, and gravely doing everything you can to not trigger that reason, is what allowed the two superpowers not to blow up the world in the first Cold War.

Biden’s Russia policy irresponsibly ignores the leader of a superpower’s responsibilities in a nuclear world. And that policy is based on the weak foundation of the calculation that Putin is bluffing when he says he will enforce his red lines. In the debate, Biden should be asked about that responsibility of the leader of a superpower.
Click to expand...
Joe Biden Drained the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)

No other President drew more oil out of our nation’s critical reserve than Biden, and he did it just for the politics. When Biden took office, the SPR level was at over 638 million barrels; today that level is at 370 million, the biggest drawdowns taking place in the lead up to the 2022 midterm elections. To put it another way, Mr. Biden inherited an SPR with the fuel indicator close to “Full” and now it hovers at around the “Half” mark.

Upon releasing nearly 200 million barrels in the lead-up to the 2022 midterms, Team Biden blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine for soaring gas prices. However, they are once again considering raising the SPR ahead of November’s elections because Biden only cares about the cost of gas when his job is on the line.

Biden Administration Leased the Fewest Acres for American Oil Production Since Truman

Since the end of World War II, no other President has leased fewer acres of American land for oil production than Joe Biden. To put this failure in perspective, in his first 19 months in office, President Jimmy Carter leased 11.77 million acres of land for oil, compared to Biden’s 126,228. In December 2023, Biden’s Interior Department openly bragged about offering the fewest offshore oil leases in history. While Jimmy Carter, facing massive inflation and an unruly OPEC, leased 93 times the amount of land for American oil than Joe Biden.

During the second Presidential debate in 2020, Joe Biden promised to preside over the demise of the American oil industry. And while he’s done all he could to fulfil that failure, perhaps the most insulting part is his willingness to beg OPEC for more oil.

Joe Biden Colludes with Saudi Arabia for More Oil

In July 2022, American families were paying around $5 a gallon for gas at the pump, an historic high. Along with his decision to cut leases for American production and drain the SPR, Joe Biden made a trip to Saudi Arabia to fist-bump with their prince. Biden’s goal was to get Saudi Arabia to pump out more oil to alleviate skyrocketing prices. The Saudis not only refused, but they also actually decided to cut production.

In response, the Biden Administration entered into secret negotiations to have OPEC delay their production cuts until after the 2022 midterms. An American President colluding with a foreign power to manipulate gas prices for political purposes should be a massive scandal, but for Joe Biden, it was just another failure to ignore.

The Failed “Inflation Reduction Act”

Since taking office, Biden’s goal was a massive climate bill. First it was called “Build Back Better” but when that failed, his administration re-branded it as the Inflation Reduction Act. At the time, inflation was at the highest point since Carter left office and Biden successfully took advantage of the crisis he induced by passing the biggest climate bailout in history.

The $369 billion measure squeaked through Congress. Before the ink was dry from his signature, Biden started to note the bill was actually focused on climate and not inflation. This massive green bailout is a success for Biden because of the billions headed out the door to his friends and China. However, the current 3.3 inflation rate celebrated by Biden is higher than President Trump’s highest rate. And President Trump didn’t have to spend $369 billion of our money to achieve it.

Electric Vehicle (EV) Mandates

In 2023, Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed strict new vehicle admission standards. The ruling forced electric vehicles (EVs) to make up at least 54% of new car sales by 2030 and 66% by 2032. These arbitrary demands and deadlines have only delivered tangible failure.

Earlier this year, the media feigned outrage over President Trump noting the automobile market was facing a “bloodbath” under Biden. The debate stage on Thursday would be the perfect time for President Trump to point out to the world, and Biden, that he was right, particularly about EVs.

The last six months have seen EV companies layoff thousands, lose market share, and burn through billions. The pain is just getting started as earlier this week a survey found that nearly half of EV owners want to switch back to gas-powered cars.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom