Biden announced he was running in 2024 for reelection.
4 more years!
- Thread starter Lucy01
- Start date
Good Lord will we ever again find leaders who aren’t decades behind their peak mental capacity. Mayor Pete would devour either Biden or Trump in a debate. It’s laughable how bad are our candidates for the highest office in the nation- corrupt morally and idiotic mentally- just flipping great. Can all megalomaniacs die of a stroke now please?
Can’t even begin to imagine Biden‘s physical and mental condition in 6-1/2 years given his decline over the past several years.
We need presidents in the 40-60 range, in peak mental and physical condition, and with relevant experience.
Thank you.
I was looking for a link where he "Announced" it, not an annoymous tweet from unnamed sources at The Hill about something he told Obama.
Not doubting it, just looking for THE ANNOUNCEMENT.
Mayor Pete doesn't work. I'll take Biden or Trump over him. Our Fed gov attracts the worst of the worst. Compare our transportation leaders: Musk and mayor Pete. One couch surfing working around the clock the other home on paid leave
Once Biden sees the red tide in November I promise he will not want to fight the Squad on one side and the QAnon backers on the other side.
He'll be impeached. Dealing with Hunter investigations. All the bs retaliatory shit that doesn't do any of us a bit of good
Cuz it was all a hoax. Biden and Hunter are real criminals.
Our gov is worthless. Totally and completely worthless. Vendettas and gotcha politics. At least Kinzinger will be gone and hopefully Cheney loses. Then Trump gets too old and fat. And the Squad loses influence. And Gaetz and MTG lose or get drowned out. And we get some new blood that actually are interested in governing
Ok just let’s stick with facts. Congress appropriates all funds- Congress provided Ukraine funding and Trump intervened to use funding to leverage Ukraine to help investigate Biden family- these facts are indisputable. Both Trump and Biden are corrupt and likely criminal- don’t be blindly partisan and incorrect on facts. Trump was impeached twice neither time was it related to the Mueller investigation- the topic you accept on Trump’s reasoning that it was a hoax. Some of us objectively do wonder why Russia worked to get elected in 2016- this fact is also established in all circles other than Tucker nightly partisan preach. Folks who only watch one source are either lazy or not overly intelligent
The newer blood politicians currently in congress, on BOTH sides, are not very inspiring.
It's so funny. I was thinking about all the old turds and they may actually be more sane than the newer blood politicians. Look at the craziest ones we have out there: AOC/Cori Bush, MTG, Gaetz etc.
I'm an old fart. They may be more sane but from personal experience I guarantee their mental acuity ain't what it once was.
If Trump was impeached for delaying funds to Ukraine, Biden certainly deserves impeachment for threatening to withhold $1 billion unless a Ukraine prosecutor investigating his son was fired.
Just FYI, Congress appropriates and authrorizes the funds and the Executive office distributes them. That's how it works. Trump withheld no funds, if you're sticking to facts.
I've still never heard how Russia tried to influence the electiion in favor of Trump. Have you?
The Hillary campaign was actively conspiring with Russians to create a fake dossier on Trump. Doesn't that seem a bit odd to those of you who are 'objective'?
Ha. You think about it and if you had a death case would you hire Biden. Never. You'd say the guy is a million years too old. Yet we hire him and the rest to run the country.
Are you an idiot? Russia looped to NYT the HRC email story- that was the October surprise that got Trump elected in the oh so narrow 2016 election (5 million illegal alien votes your similarly brain powered hero spouted was the reason he lost the popular vote to HRC)- you’ll note I left out park Avenue meetings between Trump campaign and Russia or the Finland meeting wherein Trump told everyone to leave the room so he could communicate in private to Putin- man if you have an IU degree please put aside the bong long enough to read some peer reviewed journals
That's a story ("looped to NYT"?) you've heard from the media, not from any Mueller or Congressional report.
The meetings were not found to be any kind of collusion, so how did they infuence anyone? Do you think meeting with Russians is going to influence anyone to vote Republican? WTF?
So, the US President can't meet with Putin one-on-one? Does that include Obama telling Medvedev, the outgoing Russian President to tell Vlad he'll have more 'flexibility' after the election? Wonder what that meant?
So, you're not for impeaching Biden for doing something you're accusing Trump of?
If you have an IU degree, please use return it for lack of use.
Groups in Russia created fake online content that was posted to social media to spread lies about Hillary Clinton. Whether this action was Russian government sanctioned or not was never proven, but it is a fact that these Russian companies "existed". Mueller specifically went after them. If you truly need me to find you a link on that part, let me know and I will dig one up. There were lies about Trump too, but the amount for Hillary were significantly more (I think I remember seeing it was something like 5:1).
I personally know someone who was duped by a fake social media post (the one about how Hillary used campaign funds to pay for her daughter's wedding). She was on the fence about voting for Hillary and told me that reading that post was the deciding factor for her. She found out it was a lie about a week after the election. What's weird is that she is a relatively smart person and I would not consider her "dumb" or "misguided" in any way. She just fell for a lie. If just one person in fifty falls for it, well, that's a 2% shift in election results. With how relatively close the margins have been in these past few elections, 2% is huge.
At the end of the day, I don't "blame" Russia for Trump being elected though. I blame people stupid enough to believe everything they read on the internet. It's semantics, certainly, but there is a difference between saying Russians INFLUENCED the election versus saying it's Russia's FAULT that Hillary lost. Too many Democrats want to blame Russia though when the fault lies with Hillary for her own actions (email issues, etc.).
People give Russia to much credit! They can’t even beat Ukraine.
I was just asking. I have heard many times that Russia was supposedly trying to influence the election for Trump. I just never heard any examples.
I remember the story about paying for Chelsea's wedding. Of course it didn't come from campaign funds - it came from the Clinton Foundation! lol (that's a joke)
I just find it hard to believe that there was a big effort to benefit Trump when there were so many more negative fake stories being passed around about Trump.
You do realize it was the Clinton foundation accused of paying for the wedding and not the campaign right? And the accusation was from emails from internal foundation employees. So hardly the Russian disinformation campaign youd like to think it is. Hell even Snopes classifies this as "unproven" which in Snopes world means yeah we can't totally refute it but we're not gonna investigate it further. But carry on with how this impacted the votes via those pesky Russians.
Sadly, the issue is not mental ability in absolute terms, but rather whether he is more mentally competent than his opponent. It is always a choice. I preferred brighter bulbs than him in 2020 during the nomination process, for sure.
The curse of Gen X. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right…
I think his point is Pete would mop them up in a debate. He would. Easily. And that we need fresh blood and ideas. Would do. Badly.
Not that pete is necessarily the person.
Factbox: Key findings from Senate inquiry into Russian interference in 2016 U.S. election
t - Below are key findings of the U.S. Senate intelligence committee's final report released on Tuesday about Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S presidential election in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.
www.reuters.com
Danc here is Reuters take on the 2016 election interference. And you might better understand my stance- I will support neither Trump nor Biden going forwards and I’ll celebrate the death of one of those two as he is an existential threat to democracy
You're wasting your time trying to convince him of anything that doesn't comport with his almost always erroneous perspective.Factbox: Key findings from Senate inquiry into Russian interference in 2016 U.S. election
t - Below are key findings of the U.S. Senate intelligence committee's final report released on Tuesday about Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S presidential election in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Danc here is Reuters take on the 2016 election interference. And you might better understand my stance- I will support neither Trump nor Biden going forwards and I’ll celebrate the death of one of those two as he is an existential threat to democracy
A) Yes, I was wrong, it was the Clinton Foundation, not campaign funds (Hey, I'm old and that was 6 years ago....)
B) It was part of the Wikileaks email batch which, to my understanding, the Russians knew all about already at the time of release.
C) It has been proven that Russian troll farms were creating content and specifically targeting conservative groups with the misinformation / lies. So even if this particular example didn't originate in a Russian think tank, they most certainly helped spread it. I will happily link the Senate report of the findings if you like.
As to the nature of the Chelsea Clinton wedding itself being true or not, an independent review of the finances was performed and found no evidence of misappropriated funds, along with the wedding organizers statement that the funds were directly from the Clinton parents. The emails you reference were from Podesta who was discussing second (or third) hand about someone making a claim within the Clinton Foundation. There were no emails from within the Foundation itself.
Pete is polished, professional, pleasant, articulate and bright.
He doesn't have a chance.
Pre or post election? If you want to claim that the number of lies made up about Trump Post-election compared to those about Hillary, I would likely agree with that (and in fairness, Trump put his foot in his mouth with dumb statements so many times that it was fairly easy for anybody to make something up and it wouldn't be far fetched to have come from Trump's mouth). But Pre-election, I'm trying to think of any significant lies that were out there. The pee tape, maybe?
I'm not crazy about voting for Biden again, but I definitely would if the choices are him and Trump. Keeping Trump from office is too important to abstain from voting.
