Biden uses feisty State of the Union to contrast with Trump, sell voters on a second term
Biden uses feisty State of the Union to contrast with Trump, sell voters on a second term
Biden's third such address will be something of an on-the-job interview, as the nation's oldest president tries to quell voter concerns about his age and job performance while sharpening the contrast with Donald Trump.
That was one of the more interesting SOTU addresses I've seen. Personally, I think he said most of the things that needed to be said, and he said them reasonably well. I'm sure he's going to get some flack for attacking Trump directly (though not by name), but I was frankly glad to see it. Doing otherwise makes it seem like it's just your typical election/political disagreements, but we're past that now.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Did he mention that under his watch women lost their bodily autonomy
Wow, that's rich. Biden and the Democrats have been fighting against that very thing. It's being done in Republican controlled states, supported by a Republican majority Congress. Yes, he talked about it.
It's like punching him in the nose and then saying you won't vote for him because he's got blood on his face.
obviously the republicans are more to blame for the roe v wade repeal, but Democrats have blood on their hands too. It's been half a century since 1974 and the Democrats have had many majorities and presidencies since then. At no point did they pass some sort of abortion bill.
and joe biden has been a leading figure in the democratic party for nearly as long
The majority of Americans felt Roe was the right stance - that abortions should be legal with restrictions, and that states should have a say in those restrictions. Stocking SCOTUS with conservatives (in part by refusing to confirm a judge nominated by a Democrat), and then overturning Roe wasn't something most realized needed to be fought against.
And, regardless, you posted the thing about it happening on his watch as an argument against him - which means you prefer the ones they're fighting against, the ones who are actively trying to take away a woman's ability to oversee her own healthcare. How does that make sense?
You are losing rights no matter who sits in the Whitehouse lol. Your country was never the propagandized version of what you want it to be, but it's somehow getting worse.
It's getting worse for sure, but it's getting worse because it's sliding right, and it's sliding right in part because people like you keep arguing that left-leaning people shouldn't vote for the more left of two candidates because they aren't left enough, resulting in the more right-leaning candidate getting elected. You're the cause of the very thing you're complaining about.
Yeah dude, it's my fault, as a Canadian Socialist, lmao.
If Trumps three Supreme Court picks had been made by Clinton or Sanders instead, there wouldn't be the current discussion about losing rights.
If my nan had wheels, she'd be a bike. Sanders didn't win because racism and greed are more important values to your country than freedom and empathy.
It's not about who won or lost, it's about your statement that "You are losing rights no matter who sits in the Whitehouse lol."
That's patently false. If the White House had been held by Clinton or Sanders when those three Supreme Court nominees were selected, we would not be having the discussion of lost rights.
Great.
Sounds like they're not fighting very hard lol
What do you suggest they do?
I've got all sorts of suggestions, check my comment history.
I read a full page of them and I saw zero suggestions, just a lot of bad faith arguing. I'm not going to spend my time filtering through your nonsense to find whatever nuggets you think I should see, and no one else should have to, either.
Great, I'm glad you're fine with a president bending over backward to facilitate a genocide, accelerating the climate apocalypse, and taking a far right stance on the border. Vote blue no matter who lol.
bending over backward to facilitate a genocide
Actively trying to negotiate a cease fire - says Israel has a right to defend against Hamas, but that they need to protect innocent Palestinians. Trump says Israel should finish the job and has advocated for using nukes in the middle east.
accelerating the climate apocalypse
Negotiated a massive bipartisan infrastructure bill (with a divided, polarized government) that included huge improvements for green energy and electric vehicles. Trump consistently weakened government regulations of corporate emissions, promotes coal, and argues against electric vehicles.
and taking a far right stance on the border
Negotiated a bipartisan bill that has way more than enough support by both Democrats and Republicans to reduce the problem at the border. Trump successfully advocated for not bringing the bill to the floor for a vote because it's more useful to have a border problem to use as a political weapon (actually said that). Biden worked to reunite families separated at the border by Trump.
Yeah, I'll comfortably vote for Biden, even though I don't think he's percent. I think he's at least a decent and fairly effective president, while Trump is a complete train wreck. But you go ahead and keep trying to convince people that Biden has flaws, so they should instead help elect Trump by voting independent or not voting at all.
I suspect all your arguments really are intended to help elect Trump by weakening support for Biden. They're so overtly bad faith arguments.
If you read an entire page of my comments and think I support trump because I'm critical of Biden, you're stupider than I thought :P
I think you're arguing against voting for Biden, which ends up being the same as supporting Trump. You're either doing that intentionally or you can't grasp the simple fact.
I think trump is worse than Biden. You'd have to be a braindead American to think otherwise. Now that I've passed the purity test, what would you like to talk about? The genocide, the migrants in cages, or the record oil production? Record homelessness? His strike breaking?
All of those things are problems, and we should talk about them and how to fix them. Biden says they're problems, too. If we're in a thread about, say, the southern border, and you were bringing up these issues and Biden's failings, I'd be right along with you.
What I object to is people coming into a thread about who should be the next president saying "Fuck Biden" because he isn't doing enough at the border or hasn't taken a strong enough stand on Gaza. I object to that because the implicit message is "don't vote for Biden," which will directly result in Trump getting elected, and Trump is far worse in all these areas.
I think you’re arguing against voting for Biden, which ends up being the same as supporting Trump. You’re either doing that intentionally or you can’t grasp the simple fact.
false dichotomy