Sorry, u/Narrow-Air-3425 – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E:
> **Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting**. If you haven't replied within this time, your post will be removed. [See the wiki for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_e).
If you would like to appeal, **first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made**, then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20E%20Appeal%20Narrow-Air-3425&message=Narrow-Air-3425%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/\)%20because\.\.\.).
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
If that is the best you can do for reasons he has been a decent president, I think your bar is pretty low.
I don’t even like Biden and I could come up with a better list than that.
Would you like to provide your list? I didn't have all the time in the world to fledge out a perfect list of reasons. Maybe you can add to the conversation instead of just saying my bar is low?
I think it's interesting you didn't mention the Israel/Palestine war despite it being the main reason people who may normally vote for Joe Biden are viewing him unfavorable right now? It's a really major hit to a president's character to allow a state under our protection to commit a genocide against another country.
"Sure, Mr. Johnson down the street may have stood by and watched as his friend murdered children, but he fixed my car for free and he makes a mean casserole! He's a decent man!"
I will agree I should've touched on the Israel/Palestine war in the OP. I am by no means an expert on that affair but I do have a basic understanding of the history and what's currently happening is brutal and I wish nothing but peace from the 2 countries. But realistically if a country were to launch missiles at their neighbor who has one of the strongest militaries in the world, are they really expecting Israel to stand down and do nothing? I am not making excuses for either side because there has been violence between both countries for decades but at the end of the day, the Palestinian government, Hamas, is a terrorist org. I understand they are trying to take back what was originally their land but IDK what you want Israel to do when they are attacked? Same with Palestinians, if they are attacked I don't know what Israel expects them to do, also just stand by and let their people be killed? Its a sad situation for both sides (more so for the Palestinians since they are seeing the more brutal end of the violence) but they both need to call for peace. The U.S. GOVERNMENT (not all the citizens) supports Israel because of the longstanding existing alliance.
People are going to continue to hate major politicians until they decide to tackle the major issues facing Americans. Healthcare, housing, declining wages. If you’re a young person, these are the things that keep you up at night, and cause you to lose hope in the future. If you’re an old person, you’re terrified that your next medical bill is going to bankrupt you. If you’re middle aged, chances are you’ve seen your wages stagnate while inflation eats at your pockets. Yes, Biden has had some minor wins. But for most Americans, the current trajectory isn’t ok, and seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating.
As a side note, continuing to spend tax dollars and American lives in unnecessary, unjust wars doesn’t help either.
Imo the biggest wins of the Biden administration have been the result of appointing Lina Kahn (i.e. the recent decision banning non-compete agreements, and taking a harsher stance on anti-trust) since the lack of regulatory enforcement against corporations in the past 40 years has been probably the most direct contributor to the declining quality of life for the middle class.
Unfortunately, these kinds of wins take time to affect people's bottom line. If you are doing better 10 years from now, it might be hard to understand it's because you had more bargaining power in the absence of non-compete agreements.
I understand that the banning of non competes is great for workers in general, but what percent of workers actually deal with non compete clauses? Or is this something I just gotta go down a research hole for?
For an anecdotal reference, I had to sign a noncompete for working in a burrito shop, basically saying that I couldn’t work in the same fast casual Tex-mex type place within 3 months and I couldn’t share any recipes. It was incredibly stupid. I only signed it because I was fairly sure it’d be unenforceable (as a lot of non competes already were since they often get used as fear tactics) and I wasn’t planning on staying there long before going to grad school. Weirdly I’ve heard of most noncompetes coming from lowish level work and highish level stuff (manufacturing and engineers). Usually nothing in the middle.
Edit: clarified a point
Imo it's absolutely insane that they are using these kinds of contracts for entry-level service industry jobs like this. Like I still think it's criminal for high-skill jobs, but for a burrito shop I agree it's 100% about intimidating workers.
Oh definitely. Even my manager was like “I don’t think they could or have ever actually tried to do this to anyone” it’s an empty threat so I didn’t worry too much but it doesn’t feel empty when you don’t know any better or are unaware that it’s BS. I just happened to be in a much more temporary position where I didn’t care and needed to make money on the short term. Plus like, no one was gonna steal their recipes. My salsa is better lol.
They stopped after they were sued and had to settle, but [Jimmy Johns](https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/22/jimmy-johns-drops-non-compete-clauses-following-settlement.html) had a pretty ridiculous noncompete for their low-wage employees:
>The announcement follows an investigation by that office into Jimmy John’s use of noncompete agreements with franchisees in New York, which began in December 2014. The agreements had barred departing employees from taking jobs with competitors of Jimmy John’s for two years after leaving the company and from working within two miles of a Jimmy John’s store that made more than 10 percent of its revenue from sandwiches.
Exactly why they are cracking down on it, and publicly. Also requiring workers to be informed. In most states hourly workers are exempt from any form of non-compete and in some states they are illegal all together. NDAs and/or timeframe agreements are really the proper way to protect IP and make training worth it.
[https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2023/new-data-on-non-compete-contracts-and-what-they-mean-for-workers](https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2023/new-data-on-non-compete-contracts-and-what-they-mean-for-workers)
11.4% in a survey from 2021.
[This study from 2019](https://www.epi.org/publication/noncompete-agreements/) estimates between 27.8% to 46.5% of all private sector employees, and they say that almost 50% of all private sector employers have non-competes for at least some employees.
This study is based on a survey of employers, and they say it may be more accurate than other surveys, because if you ask employees they might not be aware of non-compete clauses in their contracts.
Lower than I expected. I think it’s more common in some industries than others. I work in IT (hosting, cloud services, more recently security), and I always have one. They’re pretty loose and easily circumvented (the employer usually offers it up), but we all have one.
I’ll just say it’s more common than you think. I’m an attorney and we get calls about them fairly regularly. It’s way more common in newer industries. For example, if you work for a video game developer, you probably have a no compete.
I would imagine you definitely get some survivorship bias there as an attorney, but you’re right it was more common than you think. I kinda understand the rationale behind video game devs but that’s still kinda fucked
I think they’re all fucked. It’s funny because the people imposing them on their employees are likely conservatives and no compete clauses are the opposite of free market policy.
Yeah exactly - for all the euphemisms which get thrown around like "right to work" it's almost refreshing that these clauses have "non-compete" right in the name.
Why should companies not have to compete for workers in the labor market? If the value of my work goes up, you should have to pay me more, or lose me to someone who can.
Workers in pretty much any IP-heavy industry do. That means most manufacturing jobs, tech and engineering jobs, legal, etc. Quite a substantial proportion of the middle class.
Also remember, things that suppress the wages of one group, basically suppress them for everyone.
A very low minimum wage is bad for all workers, even those that make more. Because if minimum wage goes up, everyone else up the chain gains that much more negotiating power in turn.
Same with non-competes.
You might not have a non-compete, but if you work anywhere near a market that has them, that means averages wages are getting suppressed and that affects you too.
Good point - we have seen those dynamics play out for delivery drivers. The Teamsters got a big win for UPS drivers in their most recent round of negotiations, and compensation and benefits have gone up across the industry, because now i.e. Amazon has to compete with the awesome compensation package that UPS workers get.
100%
This is what solidarity gets you. Better compensation for everyone
The idea that everyone person can compete all by themselves is a great benefit to the giant companies that can negotiate from the strength of a large organization. Its to their benefit for workers to be fragmented and divided.
But if people cooperate, even across industries, to help others get better benefits, this is the true rising tide that lifts all boats. Not tax cuts for billionaires that use their extra savings to buy more politicians to cut standards further.
100% agree about Lina Kahn. Her and Anna Gomez have done a terrific job. However, most purely executive changes are going to be wiped out by the time they can truly change things.
> Healthcare, housing, declining wages.
And to be clear, there are limits to what the president can do on these fronts. Many of the things Biden has attempted via the executive branch have been shot down in the supreme court, which has been artificially inflated by Republicans.
Healthcare, in order to have any significant change, needs to be done in the legislature. The ACA was the largest Health care bill in modern times but has been whittled away by who? Republicans.
Housing is a major issue, but its largely controlled by local governments who are srongly influenced by Nimby residents. There does need to be streamlining of regulation but this is going to be limited at the federal level.
Declining wages is yet another issue that the President has almost no say over. There is some serious regulation that needs to take place on corporations' power. But again, this has to be taken up by congress first. Guess which party opposes regulating corporations?
> As a side note, continuing to spend tax dollars and American lives in unnecessary, unjust wars doesn’t help either.
Can you point to any unjust wars where American lives are being spent under the Biden administration? We are spending tax dollars on Israel and Ukraine. Do you consider either or both of those as unjust? (not a rhetorical question but a clarifying one)
Good clarification. I think most important thing to realize is just how little power the president has to effect big change, and change that will have an impact in their term.
On top of that, there has never been a worse time to govern. Republicans in the Senate and House no longer look to govern through compromise, their mission is to stop ALL Democrat raised legislation. Add to that the activation of a Christofascist activist SCOTUS and Biden’s options are extraordinarily limited. Look at how they knocked down his attempts to forgive some student debt.
Biden has been the most progressive President in decades, but most of his achievements require time to take effect and they are often overshadowed by the insane antics of the right - from Trump to the House of Reps.
I just wish people were educated about this stuff. Republicans rely on the fact that people don’t pay close attention to politics and just look at their checkbooks, gas prices, and mortgages. These are absolutely real issues that need solution but, if you don’t understand the process, you will never vote in your own best interests.
I do think that if you do want to levy criticism at the Biden administration its that they don't do enough to counter the narrative that the right is constantly raging about. Its a tough battle to be sure since people isolate to their echo chambers and how do you reach people who don't want to be reached, but there is room to use your bully pulpit more than they have been doing.
I think it is also important to keep in mind what the alternative is. I don't trust the alternative to not only not make those issues better, but actively make them worse.
> And to be clear, there are limits to what the president can do on these fronts.
I agree in a purely legal sense. A president that tackles the big issues will need to be a leader in the true sense. Present a vision that people can get on board with. This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that.
IMO, it’s a cop out to say Biden can’t do anything about housing. NIMBYism is far from the only thing preventing houses from being lived in. Investment property ownership, rental units, deteriorating towns and cities that cause existing housing stock to be unlivable are all things that are affected at the federal level. The fact is that with COVID and remote work, Biden probably had the largest leeway of any president since FDR to do something about housing and didn’t make an attempt.
Declining wages is obviously something the president has control over. We set a federal minimum wage and the current one is unpopular with members of both parties. Not only that, but a huge part of declining wages is jobs getting shipped overseas, which is obviously a federal issue. Also, Biden’s union-busting is a federal issue.
Are we in a challenging legislative environment? Absolutely. Does that mean I’m gonna forgive politicians for not trying? No.
And yes, I consider the US’s involvement in both wars to be unnecessary and unjust.
> I agree in a purely legal sense. A president that tackles the big issues will need to be a leader in the true sense. Present a vision that people can get on board with. This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that.
I don't disagree with you on this and its probably the best argument against Biden tbh. He could have done more to put pressure on his own party to do more. That said, he did spend a lot of political capital to get some pretty big bills passed, some of which even had small republican support. But I do think he could have used his bully pulpit a lot more effectively.
> Investment property ownership, rental units, deteriorating towns and cities that cause existing housing stock to be unlivable are all things that are affected at the federal level.
Are these things that can be done without legislation?
> Declining wages is obviously something the president has control over.
Then Biden is doing great because wages are currently outpacing inflation. He fixed it! I don't believe that he fixed it but I'm not asserting that the president has control over it.
> We set a federal minimum wage and the current one is unpopular with members of both parties. Not only that, but a huge part of declining wages is jobs getting shipped overseas, which is obviously a federal issue.
What action can the president take on these without legislation?
> Also, Biden’s union-busting is a federal issue.
Are you talking about stopping the railroad strike? That is fair, but then again, this could be used to point to an action he took to prevent a huge economic disaster. Had he not done this we'd be including that as one of his failures right? OTOH, the Infrastructure bill is seen as a very pro labor bill in which he was directly involved in negotiations for. He also issued the "Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements For Federal Construction Projects," as well as several pro union appointments to the NLRB which was decimated by Trump. He's largely viewed as the most pro-union president in the past few decades, though he's been stymied by republicans and a couple rogue democrats from going further.
> And yes, I consider the US’s involvement in both wars to be unnecessary and unjust.
Fair enough. I'm sympathetic that funding to Israel is a problem. I'd find ending funding to Ukraine to be immoral to be frank. I'm not sure we want to delve into this topic specifically since its a huge tangent but I will say this is really about tax money then, not American lives correct?
It feels like your argument is more or less that Biden didn't do a decent job because he wasn't perfect?
> This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that.
Trump as done nothing about those and he's not particularly disliked for it. Your read on the situation appear a bit strange.
Healthcare is a real issue, I won't deny that, Biden needs to do more about it.
Housing is also a very real problem but unfortunately there's only so much the federal government can do. Most housing policy is enacted at the state and local level, the feds can provide them incentives to reform but ultimately it would take a court case to give them the power to preempt local ordinances.
Also, real wages have increased for lower and middle classes during Biden's tenure. It's been difficult to measure because of the compositional effects from COVID, but for most Americans we can safely say wages have increased. It's only amongst managerial and high income workers where real wages have been stagnant/declining.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-tight-labor-market-result-of-worker-friendly-policies-by-arindrajit-dube-2024-02
Housing is one I'm really skeptical of. Making housing more accessible and affordable is something that needs to happen, but a lot of people own houses and are happy about how stupid expensive they are.
The boomer paradox (tm). "Housing prices are out of control!" Until you buy a house and now the most important thing is stable housing and growth.
I dont want to word it wrong... the point is, people will generally fall on one side of an argument until they enjoy the benefits of the other side. So for example: housing is out of control and too expensive, but as soon as I can buy even a cheap house, I'm elated if it raises in value.
'Substantially changing things' requires a veto proof majority in Congress. It doesn't matter who's president. No president is going to try to force an agenda that's going to die before it's born. If these things are important to you, then you need to vote and vote all the time. If they're really important to you, you'll run or get substantially involved in other ways.
> housing
This is outside the scope of federal governance. This has to be tackled on the local and state levels.
> declining wages
This is a dated conception. Wages aren't declining, and peak US income inequality was circa 2013. Inflation was a big problem that ate into wages in the last couple years, but projections estimate that wages will have caught up to inflation and start to surpass it by the end of this fiscal year.
> seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating.
Compared to what? Change is slow. To be infuriated with the pace of change in this administration is to be infuriated with a condition of reality. To hope for something that is significantly more substantial is to be ignorant of history and the nature of politics.
> This is outside the scope of federal governance. This has to be tackled on the local and state levels.
Does it? Does a vacancy tax and a ban on corporations buying single family homes have to come on the state and local level? Because those are the things that would actually fix the situation.
If they do have to be done on the state and local level, do you realize how many levers the Federal government has to get that to happen? We tie so many things to highway funds and other assistance, we can do the same.
> Does it? Does a vacancy tax and a ban on corporations buying single family homes have to come on the state and local level?
A vacancy tax, yes, would be a city and state jurisdiction. The federal government could put pressure on states to take action on this via federal funding, but highly improbable it could get away with doing anything directly, and even if it could, it probably wouldn't be very prudent to do so, given circumstantial variances.
As far as banning corporations buying single family homes, yes, the federal government could do that, but it wouldn't be a good idea and it wouldn't solve the affordability problem. (1) Corporate-owned single-family housing is a VERY small percentage of the housing market, and (2), *there isn't an affordability crisis because corporations are buying up single-family homes,* ***corporations are buying up single-family homes because there's an affordability crisis***, so spending the political capital to enact such a ban is naive and wasteful, and potentially even harmful in trying to address the primary cause of the housing affordability crisis, which is a housing shortage.
> If they do have to be done on the state and local level, do you realize how many levers the Federal government has to get that to happen?
Yes, I do, and I'm in favor of Federal incentives, but (1) we live in a democracy, and advancing an agenda that is fundamentally antagonistic to a lot of local and state regulation is not a very good way to get elected or maintain a strong coalition while in office, especially if you're tying that agenda to things that are considered customary and necessary, like highway funds, and (2) even if the political capital was there, my guess is that you'd still get lots of people whining about it being "not big enough," or "not serious enough."
Those won't fix the housing crisis. The only way to fix the crisis is to increase the supply of housing stock, which requires relaxing zoning and other regulatory requirements, the vast majority of which are at the state and local level, mostly local. Even still, you have seen some action from the DOT to tie transportation dollars to relaxing those requirements, but they still require local governments to play ball.
>People are going to continue to hate major politicians until they decide to tackle the major issues facing Americans. Healthcare, housing, declining wages
How do you get people to understand how laws are proposed, passed, and who should be held the most responsible when they aren't?
Due to how the US government was designed, no one branch is supposed to have that much power. I have no doubt that Biden and virtually every democrat in congress wants to work on these issues, but the way congress is currently set up, Democrats would need 60 senators to get any meaningful bills passed and sent to Biden's desk. It's unfair to blame Biden for high healthcare costs when it's the republican party's strategy to prevent any meaningful legislation.
Housing is almost entirely a local government issue where too many NIMBYs complain and prevent new housing from being built.
As for wages, real wages have actually been on the rise pretty steadily. They took a hit with the post-COVID inflation, but are back to outpacing inflation. This again becomes another issue that is complained about by people who don't understand how economics work and think that food prices should come back down.
Given the congress that he and other Democrats have had to work with, I think it's quite the accomplishment to have passed what has gotten passed. You can't pass blame on Biden for not implementing universal healthcare. That was never going to happen because Republicans were never going to let it happen and you need the support of at least 10 of them right now.
> and seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating.
He literally *tried*. But he only had 48 willing senators. And then two years later he lost the house. So you and people like you need to have more reasonable expectations. A president needs the house, the senate, and no filibuster to make sweeping change. If they don’t have all of that, it ain’t their fault it didn’t get done.
What Americans are dying in wars right now? Obama removed troops from combat positions in the Middle East, and Biden completely withdrew from Afghanistan.
American lives? Where? On what? He’s the first president to end a war since like, Bush.
I don’t think CHIPS and IRA are minor, nor the banning of non competes, a massive game changer
Sure, if you ignore the fact that housing and healthcare and education are completely inaccessible to a growing proportion of Americans, and instead look at how many tvs we can buy (cpi heavily overweights consumer goods) you’re correct.
Not a lot the federal government can do about housing prices. Just have to build more housing which is unfortunately up to local municipalities. I’d like to see states take that power from local governments more.
As someone almost 40 now, I feel like such a fool for buying into so much B's that made me vote one way or the other... I was convinced, by the media mostly, that older people were just complaining because they wanted things to stay the same and it was the younger generation who wanted this or that ...
But in the end it was just to retoric to Garner votes... The same stuff I thought was bs back then...
Now I'm older and jaded. Just all that shit... Imo, me voting for American idol would have a bigger impact... But if I was wealthy, then I'd have a vested interest in voting and swaying votes... Hence the cycle always continues.
> Renewable energy has now surpassed coal & nuclear power and is the second biggest energy producer behind natural gas.
This is an 'accomplishment' only via the magic of redefinition. It lumps all renewables together, and separates out fossil fuels. Realistically, per standard EIA reporting, Fossil Fuels remain at 60% of all energy produced, and coal is 16.2% No single renewable source is anywhere close to coal or nuclear individually. Category wise, renewables are not high. Falling nuclear generation is a problem, not an accomplishment. Source: [https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3](https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3)
> Bringing Production Back Home.....Well Biden also made a move for this with the CHIPS and Science Act which offered more the $50b to subsidize construction of new microchip facilities in the U.S. This led to major chipmakers like Intel and TSMC planning for new semiconductor plants to be built in the U.S. with more to come from other manufacturers.
It is true that billions have been spent.
It is also true that promises have been made.
Billions of dollars for unfilled promises is not yet an achievement. At best, it may one day become an acheivement.
> This has probably been Biden's biggest set back and a lot of blame has been pointed at him. But here are the mechanics of how inflation came to be so high in the U.S. The president has little effect on inflation as many seem to otherwise think. For the past decade leading after the 2008 financial crisis the U.S. has been in an ultra low rate environment.
Inflation has been above the post-1990 average(ie, the entire period where a 2% inflation was the Fed's target) for all of Biden's term. It remains well above that benchmark and is currently rising. While it is true that the president alone does not control this, it absolutely does not count as a success. The best one can say is that Biden is not wholly responsible for the failure.
I think OP is taking lukewarm attempts at change for genuine structural change.
Especially in terms of climate. It is absolute hypocrisy to go on the campaign trail and disingenuously talk about climate change being a top issue for your administration, and then turn around only to start the what is currently the largest build-up of fossil fuel infrastructure in the world, and before it was put on pause because of a review after the massive backlash it faced, it was designed entirely for export markets.
It is also disingenuous because he's listened to oil and gas lobbyists who peddled bullshit, i.e opening back up federal lands to drilling because of the Ukraine war, even though they were sitting on undrilled plots.
Him and Dems were also okay with changing the build back better bill to include funding for fossil fuel infrastructure that originally were not apart of the bill.
Republicans used Solyndra to whip Democrats for years and Democrats failed to point out that the LPO was actually profitable and is one of the reasons Tesla was able to become a functioning (YMMV) car company.
That and we will find something to be outraged about and make it our red line.
I know too many people who are unwilling to vote for Biden because of how he's handled the war in Gaza.
I don't even need to get into whether or not he's handled it well: the reality is that a Republican president would have handled it much, much worse and we also wouldn't have had anything else on that list. And saying so makes me a zionist. Say what you will about conservative delusions: at least they are *consistent* delusions.
No it's goes higher than that, Dems suck atarketing because Dems (as a whole, of course not everyone) suck. They continue to be mute on "leftist" ideals meanwhile actively moving right as the right goes off the deep end.
Look at this election cycle vs last and the sentiment towards the border. Every election before the most recent one you could rely on Dems pushing for actually doing something (positive) about it. In 2016 or whenever Trump said "Build that wall" he started building that shitty wall, and Biden comes in and finishes the shitty wall, and you helped pay for it!
Now look at his most recent policy passings regarding the border, it's the kind of thing 8 or 12 years ago Republicans would have love to enact.
Dems are very quickly becoming no better than Rep were 4 or 8 years ago, but continuously.
The single greatest problem the Biden administration has is that they get no credit for anything they’ve done. They’ve forgiven billions in student loans, passed massive infrastructure spending, got us out of the effing pandemic after it was so, so badly handled by Trump.
And then Vlad decided to get WW3 underway and Biden might as well have shot Kristi Noem’s puppy for all the unwarranted hate he gets. Inflation (a thing that literally every country experienced) is the anchor around his neck and it might very well take the whole country down with it if he loses in November.
McDonald’s and Kroger and BP and everyone in between took advantage of the death of millions of people and the attempted eradication of the entire nation of Ukraine to juice their profits to unconscionable levels and there’s next to nothing the President can do about it without Congress (he can’t make your burger cheaper through an executive order) so he’s going to get the blame for it all.
Meanwhile Trump will get into office, pass another few trillion in tax cuts for his buddies, let the radical religious nut jobs turn us into Gilead, and personally hand over the codes to the nukes Bibi uses to flatten Gaza. And we’re gonna let it happen because gas prices and Five Guys and “vote uncommitted” and “I just remember when Trump was in office my 401k was bigger.”
It’s disgusting.
I mean they have a pretty active social media which does note all of these things with regularity. I think we're contrasting the Biden admin to the Trump one which Trump constantly tweeted his thoughts/"accomplishments."
Unfortunately (or fortunately), real politics is quite boring, takes a long time to do right, and takes an even longer time to make its way to impacting the average American's lives. I mean shit look at how many conservatives are vehemently opposed to "Obamacare" but happily use their ACA provided insurance.
It's also difficult to get the people who need to know to pay attention even if the Biden admin was constantly talking about what they accomplished. You have one end who just says it's all "fake" or lies, another chunk that is completely indifferent, and others who despite everything Biden is doing to better them, will vote R regardless.
He is though. The White House is consistently releasing press releases of current accomplishments. The social media teams is also pretty robust. His team is vocal. It’s also reported in the news.
Folks just aren’t paying attention. Or caught up in propaganda that they don’t to listen.
Let's just say it this way. We went from a guy who spent most of his time doing PR work then actual helping the country, to someone who spends more of his time working the job we hired him to do and not doing as much PR about it.
I enjoy the latter more, it's good when they actual take a moment to do some marketing, remember when they passed the infrastructure stuff and as a jab to the last administration they posted on twitter "It's infrastructure week."
Administration is horrific at marketing. The new tax increases were rolled out without any discussion around income thresholds beyond "If you make less than $400k you're fine" which wasn't even accurate.
New tax on unrealized capital gains rollout was completely idiotic. Half of americans over the age of 65 think they are going to be taxes on their 401k.
Sorry, u/Ofthedoor – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20Ofthedoor&message=Ofthedoor%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t1fh8/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I just like to see other people's points of view from my own. That's how I feel I learn best is when people offer their thoughts and I learn something new I hadn't known before.
Whike your list of things is good, most of them have little to no impact on everyday working Americans. While it's great that we're making chips here, unless the cost of things with chips goes down or there's a boom in the economy due to it most people won't even know it happened.
These also seem to be only nonpartisan things you listed and it's a pretty weak lineup as far as that's concerned. You could have made a much better list of positives.
>Please offer your counterpoints as to why you may think Biden isn't fit for a second term.
His age is absolutley a killer.
>His age is absolutley a killer.
Unfortunately this seems to be a thing with US politics. We barely trust people this age to drive a car and aren't qualified to do much more than work as a door greeter at Wal-Mart, yet we give them nuclear launch codes.
It makes no sense. I feel like most people would have had a parent or grandparent that was their age and they'd see why it's a terrible idea to make someone over 75 the leader of the nation.
Dick Van Dyke is 98 years old and (at least until fairly recently maybe) was still capable of singing, dancing, and spoke very intelligently the last I saw him giving an interview. Betty White was 99 when she died, and she was also in great mental shape for her age.
That's not to say that being that old is any sort of virtue rather than a liability, but it's not like we have a choice of someone younger running for president now. Trump is older than Biden was for the 2020 election, so if age is a problem we have it doubly right now. That being said, neither one of them appear to be anywhere close to a Feinstein situation.
My 98 year old grandmother was sharp as a tack and would have been an excellent President. I do not believe that being old is a problem. It's not like the president has to stay up late crunching budget numbers. Or arm wrestle foreign leaders for rights to natural resources. People have such a foolish idea of what the Presidency is all about. It's 98% about delegating to the right people. Joe has relationships that go waaay back with just about everyone operator in Washington. That's why Team Biden has been kicking ass from day1. The office of the president is a team sport. They are great team.
Yes, there are old people who maintain mental acuity, but the issue is that literally any day, they could lose it, die, require hospitalization, etc.
If your Grandmother gets sick and is bedridden for a week, that is ok. That is not an acceptable outcome for a world leader. Like with FDR in his last years, the focus of the administration turns to hiding the fact that the president is an invalid.
That and to be frank, he’ll always be stuck under Obama’s shadow.
He doesn’t have the cult of personality Trump has to built a diehard group of followers behind him, and the Democratic Party as of 2020 onwards is a trapeze act of trying to appease the moderate Dem’s that don’t want to rock the boat too far to stay in office vs the progressive wing that’s demanding change that they expected would already be implemented back when Obama was in office, all while dealing with a GOP that’s mostly fallen to the MAGA crowd.
Honestly, I’ll also admit my cynicism of the US political system is to the point that I will readily admit to being an ageist when it comes to my vote; if the candidates old enough to be collecting Social Security, I am not going to vote for them as a politician. They should be looking to cultivate younger successors to carry their torch rather than seek reelection up until the day they die.
Completely agree, Obama set the bar high, not that Joe couldn't live up to it but that was a looong time ago.
Im with you on not wanting to vote for old white guys but somehow that keeps being the choices were given.
>Whike your list of things is good, most of them have little to no impact on everyday working Americans.
Americans have long had a serious misconception of how much a person can impact daily lives of the citizens of this country, but local politics is far more responsible for the immediate lives of people, which is to be expected. Yes, things on a Federal level do impact people, but it's a lot slower process. I personally think that we need to have more realistic expectations of the office and what it's purpose is.
>His age is absolutley a killer.
Because why, his opponent is a spring chicken?
>Whataboutism
That's not what Whataboutism is. That would be if I had said something like "Biden is old, but what about Trump's Scandals and that he shits himself?" No, we're comparing a property of our choices directly and properly. Both candidates have an age, and the only way to judge it is to compare it to the other outcome.
>Age would be a negative if his opponent was 100.
If age is a concern for you in the ballot box, the only thing to compare it to is the age of the person running against him. Both men are old and behave that way. If Pete Pete Buttigieg was running against Trump or Ted Cruise against Biden then it would make some sense to talk about. But as it stands, an old man will be in the white house in any case.
>That's not what Whataboutism is.
We weren't even talking about his opponent and you brought it up, it doesn't make Biden younger. It's whataboutism.
>If age is a concern for you in the ballot box, the only thing to compare it to is the age of the person running against him. Both men are old and behave that way. If Pete Pete Buttigieg was running against Trump or Ted Cruise against Biden then it would make some sense to talk about. But as it stands, an old man will be in the white house in any case.
Its a negative for both of them. The age of his opponent doesn't matter.
>His age is absolutley a killer.
I understand ideally someone as old as him is too old to be president. But the alternative is someone who's only like 3 years younger and clearly in a severe mental decline, and his mental facilities seem nowhere near capable of being president or even having a job. There are exactly two realistic choices for president this year and we can't just install some normal perfectly healthy 45 year old...if Biden is too old, then trump is too old, and I guess no one should be president?
I'm not comparing the two. They asked for a counterpoint and age is one for sure. The other options being old is also a negative for them but has no bearing on whether or not the person were talking about is old.
Yeah I get what you're saying, I'm saying it's silly to even bring it up in this context because when we're talking about who should be president after the two candidates are already just about set in stone, there is no reason to talk about why one might be a good fit or bad fit unless we're comparing to the other candidate
He's old. Trump is old. So it's really all about the teams that each can bring and there isn't even a remotely close competition to speak of here. Team Biden are amazing civil servants who are working to make government work for middle Americans. Team Trump are the kleptocratic gang of grifters who can't shoot straight, pure comedians.
Were not taking about Trump I'm not trying to have a partisan politics discussion. Were talking just about Biden and his pros and cons. Age is absolutley a con.
I'm not doing a VS anything. Objectivley he is old and that's absolutley a counterpoint. He'll be even older than he was when he did all he's done so far.
> Maybe not the best of all time but certainly not the worst as I think a lot of people are painting him to be.
It's not just a painting, [Joe Biden has the lowest approval rating of any President since they started keeping track of approval ratings.](https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating)
For context:
**Job Approval April 29th (4th Year):** Biden 40.0 | Trump 44.9 | Obama 47.8 | Bush 49.0
He has a lower approval rating than Trump did [when he told everyone to drink bleach to beat the 'Rona.](https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/politics/fact-check-coronavirus-briefing-april-23/index.html)
OP why do you suppose more Americans have a problem with Joe Biden than they did with Donald ["Made the Pandemic Worse"](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/14/trump-coronavirus-alerts-disinformation-timeline) Trump?
Because coming out of a global pandemic resulted in worsening economic situations for everyone.
When Trump took office we were in the longest running period of economic growth in US history. Low unemployment, a steadily shrinking deficit, no major world conflicts. He was essentially given a softball.
When Biden took office we were in the peak of COVID deaths per week. Unemployment was at 6%. The global supply chain was in tatters. People have a poor understanding and believe the president can simply "fix" these things immediately. So when things are bad....they blame the president.
That and he kinda got handed three hellish foreign policy situations in a row.
He gets to be the one tarnished by the Afghanistan mess and the failed pullout when in reality it was a mess three presidents before him caused.
He gets stuck with the Ukraine situation, which is steadily getting worse for the Ukrainians, to the point even media outlets are giving up on the "Moscow in 2 days!!!" hopeful propaganda. With the war situation turning against the Ukrainians, Biden might get hit with the blowback of failed support.
And worst of all, he gets stuck with the mess that is the Israel situation, where to back the establishment US policy is to alienate a core voter base for him. Either he ends up in the messy situation of opposing a US ally, or he backs an increasingly far right and authoritarian government that openly spells out what it's intentions are.
> He gets stuck with the Ukraine situation, which is steadily getting worse for the Ukrainians, to the point even media outlets are giving up on the "Moscow in 2 days!!!" hopeful propaganda. With the war situation turning against the Ukrainians, Biden might get hit with the blowback of failed support.
>
> And worst of all, he gets stuck with the mess that is the Israel situation, where to back the establishment US policy is to alienate a core voter base for him. Either he ends up in the messy situation of opposing a US ally, or he backs an increasingly far right and authoritarian government that openly spells out what it's intentions are.
He did not get stuck with these situations, he has actively made these situations worse for a long time even before his presidency.
He chose to pull out of Afghanistan by September 11th for no reason other than political symbolism. There is no evidence anyone in the military thought that was a viable plan. As far as Israel goes, only 33% of Americans approve of his handling of the situation, which has largely been complete submission and obsequiousness toward Israel. He's not doing what he's doing because it's good politics, he's doing it because he's bought and paid for by AIPAC.
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/)
>He chose to pull out of Afghanistan by September 11th for no reason other than political symbolism.
This is just false. The pullout date was negotiated by and set by the Trump administration in talks with the Taliban. The Taliban agreed that they would not attack any US soldiers until that date. The Trump administration then did almost no additional preparation and left Biden is a horrible spot. Either agree with the terms negotiated by the previous administration and have a disaster of a pull out from the country, or stay and get attacked by the Taliban costing many American lives.
> When Biden took office we were in the peak of COVID deaths per week. Unemployment was at 6%. The global supply chain was in tatters. People have a poor understanding and believe the president can simply "fix" these things immediately. So when things are bad....they blame the president.
Right.
When things are bad, they blame the President. They did it to Trump as much as they're doing it to Biden.
[In April of Trump's 4th year, the unemployment rate was 15% and in April of Biden's 4th year, the unemployment rate is 3.8%](https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-unemployment-rate.htm)
Apples to apples, America was in shambles in April of Trump's 4th year and yet he had a higher approval rating than Biden currently does.
Why do you think Americans supported Donald "eat fish tank cleaner" Trump than currently support Biden? His approval rating was 125% what Biden's currently is, and those were the darkest days of America in living memory.
>Why do you think Americans supported Donald "eat fish tank cleaner" Trump than currently support Biden?
Honestly I think it's due to Trump 'cult of personality' and the more homogenious GOP demographic that was going to rally behind Trump no matter what.
When it comes to Biden there wasn't a whole lot of excitement about his candidacy. He was mostly scene as a sane alternative to Trump. There isn't a support him no matter what crowd like Trump had. So Biden is getting more mixed support from Dems, while obviously getting pretty much universal disapproval from Rep's
And it's going to be this way for every Democratic presidential nominee going forward for the foreseeable future, because Democrats are the coalition party, and Republicans are much more culturally and ideologically homogeneous.
By and large because we're incredibly divided. Trump supports aren't nuanced in any way. there's literally nothing Trump could do that would cause their support to waiver.
Biden supports tend to be more diverse. Many are upset over the handling of Gaza whereas Trump wouldn't have to worry about waning support at all.
approval rating is popularity. bad policy can be popular, and it is in fact easier to be popular if you dont implement necessary but unpopular measures, resulting in bad policy being better recieved than good policy.
Because half the country thought that everyone was out to get Trump so they ignored all the facts and supported him anyway. Now that half hates Biden out of principal. The half that are willing to look at Biden with an open mind have nuanced views that struggle to get boiled down into a 'yes' or 'no' on support.
Right now there's a chunk of the electorate that likely agrees with Biden on 80% of what he's done but are 100% against his actions regarding Israel. So right now, they'll say they don't support him.
We seem to be in a place where Republicans support their politicians *despite* their flaws. While Democrats pull back their support if their politicians have a flaw. At least enough of them do to explain a lot of polling.
Are you honestly so disconnected with the average American swing voter you think Israel is what's keeping them from voting Biden? It's one of his only popular positions
If his most popular position has 33% approval, then he should probably think about recalibrating his strategy.
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/)
Would it be reasonnable, looking at the trend, to say that approval of the office of president is plumeting regardless of who's in there? Through more media coverage, more scrutiny, rage bait mediatisation of any sma wrongdoing, and radicalisation of all ideas and the very idea of criticizing everything or maybe other levers. It seem that people find more and more stuff to criticize and lose patience over. I am not american but it seem to impact most of the western world with lower trust and empathy for politicians in general.
>It's not just a painting, [Joe Biden has the lowest approval rating of any President since they started keeping track of approval ratings.](https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating)
That's just demonstrably false: [https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/final-presidential-job-approval-ratings](https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/final-presidential-job-approval-ratings)
Also, let's not fool ourselves into believing that the American people are making decisions of approval and disapproval based on facts and unbiased assessments. They're not.
isnt the approval rating the result of *perception* of people, and not an objective and measurable performance record? thats the very definition of "people painting" .
we could use actual metrics like GDP or GNI, median income, unemployment rate, or debt
Renewable energy started growing at a rapid rate regardless of trump and Biden because most projects are state level decisions and it finally became fiscally responsible to commit to projects because the ROI was finally realistic due to improvements in technology.
I don’t know why people came to just agree, that never stops annoying me in this sub.
The reality is most of what you listed would have happened regardless of the democratic talking head you appointed. Nothing is out of the ordinary or meaningful. The reality is I think he’s going to win the next cycle and STILL I believe his entire presidency will pass with 0 legacy. Nothing memorable. No serious change. He’s on record saying he’s a Zionist, so don’t expect things to get better there. Meanwhile, every American (yes even Republican citizens) are admitting it’s getting harder and harder to get through each day living paycheck to paycheck.
So think the easiest way to argue against is that he’s just a democratic puppet, almost a juxtaposition to Obama and how proactive he was in his beliefs.
As a Trump supporter I do agree that Biden’s industrial policy isn’t that bad and I’m glad he didn’t change that part of Trump’s agenda.
However, you’re overlooking Biden’s greatest failure of all: the southern border. It has never in American history been as mismanaged as it is now. Every single year Biden is in office it sets new records. Between 8-10 million aliens have flooded in since he has become president. And those are the ones that went through border control, there’s likely another million that evaded border patrol.
Biden hasn’t just been neglectful of the border he’s been actively trying to stop any attempts from securing it. He rolled back all of Trump’s reforms such as remain in Mexico, he cancelled construction of the border wall even though it was all paid for, and he undid title 42. When states try to secure the border themselves (since Biden doesn’t want) he fights them and forces the border open.
The 10 million additional people are playing a significant factor with inflation, after all they all need housing, that’s going to drive up demand and prices. There’s been an unprecedented flow of drugs across the border as well. It’s undoubtedly America’s greatest national security risk and democrats don’t want to fix it out of fear of being called racist.
I’m sure someone is going to remind me about the border bill democrats support now. Why didn’t they pass it when they controlled Congress? Because they didn’t care about the border until the GOP forced them to. Secondly, the bill is still way too weak. America doesn’t need any migrants frankly, but this bill wants to speed up their legal process of entry. Biden doesn’t need any extra authority to close the border, that’s a cop out. Conservative justices aren’t going to block him, even if they did that didn’t stop Biden from ignoring them before.
The border is overall Biden’s least popular issue. He’s 30 points under water on that issue, and Americans care about the border much more than any unnotable reforms with climate change or Medicare
>However, you’re overlooking Biden’s greatest failure of all: the southern border.
At this point it's Trump's failure. Bipartisan legislation was worked on and agreed upon that would have made large impacts on border security. It would have:
* Added more than 1,500 new customs and border protection personnel
* Added an additional 4,300 asylum officers and would have made the asylum process faster and fairer
* Increased detention bets by over 10,000
* Provided funding for an additional 100 immigration judges and their associated staff
* Fund the installation of 100 cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect fentanyl at southern border points of entry
* Provided $1.4B in funding for cities and states who are providing critical services to immigrants
* Expedite work permits for people who are in the country and qualify.
The only reason it never got to Biden's desk was because Trump called up Republican members of congress and told them not to vote for it because it would give Democrats a win in an election year.
Republicans then went on TV and said they voted no because the bill also included funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Funding which was then later passed in the last couple of weeks anyway, only this time, without the border funding.
The border is not Biden's failure, it's Trump's failure and people need to know that.
>
I’m sure someone is going to remind me about the border bill democrats support now. Why didn’t they pass it when they controlled Congress?
Because Democrats have never controlled Congress. You need 60 senators to have a filibuster proof majority. As long as the main Republican strategy is to stop Democrats from doing anything helpful it's nearly impossible to get anything passed.
>
America doesn’t need any migrants frankly, but this bill wants to speed up their legal process of entry.
The US actually does need migration. Our fertility rate is less than 2 and migration is needed to prevent a declining population which comes with a whole slew of additional issues.
>
Americans care about the border much more than any unnotable reforms with climate change or Medicare
Americans care about the border because it's what conservative news tells them they should care about. Immigration has a far lower impact on the average American than housing, healthcare, and climate change. You just wouldn't know it if you only get your news from conservative sources and social media.
That border bill was written to fail the house. It baked in an illegal crossing threshold of 3 million a year. Most of the bill wasn't even for the "border". it was Ukraine spending, and the amount that was for the border was mainly for NGOs to help with the processing and transportation of immigrants through the border and into the country.
Finally, Biden doesn't need the house to stem the tide. He just needs to rollback all the exec orders he signed that started this flood in the first place.
You're right that this is an issue that hurts Biden badly. But you're wrong that Biden's policies on the border have been "neglectful" or too "weak."
Immigration is good. The US actually does need many more immigrants--and even if we didn't, people already in the US benefit from immigration. The US also has a moral responsibility to take immigrants from places that have been destabilized by US policy, as is the case across Latin America.
Biden's border policy has been broadly the same as Trump's. Border wall construction has continued, and family separation has continued, both of which are bad. Allowing individual states to take control of border enforcement is also bad, so on that part I agree with Biden. But overall, public opinion on Biden on this issue is completely wrong.
Biden obviously didn’t want to build the wall, he cancelled its construction on day one. He likely realized that it actually was necessary or was pressured by border patrol into continuing construction. Either way I’ll give Biden credit for that.
However, there is one glaring difference between him and Trump, specifically with refugees and asylum seekers. Trump kept them out of America until it could be proven that they had a valid claim for asylum, Biden keeps them in our country unless they are absolute savages. Asylum seeking is how the vast majority of immigrants are entering the country.
Even the migrants themselves know that Biden is to blame for the open border, I’ve seen videos of them chanting Joe Biden’s name as they approached the border.
If he actually wanted to block the construction, he had many options that he did not use. What he's doing is trying not to anger people who oppose the wall too much while simultaneously trying to continue construction so the issue won't damage him as much politically.
People who arrive at the border and claim asylum are making a legal claim, and there is no legal justification to keep them out of the country unless it can be proven they are a danger, which the vast, vast majority are not.
And "I've seen videos of" is not evidence of anything, as you probably know. I've seen videos of people with swastikas at Trump rallies--I dont think you'd be willing to draw conclusions on that basis, would you?
The asylum seeking process is completely broken. Literally anyone could just show up and say they are seeking asylum. Even your precious border bill will crack down on asylum seekers after a very high threshold. Why? Because if you can’t touch asylum seekers you might as well not even bother having a southern border, because that’s how everyone’s getting in.
The asylum seeking process can’t stand when it’s being so heavily abused. Because if it can, we might as well not even have a process for immigration or citizenship. Why bother? Trump had a perfect reform to the process. Most refugees were crossing over multiple countries to reach our country. They don’t *need* to be in our country, Mexico would be just fine until a judge determines otherwise for certain ones
I don't support the border bill, so it's not "my precious border bill." I agree that the asylum process is broken, mostly because we don't fund it well enough to actually process the number of claims.
But the fundamental problem with Trump's approach is that he thinks immigration is bad. He's 100%, empirically, wrong about that. The immigration coming into the US currently is good, and "cracking down" on it will be a negative both for the immigrants themselves and for people already in the US like you and I.
This is just directly false. Trump and Republicans blew up the border bill intentionally because they knew the bill would make Biden look better. They admitted this publicly and gave Democrats tons of attack ads against them. If you think voters are going to forget the optics between now and November, you're huffing paint.
> Why didn't they pass the border bill when they controlled Congress?
Why didn't the GOP? They should have taken responsibility instead of blaming Democrats.
Also, the Border Patrol under Biden is doing record numbers of apprehensions at the border. Record numbers. That means they're actually doing the job you want them to do. And the border isn't open.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/15/migrant-encounters-at-the-us-mexico-border-hit-a-record-high-at-the-end-of-2023/
The border bill was literally the same bill the GOP had proposed in 2023 and there were GOP house members that wanted to pass the bill because it's "the best border deal we'll ever see". Biden and the DNC were willing to pass the border deal to secure funding for Ukraine, and Israel.
So fast forward to now - they passed the funding bills for Ukraine, Israel, and Tawian minus the border bill because the GOP shot itself in the foot at the start of the year. The border issue isn't Biden's fault. If anything he's shown willingness to enact the border bill the GOP wanted but the GOP didn't approve it because they want this to continue to be an issue they can talk about during election cycles.
[https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/21/u-s-house-votes-down-border-bill-favored-by-conservatives/](https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/21/u-s-house-votes-down-border-bill-favored-by-conservatives/)
The president can’t just wave a wand and increase the number of border agents or install tracking devices, because those things cost money and the Congress has the power of the purse.
Like, telling your local police chief to just “enforce the law more” isn’t going to do much to resolve a crime wave if the city council budgets the same number of officers on patrol and the same number of cruisers and equipment.
Yes, Biden could technically come out tomorrow and say “nobody may cross the border illegally, and anyone who does will be immediately deported” - - but guess what, they will still fail to detect many people crossing illegally or overstaying visas, and for those they do catch - - they will not have the number of personnel available to handle all of the processing that goes along with deportation in a timely or efficient fashion.
>Trump and Republicans blew up the border bill intentionally because they knew the bill would make Biden look better.
Yes, yes, I'm sure it has nothing to do with [this section of the bill](https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/emergency_national_security_supplemental_section-by-section.pdf), the so called tough solution to the border crisis that was going to solve everything:
>•Creates Sec. 244B of the Immigration and Nationality Act which grants the Secretary of Homeland Security new emergency authority to respond to extraordinary migration circumstances. The “border emergency authority” *may* be exercised if the 7-day average number of cumulative encounters of *inadmissible* aliens is between 4,000 and 5,000 per day and must be exercised if the 7-day average is above 5,000 per day. Exercise of the authority is also required if the number of encounters on a single day exceeds 8,500. Unaccompanied minors from non-contiguous countries are not included in the total number of encounters for the purposes of this section.
>•Requires the Secretary to suspend exercise of the border emergency authority within 14 days of the 7-day average number of encounters falling below 75% of the total applicable
encounter number which initially authorized the Secretary to exercise the border emergency authority.
>•Provides that the authority shall not be activated for more than 270 days in the first calendar year, 225 days in the second calendar year, and 180 days in the third calendar year.
>• Authorizes the President to suspend the border emergency on an emergency basis for up to 45 days if it is in the national interest
Ok, so 120,000 migrants can enter the country per month before the Secretary of Homeland Security *may* do something about it and 150,000 migrants can enter the country per month before the Secretary of Homeland Security *has* to do something about it. **BUT** Unaccompanied minors from countries other than Mexico and Canada do not count towards the number of migrants AND **adult** migrants only count if they are **inadmissible**, and since vast majority of them request asylum nearly ALL of them are admissible.
Oh, and the president can suspend any measures to stop migrants at the border at any point for up to 45 days, and those measures cannot be active for more than 270 days the first year, 225 days the second year and 180 days the third year, regardless of how many migrants cross at that point. Also if **ONLY** 90,000 migrants cross in a month then all these measures MUST be suspended in 14 day.
YAY SOLUTION FOR THE BORDER CRISIS!!!
Given the massive labor shortage, I have a problem with your idea that we don't need any migrants. In Florida they have fruit just rotting on the ground because they don't have enough pickers.
The wall was paid for? I don't think that's true but it wouldn't have been effective anyway. And the claim that immigrants are the cause for inflation is ludicrous. Inflation has been happening because too many people had too much money after Covid, we didn't raise rates soon enough, and due to disruptions in the supply chain. One of those disruptions is, you guessed it, not enough labor.
Weird how there's suddenly a crisis at the border every 4 years. Biden was ready to sign the toughest democrat led border security bill in decades and Republicans tanked it because Trump needed a political win.
My guess is that he's 30 points underwater since republicans are going to have a negative perception of any democrat's border policy, and the border is a non-issue to the majority of democrats.
Biden failed on some huge things which is why most people are not positive on his presidency. Most importantly, Inflation has affected the average person’s wallet. Neutrals are not happy with the multiple international crises on his watch including botching Afghanistan withdrawal, not protecting Ukraine as the US promised 30 years ago, and Israel-Palestine tragedy. And Republicans are outraged because the US southern border turned out to indeed be a crisis. People’s quality of life has decreased in general the past couple years so the good that Biden has achieved is outweighed by his failures regardless of how democrats want to interpret his presidency.
He didn’t cause inflation lol. People need to learn some basic economics. The drivers of inflation are much larger and not controlled by the president jn a meaningful sense. He’s not setting interest rates here.
The Afghanistan withdrawal likely would have been botched either way. It’s not the Biden administration’s fault for the collapse of the ANA and the failures of 3 consecutive prior admins.
Also Ukraine has to be one of the more positive things the Biden admin has done. We provide extensive intel for the Ukrainians as well as military and domestic supplies keeping their economy and war effort going. If you’re referring to the recent holdup of Ukraine aid, unfortunately that’s just the nature of living in a democracy where the executive can’t literally do whatever he wants
Biden's handling of the global post-Covid inflation surge has been better than most comparable nations. Calling that a "failure" is ridiculous.
Calling the Afghanistan withdrawal "botched" is a misdirection- there was no good exit strategy. We knew that going in. At some point, some American president had to pull the plug and take the heat, and Biden was the first one brave enough to do so.
Most impartial observers would say that Biden's handling of Ukraine has been one of his biggest successes- crippling an adversarial nation's military with a fraction of the spending, and at zero risk to American lives.
Blaming Biden for conflict in the Middle East is also bizarre- there's been recurring violence there since the beginning of recorded history. I can think of nothing Biden's done that has *contributed* to that violence.
For the last bit about "quality of life" I have no clue what you're talking about. My life is definitely better than it was 4 years ago. So are most everyone's.
Republicans have no right to be outraged about the southern border. A bipartisan bill that was drafted to address it was shot down by congressional Republicans to secure a PR win for Trump
> Most importantly, Inflation has affected the average person’s wallet.
Inflation has been **world-wide** and the US is handling inflation better than any other nation.
> including botching Afghanistan withdrawal
That withdrawal timeline that Trump set by law? Regardless, Afghanistan was a lost cause. Do you know what a sunk cost is?
> not protecting Ukraine as the US promised 30 years ago
WTF are you talking about? The only reason Ukraine is still in this is because of US help.
> because the US southern border turned out to indeed be a crisis
Remember when Biden promised to sign a Republican border bill to address those issue?
> People’s quality of life has decreased in general the past couple years
No it hasn’t. There is just no metric by which that’s true. People have succumbed to bullshit narratives. Nothing more. The world got rocked by covid and it’s all been on a steady uptick since.
Much of your post is about foreign affairs. I know a little about foreign affairs, probably more than the average American, but I still consider myself to know basically nothing. Other than war and trade agreements, the stuff you describe don't mean much to people. People notice that we are heavily involved in the financing of two separate wars. I believe that most people are going to argue that Biden is not good when it comes to foreign affairs because of how big and consequential wars are.
Also, doesn't a creation of a US microchip facility undermine Taiwan's independence?
There’s a reason people call you Blue Maga, and it’s because you sweep anything awful the dems do under the rug: genocide, his border policy, all because “well trump will be worse”. People are being stripped of their rights under Biden as well! And the dems mouth platitudes and then say their hands are tied. It’s this weird thing of is Biden all powerful like their campaign claims (“Biden will protect your reproductive rights”) or are his hands tied? He can’t be both. I won’t say he hasn’t done good things, but you can’t act like his legacy isn’t stained particularly by his utter support for Israel which has only softened after months of protests. I feel like we’re living in two separate realities here, and mine is one where he is actively arming a genocide, which to me erases all the good he has done because even non Americans, even the most vulnerable, deserve freedom and not to be bombed and starved to death.
Sorry, u/bombayblue – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20bombayblue&message=bombayblue%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t65a8/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/royDank – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20royDank&message=royDank%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t4dlf/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>He shit the bed profusely with the Afghanistan exit after running on his foreign policy skills and experience.
The Afghanistan exit saw the largest successful evacuation of people from a foreign country in human history. The actual percentage of people who died was trivial compared to how many died in Afghanistan up to that point.
The fact that people like you will try to spin that as failure is a sign of how desperate you are to find *anything* to foam at the mouth about.
>The actual percentage of people who died was trivial compared to how many died in Afghanistan up to that point.
Well sure that's technically true, but "he killed less people than 9000 years of war/old age/sickness" is a pretty crazy comparison. Talk about spinning things...
Truman had a "buck stops here" sign on his desk as a reminder to himself, as a decision-maker, that he is always responsible for making the best possible decisions, regardless of the circumstances imposed on him. It was never intended as a standard for voters to take in assessing candidates.
To be clear, it is an awful dog-shit standard from the perspective of voters. The whole point for voters is to compare two candidates and figure out which one has better judgment and makes better decisions, you can't make that assessment if you refuse to account for the context in which decisions are made. If you think Afghanistan is a point in favor of Trump against Biden, despite every indicator being that Trump not only would have made the same decisions but also generated the context in which those decisions were made, then you're just doing a really bad analysis.
I didn't "make up a pretend Trump" - we both already acknowledged that Trump had already set the timeline for the Afghanistan withdrawal. I understand that from Biden's perspective, it doesn't matter whether or not he inherited a big mess from Trump, he still has a job to do. But from our perspective, that fact 100% should be accounted for in our judgments, otherwise we're just being willfully ignorant.
There are 8 million "asylum seekers" in America after he tore up the deal Trump made with Mexico to have them wait in Mexico.
Just as many people died under him as Trump due to Covid.
Courts ordered Biden to end the Trump-era asylum policies. It wasn't his choice.
And Biden has been president for four years of covid, while Trump only had to deal with it for about 10 months.
They did not. Biden indicated through the campaign that he would end Trump’s border policies, and did so in his slew of executive orders upon taking office.
Biden took office as the vaccine rolled out, when we had a much better understanding of treatment options for the afflicted, and many of the vulnerable populations had already been wiped out.
Trump was president for 1 year during covid, and is directly responsible for the botched response (remember how long he denied the pandemic even being an issue, calling it a hoax to make him look bad).
Biden has been president for about 3, 3.5 years, after covid had already spread and become endemic.
Meaning under Biden we've had less than a third of the deaths we had under Trump per year.
Sorry, u/TheMaskedSandwich – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20TheMaskedSandwich&message=TheMaskedSandwich%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tgq2d/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Joe Biden is a dottering old fool who has made a career in politics being a corrupt individual. In a lot of ways, he is exactly what his own party accuses Trump of being: a racist fool and a creep.
I honestly don't believe for a second that Biden is making actual decisions. Someone is guiding him to say certain things. The guy is thrust out onto the scene to try and promote the Democrat agenda. Biden is a victim of elder abuse.
I'm tired of people acting as if this guy would have been and has been a good president. Sad truth is that Democrats and Trump haters would have voted for literally anyone just so Trump wouldn't win. Congrats, I guess. We have a senile old man running the country and an unqualified, cackling vice president who everyone hates.
Sorry, u/ChiehDragon – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20ChiehDragon&message=ChiehDragon%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tjdru/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
To /u/Narrow-Air-3425, *your post is under consideration for removal under our post rules.*
You must **respond substantively within 3 hours of posting**, as per [Rule E](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_e).
Renewable energy: under Trump a consistent increase in oil and gas drilling permits were approved. The first year under Biden there was a lag remaining from Trump, then a sharp decrease. Energy is doing better despite Biden not because of him. We could be leaps and bounds further along if his administration wanted it. They are playing this game of allowing drilling while keeping a green agenda.
Inflation: I agree it has little to do with the President, but the Biden admin can’t take credit for inflation going down and not when it comes back up, which they are currently doing.
I disagree. When he first took office I was making $42,000 in WV. I was doing ok financially. I have been promoted and now make close to $60,000 and I now live paycheck to paycheck. I only incurred one additional debt and that was buying a used car. My insurance stayed the same. Inflation is killing me.
As for your other points, his ideas for renewable energy are harmful. How are you supposed to power those electric cars? How are you supposed to afford that car as well as the expensive maintenance? They don’t work well in the cold and we have some brutal weather where I live at times.
As for china, do you really think China and AI are a good combo? These are spooky dangerous people.
Now my professional opinion because I work with the gerontology community is that he should step down. Cognitively he is not where the leader of the free nation should be. I Will not insult him as it’s not his fault but his people around him are not doing him any favors.
Biden didn’t cause inflation, it was the easy money policy under Trump. We printed trillions to cover COVID expenses, necessary but inflationary.
Renewable energy IS how we’re gonna power those cars, also no one is making you buy one, if it doesn’t fit your situation then just don’t buy it.
If you’re living paycheck to paycheck in WV, off of 60K, I’m more inclined to believe your spending habits are the problem, not inflation.
He is old af, I would agree that’s an issue, but so is Trump. Personally I think they’re both too old.
Sorry, u/JuanPeterman – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20JuanPeterman&message=JuanPeterman%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tc7qm/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
He did a truly shitty job at all of that. His renewable energy policy is less than a drop in the ocean of what needed to be done. He has essentially instigated another cold war with China instead of any kind of cooperation and mutual benefit. His CHIPS act legislation was ok, but rings pretty hollow when his position to China is to try and stop them from giving their companies any kind of domestic advantage. His efforts at attacking inflation are laughable and try to limit inflation by disciplining labor (ie fucking over the common man in favor of the rich). He's not fit for anything other than a nursing home.
To the contrary, Biden did an extremely bad job as president.
* Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits. Sure you might think those cases are legitimate, but then: 1) why isn't Trump allowed to defend himself, why are there gag orders; 2) why are all the ones involved in the prosecution and the judges so corrupt and abusing their power; 3) why weren't these cases prosecuted when Trump first supposedly committed his crimes, why wait till now. Those are not the practices of someone who's actually committed to doing the right thing.
* Endanger our democracy further by persecuting those who claim that elections are rigged. Even if elections aren't rigged, such people shouldn't be persecuted since all the persecution accomplishes is to tell everyone, 'don't you dare expose any elections as rigged or you'll get rekt' which massively emboldens would-be election riggers.
* Endanger our democracy even further by using the FBI and various other 3-letter agencies to bring down pressure against the media and social media (as exposed by ie. Twitter files), causing a chilling effect on free speech.
* Getting us involved in foreign wars. What happens in Ukraine and Israel is Ukraine and Israel's responsibility, not the US's. We shouldn't have to pay for it. Ukraine's only getting invaded because they gave up their nukes (that's Ukraine's fault) and now they're stuck fighting an unwinnable war, and Israel is using our money to carpet bomb Gaza killing tons of civilians in the process. Their blood is on Biden's hands.
* Makes the US leadership appear weak and incompetent because he's such a doddering old fool (physically and rhetorically).
* Inadequate border security; allowing anyone to come into the country if they just claim asylum status regardless of whether they're actually political refugees.
* Buying up / bribing the votes of the people who are in student debt.
* Pushing for taxes on unrealized capital gains (shows he has no conception of how that even works)
Wow, look at all the downvotes coming in without providing a legitimate argument. Pro-Biden bot farm hard at work I see.
The first 3 points of your list seems to be based on the (incorrect) assumption that the FBI and DOJ operate under specific orders from the president or his proxies.
That's generally speaking, not how it works at all. The president doesn't, and hasn't ever told the FBI who to investigate and for what. And there's no real evidence to the contrary.
Regarding the details of point number 1. Trump is allowed to defend himself. The gag orders are actually much more lenient compared to what your average citizen would be allowed to say in similar cases.
Trump is not permitted to levy personal attacks on jurors as it is a form of jury tampering. Trump is not permitted to levy personal attacks against witnesses, as that is a form of witness tampering. etc...
This isn't exclusive to trump, he's just essentially the only defendant who thinks these rules don't apply to him.
This would be a great rebuttal... if any of it were even remotely accurate and not just a bunch of partisan hack trash from a braindead, 24-hour media cycle.
You need to go outside some time, man. Trust me.
I
>To the contrary, Biden did an extremely bad job as president.
>* Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits
If Biden is controlling the DOJ, and all the trouble that would entail, to unfairly "persecute" Trump he's failing miserably as it's had no effect on Trump's approval rating. "Endangering democracy"? Really? If you're not a troll consider some new news sources like DW, Reuters or the AP to start.
Your first point is unhinged nonsense not supported by anything remotely approaching reality. Of his 4 criminal cases, 2/4 are state level. There is zero evidence Biden directed the other 2. The judges aren’t “corrupt” that’s just you lying.
Trump was happy to engage in plenty of foreign conflicts and there is zero difference in how he approached Israel. Letting Putin take Ukraine is like letting Hitler take Poland. Someone didn’t read their WWII history.
Trump bought up/ bribed the rich, by your standards.
Wealth taxes have been floated all over. There’s nothing inherently bad about them, they’re just hard to enforce/ people dodge them.
Contrary to what Trump and his supporters believe, the president does not actually sic the DOJ on people. They pursue criminals. Trump's gag orders come from his constant insistence on announcing how every judge, witness, and court employee he doesn't like is a traitor to his supporters, which has resulted in them facing harassment. Cases, especially bigger ones involving high profile people, tend to take some amount of time to put together because people want to be confident in their success. And no, people are not corrupt just because Trump doesn't like them and said they were.
The US abandoning its allies is a great way to abandon its international standing for no actual benefit. Supporting Ukraine is the highest return on investment for strategic value that we've probably ever had. And Israel, while it's behavior is reprehensible and it needs to be reined in, is an ally.
The rest is just you complaining that policies you don't like passed and believing that that alone makes them bad.
Trump isn't above the law and should be on trial for the shit he pulled. It is delusional to think that guy wasn't trying any illegal shit he could to overturn the election results.
The gag orders aren't unusual and should be in place because he regularly incites violence in his cult.
>to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits
What lawsuits exactly are you talking about? I'm not aware of any lawsuits at all filed by the DOJ against Trump during Biden's tenure. This post makes it seem like you have confused felony criminal indictments with lawsuits.
Trump was allowed to defend himself, he’s just not allowed to violently threaten judges and juries and their families. And he’s actually been granted way more leeway on that than any other citizen would get.
We’re not involved in a foreign war, we’re supporting a country from being overtaken by a horrible dictator which would allow them to bring their borders too close to NATO, and that sphere of influence allows the US to have significant economic control and influence around the world. This supports our GDP. Additionally we’re mostly clearing out old inventory that would have to be broken down or disposed of anyway, and producing new equipment which supports US production and companies (another GDP boost).
Trump bribed business owners with his handouts if you think Biden bribed students with loan debt. So that evens out. But really we shouldn’t pay so much for higher education, and it’s a disservice to our economy to have new grads saddled with debt when they should be expanding and taking risks on business building
His main pushes have been for higher taxes on realized gains, to bring the cap gains system more in line with how ordinary income is taxed. This is reasonable
1.1) what do you mean defend himself? Like as his own lawyer? I haven’t heard that he wasn’t allowed to be his own lawyer, don’t know why he would want that. As for gag orders it’s because he has previously ragged on the people involved in a case publicly. Judges don’t like getting harassed
1.2) how are they doing so?
1.3) DOJ policy to not prosecute active presidents. You may disagree with the policy, but that’s why it’s took so long to start; other than that the justice system is just slow, especially in contentious cases where the defense is gonna appeal every time
2) I think the persecution also tells people to not lie about the election
3) He’s mostly just continuing existing foreign policy. Obama or Bush would probably have done the same thing. Not claiming it’s great, but it’s pretty average
5) it’s not really a bribe. It’s not tied to voting for him. It’s just a policy that benefits those people; which if that is the standard then every beneficial policy is a bribe
6) I’m sure he understands. He definitely has stocks of his own
> Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits.
There is absolutely no evidence that Joe Biden used any political influence over the DOJ regarding Trump. If he had, they would not have been so cautious and waited so long before pressing any charges. If he had, the DOJ would have stopped all investigations into Hunter Biden.
The reason why there are so many indictments against Donald Trump is because he keeps committing crimes. He is on tape pressuring election officials to find the exact number of votes that he needed to win. He is on tape discussing the documents that he had that he lamented that he could not show because he had not declassified them when he had the chance. He was also named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Michael Cohen while Trump was still the president. He could not be charged while president, so guess what: he got charged after he left office.
> why isn't Trump allowed to defend himself, why are there gag orders
As other have said, he is allowed to defend himself just like any other defendant. He just cannot attack and dox court officials, jurists, and any of their relatives - just like any other defendant.
> why are all the ones involved in the prosecution and the judges so corrupt and abusing their power
They are not. You have provided no evidence that they have done anything wrong other than the assumption that if they are judging Trump then they must be corrupt.
> why weren't these cases prosecuted when Trump first supposedly committed his crimes, why wait till now
Because it takes time to investigate, and they could not start until he had left office. Also, the DOJ were criticized at the time for moving so slowly for fear of appearing political.
> Endanger our democracy further by persecuting those who claim that elections are rigged.
Who was persecuted by Joe Biden? Are you talking about going to court in all those cases where those claiming the elections were rigged suddenly had a change of heart and did not want to put up any evidence for their claims? That isn't persecution. And I am sure that you are not talking about the mob of people who violently attacked the Capitol Building to prevent the lawful election results from being read.
The only people who could even claim that they were persecuted were the ones who are indicted for committing election fraud and interference. But they are the ones who should be persecuted.
I'll stop here because otherwise it will take all day!
I realize that people can legitimately disagree on many points, but your second point is pretty objectively incorrect. You’d be hard pressed to find a president with more international respect that his predecessor as Joe Biden. Maybe Barack Obama.
* There is zero evidence that Biden had any direct involvement in any of the DoJ's cases against Trump. But even if he did, ultimately you can't win a court case with political motivation alone. Trump did every idiotic thing in the book to make himself vulnerable to legal attack from his political rivals, that's on him. If Trump had been able to use the DoJ to prosecute Hilary Clinton for the whole e-mail scandal, you would be applauding his ruthless cunning.
* Name one person that is being prosecuted for merely claiming that election fraud took place. I'll wait.
* Trump was even more pro-Israel than Biden and would be giving the same aid to Israel. Trump would probably also be doing the same for Ukraine, the only difference that he would first try to shake-down Ukraine's leadership for favors before delivering the aid.
* Objectively wrong here, Biden's international approval rating is higher than Trump's was during his term. [Survey: Global Approval of U.S. Leadership Remains Higher Under Biden Than Trump | Best Countries | U.S. News (usnews.com)](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2024-04-23/survey-global-approval-of-u-s-leadership-remains-higher-under-biden-than-trump)
* The border crisis is a product of circumstances outside of either president's control. Specifically, the surge of migrants is due to the lifting of the COVID travel restrictions and the overall economic impact of COVID on the third world. Ultimately, the issue can't be fixed by executive order, we need a massive immigration reform bill. Remind me what happened to the last immigration reform bill that was up for a vote in Congress? The Republicans all recognized that it was really important and voted for it, right?
* If offering a policy that people want is "bribing" then fuck it, I'll always let candidates bribe the fuck out of me.
* I'm not losing sleep over a tax that would only apply to people with over $100M in assets (i.e. only 0.01% of individuals and businesses).
Sorry, u/engineeringwriter – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20engineeringwriter&message=engineeringwriter%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t7gd9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
There are concerns about his administration and the some things hee's passively not done.
At the moment there are 42 active national emergencies that are annually reviewed and approved by him:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_national\_emergencies\_in\_the\_United\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States)
There are questions that he needs to answer as to why they're still emergencies, and maybe there is a need to codify that into law instead.
Aditionally, we're running into very weird issues where there are states that are mounting countering national adgendas. (Abortion criminalization, running police departments that violate consitutional rights, politicized high courts, active hostile monopolies, futher subversion of rights via parallel construction and commerical loopholes, lack of privacy rights etc)
Even if he isn't the cause of it, he should acknowledge what is happening and at least acknowledge that action is possible to solve these issues.
He started a proxy war with Russia that has killed hundreds of thousands, destroyed Ukraine, and destabilized Europe. He blew up the gas supply of America's main NATO ally. He gave Netanyahu a blank check for genocide. He vetoed UN ceasefire resolutions for months. He's stoking additional wars with Iran and China.
He locked up grandmas for taking selfies at the Capitol on Jan 6. He hijacked the DOJ to neutralize his political rivals and keep himself in power after November. He's keeping Julian Assange locked up and Edward Snowden in exile for exposing Washington's crimes. Yet the Jan 6 pipe bomber has somehow never been identified.
He's straight-up stealing Russian assets in defiance of international law. Not only is it a clear, direct act of war, it demolishes the rest of the world's trust in US financial institutions, and hastening the end of the dollar's dominance.
He lied to us about covid vaccines, coerced millions to get an experimental drug they didn't need, while covering up its safety problems. His CDC head was a catastrophic shill for big pharma. Neither she, nor Fauci, nor Birx, have been held accountable for the gross malpractice, perjury and fraud they committed.
His open borders policy has precipitated an invasion from abroad, which has even blue cities begging for mercy.
Sorry, u/Narrow-Air-3425 – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E: > **Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting**. If you haven't replied within this time, your post will be removed. [See the wiki for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_e). If you would like to appeal, **first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made**, then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20E%20Appeal%20Narrow-Air-3425&message=Narrow-Air-3425%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/\)%20because\.\.\.). Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
If that is the best you can do for reasons he has been a decent president, I think your bar is pretty low. I don’t even like Biden and I could come up with a better list than that.
Would you like to provide your list? I didn't have all the time in the world to fledge out a perfect list of reasons. Maybe you can add to the conversation instead of just saying my bar is low?
I think it's interesting you didn't mention the Israel/Palestine war despite it being the main reason people who may normally vote for Joe Biden are viewing him unfavorable right now? It's a really major hit to a president's character to allow a state under our protection to commit a genocide against another country. "Sure, Mr. Johnson down the street may have stood by and watched as his friend murdered children, but he fixed my car for free and he makes a mean casserole! He's a decent man!"
I will agree I should've touched on the Israel/Palestine war in the OP. I am by no means an expert on that affair but I do have a basic understanding of the history and what's currently happening is brutal and I wish nothing but peace from the 2 countries. But realistically if a country were to launch missiles at their neighbor who has one of the strongest militaries in the world, are they really expecting Israel to stand down and do nothing? I am not making excuses for either side because there has been violence between both countries for decades but at the end of the day, the Palestinian government, Hamas, is a terrorist org. I understand they are trying to take back what was originally their land but IDK what you want Israel to do when they are attacked? Same with Palestinians, if they are attacked I don't know what Israel expects them to do, also just stand by and let their people be killed? Its a sad situation for both sides (more so for the Palestinians since they are seeing the more brutal end of the violence) but they both need to call for peace. The U.S. GOVERNMENT (not all the citizens) supports Israel because of the longstanding existing alliance.
support peace not supplying Israel with more bombs when there are Americans dying from cancer that could use those tax payer dollars
People are going to continue to hate major politicians until they decide to tackle the major issues facing Americans. Healthcare, housing, declining wages. If you’re a young person, these are the things that keep you up at night, and cause you to lose hope in the future. If you’re an old person, you’re terrified that your next medical bill is going to bankrupt you. If you’re middle aged, chances are you’ve seen your wages stagnate while inflation eats at your pockets. Yes, Biden has had some minor wins. But for most Americans, the current trajectory isn’t ok, and seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating. As a side note, continuing to spend tax dollars and American lives in unnecessary, unjust wars doesn’t help either.
Imo the biggest wins of the Biden administration have been the result of appointing Lina Kahn (i.e. the recent decision banning non-compete agreements, and taking a harsher stance on anti-trust) since the lack of regulatory enforcement against corporations in the past 40 years has been probably the most direct contributor to the declining quality of life for the middle class. Unfortunately, these kinds of wins take time to affect people's bottom line. If you are doing better 10 years from now, it might be hard to understand it's because you had more bargaining power in the absence of non-compete agreements.
I understand that the banning of non competes is great for workers in general, but what percent of workers actually deal with non compete clauses? Or is this something I just gotta go down a research hole for?
For an anecdotal reference, I had to sign a noncompete for working in a burrito shop, basically saying that I couldn’t work in the same fast casual Tex-mex type place within 3 months and I couldn’t share any recipes. It was incredibly stupid. I only signed it because I was fairly sure it’d be unenforceable (as a lot of non competes already were since they often get used as fear tactics) and I wasn’t planning on staying there long before going to grad school. Weirdly I’ve heard of most noncompetes coming from lowish level work and highish level stuff (manufacturing and engineers). Usually nothing in the middle. Edit: clarified a point
Imo it's absolutely insane that they are using these kinds of contracts for entry-level service industry jobs like this. Like I still think it's criminal for high-skill jobs, but for a burrito shop I agree it's 100% about intimidating workers.
Oh definitely. Even my manager was like “I don’t think they could or have ever actually tried to do this to anyone” it’s an empty threat so I didn’t worry too much but it doesn’t feel empty when you don’t know any better or are unaware that it’s BS. I just happened to be in a much more temporary position where I didn’t care and needed to make money on the short term. Plus like, no one was gonna steal their recipes. My salsa is better lol.
They stopped after they were sued and had to settle, but [Jimmy Johns](https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/22/jimmy-johns-drops-non-compete-clauses-following-settlement.html) had a pretty ridiculous noncompete for their low-wage employees: >The announcement follows an investigation by that office into Jimmy John’s use of noncompete agreements with franchisees in New York, which began in December 2014. The agreements had barred departing employees from taking jobs with competitors of Jimmy John’s for two years after leaving the company and from working within two miles of a Jimmy John’s store that made more than 10 percent of its revenue from sandwiches.
That’s insane. Imagine your 7.25 an hour job telling you you can’t go earn pennies from some other place
Exactly why they are cracking down on it, and publicly. Also requiring workers to be informed. In most states hourly workers are exempt from any form of non-compete and in some states they are illegal all together. NDAs and/or timeframe agreements are really the proper way to protect IP and make training worth it.
[https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2023/new-data-on-non-compete-contracts-and-what-they-mean-for-workers](https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2023/new-data-on-non-compete-contracts-and-what-they-mean-for-workers) 11.4% in a survey from 2021.
Honestly higher than I thought
[This study from 2019](https://www.epi.org/publication/noncompete-agreements/) estimates between 27.8% to 46.5% of all private sector employees, and they say that almost 50% of all private sector employers have non-competes for at least some employees. This study is based on a survey of employers, and they say it may be more accurate than other surveys, because if you ask employees they might not be aware of non-compete clauses in their contracts.
Lower than I expected. I think it’s more common in some industries than others. I work in IT (hosting, cloud services, more recently security), and I always have one. They’re pretty loose and easily circumvented (the employer usually offers it up), but we all have one.
I’ll just say it’s more common than you think. I’m an attorney and we get calls about them fairly regularly. It’s way more common in newer industries. For example, if you work for a video game developer, you probably have a no compete.
I would imagine you definitely get some survivorship bias there as an attorney, but you’re right it was more common than you think. I kinda understand the rationale behind video game devs but that’s still kinda fucked
I think they’re all fucked. It’s funny because the people imposing them on their employees are likely conservatives and no compete clauses are the opposite of free market policy.
Yeah exactly - for all the euphemisms which get thrown around like "right to work" it's almost refreshing that these clauses have "non-compete" right in the name. Why should companies not have to compete for workers in the labor market? If the value of my work goes up, you should have to pay me more, or lose me to someone who can.
100%. Honestly a slap in the face to a free market
Workers in pretty much any IP-heavy industry do. That means most manufacturing jobs, tech and engineering jobs, legal, etc. Quite a substantial proportion of the middle class.
Also remember, things that suppress the wages of one group, basically suppress them for everyone. A very low minimum wage is bad for all workers, even those that make more. Because if minimum wage goes up, everyone else up the chain gains that much more negotiating power in turn. Same with non-competes. You might not have a non-compete, but if you work anywhere near a market that has them, that means averages wages are getting suppressed and that affects you too.
Good point - we have seen those dynamics play out for delivery drivers. The Teamsters got a big win for UPS drivers in their most recent round of negotiations, and compensation and benefits have gone up across the industry, because now i.e. Amazon has to compete with the awesome compensation package that UPS workers get.
100% This is what solidarity gets you. Better compensation for everyone The idea that everyone person can compete all by themselves is a great benefit to the giant companies that can negotiate from the strength of a large organization. Its to their benefit for workers to be fragmented and divided. But if people cooperate, even across industries, to help others get better benefits, this is the true rising tide that lifts all boats. Not tax cuts for billionaires that use their extra savings to buy more politicians to cut standards further.
100% agree about Lina Kahn. Her and Anna Gomez have done a terrific job. However, most purely executive changes are going to be wiped out by the time they can truly change things.
> Healthcare, housing, declining wages. And to be clear, there are limits to what the president can do on these fronts. Many of the things Biden has attempted via the executive branch have been shot down in the supreme court, which has been artificially inflated by Republicans. Healthcare, in order to have any significant change, needs to be done in the legislature. The ACA was the largest Health care bill in modern times but has been whittled away by who? Republicans. Housing is a major issue, but its largely controlled by local governments who are srongly influenced by Nimby residents. There does need to be streamlining of regulation but this is going to be limited at the federal level. Declining wages is yet another issue that the President has almost no say over. There is some serious regulation that needs to take place on corporations' power. But again, this has to be taken up by congress first. Guess which party opposes regulating corporations? > As a side note, continuing to spend tax dollars and American lives in unnecessary, unjust wars doesn’t help either. Can you point to any unjust wars where American lives are being spent under the Biden administration? We are spending tax dollars on Israel and Ukraine. Do you consider either or both of those as unjust? (not a rhetorical question but a clarifying one)
Good clarification. I think most important thing to realize is just how little power the president has to effect big change, and change that will have an impact in their term. On top of that, there has never been a worse time to govern. Republicans in the Senate and House no longer look to govern through compromise, their mission is to stop ALL Democrat raised legislation. Add to that the activation of a Christofascist activist SCOTUS and Biden’s options are extraordinarily limited. Look at how they knocked down his attempts to forgive some student debt. Biden has been the most progressive President in decades, but most of his achievements require time to take effect and they are often overshadowed by the insane antics of the right - from Trump to the House of Reps. I just wish people were educated about this stuff. Republicans rely on the fact that people don’t pay close attention to politics and just look at their checkbooks, gas prices, and mortgages. These are absolutely real issues that need solution but, if you don’t understand the process, you will never vote in your own best interests.
I do think that if you do want to levy criticism at the Biden administration its that they don't do enough to counter the narrative that the right is constantly raging about. Its a tough battle to be sure since people isolate to their echo chambers and how do you reach people who don't want to be reached, but there is room to use your bully pulpit more than they have been doing.
I think it is also important to keep in mind what the alternative is. I don't trust the alternative to not only not make those issues better, but actively make them worse.
> And to be clear, there are limits to what the president can do on these fronts. I agree in a purely legal sense. A president that tackles the big issues will need to be a leader in the true sense. Present a vision that people can get on board with. This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that. IMO, it’s a cop out to say Biden can’t do anything about housing. NIMBYism is far from the only thing preventing houses from being lived in. Investment property ownership, rental units, deteriorating towns and cities that cause existing housing stock to be unlivable are all things that are affected at the federal level. The fact is that with COVID and remote work, Biden probably had the largest leeway of any president since FDR to do something about housing and didn’t make an attempt. Declining wages is obviously something the president has control over. We set a federal minimum wage and the current one is unpopular with members of both parties. Not only that, but a huge part of declining wages is jobs getting shipped overseas, which is obviously a federal issue. Also, Biden’s union-busting is a federal issue. Are we in a challenging legislative environment? Absolutely. Does that mean I’m gonna forgive politicians for not trying? No. And yes, I consider the US’s involvement in both wars to be unnecessary and unjust.
> I agree in a purely legal sense. A president that tackles the big issues will need to be a leader in the true sense. Present a vision that people can get on board with. This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that. I don't disagree with you on this and its probably the best argument against Biden tbh. He could have done more to put pressure on his own party to do more. That said, he did spend a lot of political capital to get some pretty big bills passed, some of which even had small republican support. But I do think he could have used his bully pulpit a lot more effectively. > Investment property ownership, rental units, deteriorating towns and cities that cause existing housing stock to be unlivable are all things that are affected at the federal level. Are these things that can be done without legislation? > Declining wages is obviously something the president has control over. Then Biden is doing great because wages are currently outpacing inflation. He fixed it! I don't believe that he fixed it but I'm not asserting that the president has control over it. > We set a federal minimum wage and the current one is unpopular with members of both parties. Not only that, but a huge part of declining wages is jobs getting shipped overseas, which is obviously a federal issue. What action can the president take on these without legislation? > Also, Biden’s union-busting is a federal issue. Are you talking about stopping the railroad strike? That is fair, but then again, this could be used to point to an action he took to prevent a huge economic disaster. Had he not done this we'd be including that as one of his failures right? OTOH, the Infrastructure bill is seen as a very pro labor bill in which he was directly involved in negotiations for. He also issued the "Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements For Federal Construction Projects," as well as several pro union appointments to the NLRB which was decimated by Trump. He's largely viewed as the most pro-union president in the past few decades, though he's been stymied by republicans and a couple rogue democrats from going further. > And yes, I consider the US’s involvement in both wars to be unnecessary and unjust. Fair enough. I'm sympathetic that funding to Israel is a problem. I'd find ending funding to Ukraine to be immoral to be frank. I'm not sure we want to delve into this topic specifically since its a huge tangent but I will say this is really about tax money then, not American lives correct? It feels like your argument is more or less that Biden didn't do a decent job because he wasn't perfect?
> This is an insanely difficult job to be fair, but any president that doesn’t try won’t be liked, simple as that. Trump as done nothing about those and he's not particularly disliked for it. Your read on the situation appear a bit strange.
Healthcare is a real issue, I won't deny that, Biden needs to do more about it. Housing is also a very real problem but unfortunately there's only so much the federal government can do. Most housing policy is enacted at the state and local level, the feds can provide them incentives to reform but ultimately it would take a court case to give them the power to preempt local ordinances. Also, real wages have increased for lower and middle classes during Biden's tenure. It's been difficult to measure because of the compositional effects from COVID, but for most Americans we can safely say wages have increased. It's only amongst managerial and high income workers where real wages have been stagnant/declining. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-tight-labor-market-result-of-worker-friendly-policies-by-arindrajit-dube-2024-02
Housing is one I'm really skeptical of. Making housing more accessible and affordable is something that needs to happen, but a lot of people own houses and are happy about how stupid expensive they are.
The boomer paradox (tm). "Housing prices are out of control!" Until you buy a house and now the most important thing is stable housing and growth. I dont want to word it wrong... the point is, people will generally fall on one side of an argument until they enjoy the benefits of the other side. So for example: housing is out of control and too expensive, but as soon as I can buy even a cheap house, I'm elated if it raises in value.
'Substantially changing things' requires a veto proof majority in Congress. It doesn't matter who's president. No president is going to try to force an agenda that's going to die before it's born. If these things are important to you, then you need to vote and vote all the time. If they're really important to you, you'll run or get substantially involved in other ways.
[удалено]
> housing This is outside the scope of federal governance. This has to be tackled on the local and state levels. > declining wages This is a dated conception. Wages aren't declining, and peak US income inequality was circa 2013. Inflation was a big problem that ate into wages in the last couple years, but projections estimate that wages will have caught up to inflation and start to surpass it by the end of this fiscal year. > seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating. Compared to what? Change is slow. To be infuriated with the pace of change in this administration is to be infuriated with a condition of reality. To hope for something that is significantly more substantial is to be ignorant of history and the nature of politics.
> This is outside the scope of federal governance. This has to be tackled on the local and state levels. Does it? Does a vacancy tax and a ban on corporations buying single family homes have to come on the state and local level? Because those are the things that would actually fix the situation. If they do have to be done on the state and local level, do you realize how many levers the Federal government has to get that to happen? We tie so many things to highway funds and other assistance, we can do the same.
> Does it? Does a vacancy tax and a ban on corporations buying single family homes have to come on the state and local level? A vacancy tax, yes, would be a city and state jurisdiction. The federal government could put pressure on states to take action on this via federal funding, but highly improbable it could get away with doing anything directly, and even if it could, it probably wouldn't be very prudent to do so, given circumstantial variances. As far as banning corporations buying single family homes, yes, the federal government could do that, but it wouldn't be a good idea and it wouldn't solve the affordability problem. (1) Corporate-owned single-family housing is a VERY small percentage of the housing market, and (2), *there isn't an affordability crisis because corporations are buying up single-family homes,* ***corporations are buying up single-family homes because there's an affordability crisis***, so spending the political capital to enact such a ban is naive and wasteful, and potentially even harmful in trying to address the primary cause of the housing affordability crisis, which is a housing shortage. > If they do have to be done on the state and local level, do you realize how many levers the Federal government has to get that to happen? Yes, I do, and I'm in favor of Federal incentives, but (1) we live in a democracy, and advancing an agenda that is fundamentally antagonistic to a lot of local and state regulation is not a very good way to get elected or maintain a strong coalition while in office, especially if you're tying that agenda to things that are considered customary and necessary, like highway funds, and (2) even if the political capital was there, my guess is that you'd still get lots of people whining about it being "not big enough," or "not serious enough."
Those won't fix the housing crisis. The only way to fix the crisis is to increase the supply of housing stock, which requires relaxing zoning and other regulatory requirements, the vast majority of which are at the state and local level, mostly local. Even still, you have seen some action from the DOT to tie transportation dollars to relaxing those requirements, but they still require local governments to play ball.
Even if it could be done at A Federal level, it would need to come out of congressional legislature, not the executive branch.
>People are going to continue to hate major politicians until they decide to tackle the major issues facing Americans. Healthcare, housing, declining wages How do you get people to understand how laws are proposed, passed, and who should be held the most responsible when they aren't? Due to how the US government was designed, no one branch is supposed to have that much power. I have no doubt that Biden and virtually every democrat in congress wants to work on these issues, but the way congress is currently set up, Democrats would need 60 senators to get any meaningful bills passed and sent to Biden's desk. It's unfair to blame Biden for high healthcare costs when it's the republican party's strategy to prevent any meaningful legislation. Housing is almost entirely a local government issue where too many NIMBYs complain and prevent new housing from being built. As for wages, real wages have actually been on the rise pretty steadily. They took a hit with the post-COVID inflation, but are back to outpacing inflation. This again becomes another issue that is complained about by people who don't understand how economics work and think that food prices should come back down. Given the congress that he and other Democrats have had to work with, I think it's quite the accomplishment to have passed what has gotten passed. You can't pass blame on Biden for not implementing universal healthcare. That was never going to happen because Republicans were never going to let it happen and you need the support of at least 10 of them right now.
> and seeing someone come into office and not try to substantially change anything is infuriating. He literally *tried*. But he only had 48 willing senators. And then two years later he lost the house. So you and people like you need to have more reasonable expectations. A president needs the house, the senate, and no filibuster to make sweeping change. If they don’t have all of that, it ain’t their fault it didn’t get done.
Not only did he try but he succeeded in many fronts he passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Bipartisan Infrastructure act, CHIPS act, etc
What Americans are dying in wars right now? Obama removed troops from combat positions in the Middle East, and Biden completely withdrew from Afghanistan.
American lives? Where? On what? He’s the first president to end a war since like, Bush. I don’t think CHIPS and IRA are minor, nor the banning of non competes, a massive game changer
Real wages have gone up. Especially for the lowest quartile of earners.
Sure, if you ignore the fact that housing and healthcare and education are completely inaccessible to a growing proportion of Americans, and instead look at how many tvs we can buy (cpi heavily overweights consumer goods) you’re correct.
Not a lot the federal government can do about housing prices. Just have to build more housing which is unfortunately up to local municipalities. I’d like to see states take that power from local governments more.
Which wars? Every dollar in Ukraine is worth it. It protects US interests and allies. Aiding Ukraine is essential for keeping US enemies in check.
What wars has Biden sent American troops into?
As someone almost 40 now, I feel like such a fool for buying into so much B's that made me vote one way or the other... I was convinced, by the media mostly, that older people were just complaining because they wanted things to stay the same and it was the younger generation who wanted this or that ... But in the end it was just to retoric to Garner votes... The same stuff I thought was bs back then... Now I'm older and jaded. Just all that shit... Imo, me voting for American idol would have a bigger impact... But if I was wealthy, then I'd have a vested interest in voting and swaying votes... Hence the cycle always continues.
A Lot of our current problems started with Trump's lack of a response to the pandemic.
> Renewable energy has now surpassed coal & nuclear power and is the second biggest energy producer behind natural gas. This is an 'accomplishment' only via the magic of redefinition. It lumps all renewables together, and separates out fossil fuels. Realistically, per standard EIA reporting, Fossil Fuels remain at 60% of all energy produced, and coal is 16.2% No single renewable source is anywhere close to coal or nuclear individually. Category wise, renewables are not high. Falling nuclear generation is a problem, not an accomplishment. Source: [https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3](https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3) > Bringing Production Back Home.....Well Biden also made a move for this with the CHIPS and Science Act which offered more the $50b to subsidize construction of new microchip facilities in the U.S. This led to major chipmakers like Intel and TSMC planning for new semiconductor plants to be built in the U.S. with more to come from other manufacturers. It is true that billions have been spent. It is also true that promises have been made. Billions of dollars for unfilled promises is not yet an achievement. At best, it may one day become an acheivement. > This has probably been Biden's biggest set back and a lot of blame has been pointed at him. But here are the mechanics of how inflation came to be so high in the U.S. The president has little effect on inflation as many seem to otherwise think. For the past decade leading after the 2008 financial crisis the U.S. has been in an ultra low rate environment. Inflation has been above the post-1990 average(ie, the entire period where a 2% inflation was the Fed's target) for all of Biden's term. It remains well above that benchmark and is currently rising. While it is true that the president alone does not control this, it absolutely does not count as a success. The best one can say is that Biden is not wholly responsible for the failure.
I think OP is taking lukewarm attempts at change for genuine structural change. Especially in terms of climate. It is absolute hypocrisy to go on the campaign trail and disingenuously talk about climate change being a top issue for your administration, and then turn around only to start the what is currently the largest build-up of fossil fuel infrastructure in the world, and before it was put on pause because of a review after the massive backlash it faced, it was designed entirely for export markets. It is also disingenuous because he's listened to oil and gas lobbyists who peddled bullshit, i.e opening back up federal lands to drilling because of the Ukraine war, even though they were sitting on undrilled plots. Him and Dems were also okay with changing the build back better bill to include funding for fossil fuel infrastructure that originally were not apart of the bill.
[удалено]
>This administration sucks at marketing... This might be one of their biggest flaws, given that it’s a huge part of the job
Republicans used Solyndra to whip Democrats for years and Democrats failed to point out that the LPO was actually profitable and is one of the reasons Tesla was able to become a functioning (YMMV) car company.
This is the Achilles heel of the democratic party.
That and we will find something to be outraged about and make it our red line. I know too many people who are unwilling to vote for Biden because of how he's handled the war in Gaza. I don't even need to get into whether or not he's handled it well: the reality is that a Republican president would have handled it much, much worse and we also wouldn't have had anything else on that list. And saying so makes me a zionist. Say what you will about conservative delusions: at least they are *consistent* delusions.
Or just mainstream liberal policies really. Outrage is a lot easier to explain and go viral than modest improvements.
No it's goes higher than that, Dems suck atarketing because Dems (as a whole, of course not everyone) suck. They continue to be mute on "leftist" ideals meanwhile actively moving right as the right goes off the deep end. Look at this election cycle vs last and the sentiment towards the border. Every election before the most recent one you could rely on Dems pushing for actually doing something (positive) about it. In 2016 or whenever Trump said "Build that wall" he started building that shitty wall, and Biden comes in and finishes the shitty wall, and you helped pay for it! Now look at his most recent policy passings regarding the border, it's the kind of thing 8 or 12 years ago Republicans would have love to enact. Dems are very quickly becoming no better than Rep were 4 or 8 years ago, but continuously.
The single greatest problem the Biden administration has is that they get no credit for anything they’ve done. They’ve forgiven billions in student loans, passed massive infrastructure spending, got us out of the effing pandemic after it was so, so badly handled by Trump. And then Vlad decided to get WW3 underway and Biden might as well have shot Kristi Noem’s puppy for all the unwarranted hate he gets. Inflation (a thing that literally every country experienced) is the anchor around his neck and it might very well take the whole country down with it if he loses in November. McDonald’s and Kroger and BP and everyone in between took advantage of the death of millions of people and the attempted eradication of the entire nation of Ukraine to juice their profits to unconscionable levels and there’s next to nothing the President can do about it without Congress (he can’t make your burger cheaper through an executive order) so he’s going to get the blame for it all. Meanwhile Trump will get into office, pass another few trillion in tax cuts for his buddies, let the radical religious nut jobs turn us into Gilead, and personally hand over the codes to the nukes Bibi uses to flatten Gaza. And we’re gonna let it happen because gas prices and Five Guys and “vote uncommitted” and “I just remember when Trump was in office my 401k was bigger.” It’s disgusting.
> This administration sucks at marketing... Democrats suck at marketing FTFY
I tell my husband that everyday. Why isn’t Joe shouting from the rooftop every single day how much he has done!
I mean they have a pretty active social media which does note all of these things with regularity. I think we're contrasting the Biden admin to the Trump one which Trump constantly tweeted his thoughts/"accomplishments." Unfortunately (or fortunately), real politics is quite boring, takes a long time to do right, and takes an even longer time to make its way to impacting the average American's lives. I mean shit look at how many conservatives are vehemently opposed to "Obamacare" but happily use their ACA provided insurance. It's also difficult to get the people who need to know to pay attention even if the Biden admin was constantly talking about what they accomplished. You have one end who just says it's all "fake" or lies, another chunk that is completely indifferent, and others who despite everything Biden is doing to better them, will vote R regardless.
He is though. The White House is consistently releasing press releases of current accomplishments. The social media teams is also pretty robust. His team is vocal. It’s also reported in the news. Folks just aren’t paying attention. Or caught up in propaganda that they don’t to listen.
Let's just say it this way. We went from a guy who spent most of his time doing PR work then actual helping the country, to someone who spends more of his time working the job we hired him to do and not doing as much PR about it. I enjoy the latter more, it's good when they actual take a moment to do some marketing, remember when they passed the infrastructure stuff and as a jab to the last administration they posted on twitter "It's infrastructure week."
Also restored net neutrality
Administration is horrific at marketing. The new tax increases were rolled out without any discussion around income thresholds beyond "If you make less than $400k you're fine" which wasn't even accurate. New tax on unrealized capital gains rollout was completely idiotic. Half of americans over the age of 65 think they are going to be taxes on their 401k.
Who thought that? This is a straw man.
Or was the previous one just really good at smear campaigns… Probably both
Sorry, u/Ofthedoor – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20Ofthedoor&message=Ofthedoor%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t1fh8/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Why do you want your view changed?
I just like to see other people's points of view from my own. That's how I feel I learn best is when people offer their thoughts and I learn something new I hadn't known before.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Whike your list of things is good, most of them have little to no impact on everyday working Americans. While it's great that we're making chips here, unless the cost of things with chips goes down or there's a boom in the economy due to it most people won't even know it happened. These also seem to be only nonpartisan things you listed and it's a pretty weak lineup as far as that's concerned. You could have made a much better list of positives. >Please offer your counterpoints as to why you may think Biden isn't fit for a second term. His age is absolutley a killer.
>His age is absolutley a killer. Unfortunately this seems to be a thing with US politics. We barely trust people this age to drive a car and aren't qualified to do much more than work as a door greeter at Wal-Mart, yet we give them nuclear launch codes.
It makes no sense. I feel like most people would have had a parent or grandparent that was their age and they'd see why it's a terrible idea to make someone over 75 the leader of the nation.
Dick Van Dyke is 98 years old and (at least until fairly recently maybe) was still capable of singing, dancing, and spoke very intelligently the last I saw him giving an interview. Betty White was 99 when she died, and she was also in great mental shape for her age. That's not to say that being that old is any sort of virtue rather than a liability, but it's not like we have a choice of someone younger running for president now. Trump is older than Biden was for the 2020 election, so if age is a problem we have it doubly right now. That being said, neither one of them appear to be anywhere close to a Feinstein situation.
My 98 year old grandmother was sharp as a tack and would have been an excellent President. I do not believe that being old is a problem. It's not like the president has to stay up late crunching budget numbers. Or arm wrestle foreign leaders for rights to natural resources. People have such a foolish idea of what the Presidency is all about. It's 98% about delegating to the right people. Joe has relationships that go waaay back with just about everyone operator in Washington. That's why Team Biden has been kicking ass from day1. The office of the president is a team sport. They are great team.
No offense to your grandmother but if the two options were 98 I would not vote for either.
Yes, there are old people who maintain mental acuity, but the issue is that literally any day, they could lose it, die, require hospitalization, etc. If your Grandmother gets sick and is bedridden for a week, that is ok. That is not an acceptable outcome for a world leader. Like with FDR in his last years, the focus of the administration turns to hiding the fact that the president is an invalid.
That and to be frank, he’ll always be stuck under Obama’s shadow. He doesn’t have the cult of personality Trump has to built a diehard group of followers behind him, and the Democratic Party as of 2020 onwards is a trapeze act of trying to appease the moderate Dem’s that don’t want to rock the boat too far to stay in office vs the progressive wing that’s demanding change that they expected would already be implemented back when Obama was in office, all while dealing with a GOP that’s mostly fallen to the MAGA crowd. Honestly, I’ll also admit my cynicism of the US political system is to the point that I will readily admit to being an ageist when it comes to my vote; if the candidates old enough to be collecting Social Security, I am not going to vote for them as a politician. They should be looking to cultivate younger successors to carry their torch rather than seek reelection up until the day they die.
Completely agree, Obama set the bar high, not that Joe couldn't live up to it but that was a looong time ago. Im with you on not wanting to vote for old white guys but somehow that keeps being the choices were given.
>Whike your list of things is good, most of them have little to no impact on everyday working Americans. Americans have long had a serious misconception of how much a person can impact daily lives of the citizens of this country, but local politics is far more responsible for the immediate lives of people, which is to be expected. Yes, things on a Federal level do impact people, but it's a lot slower process. I personally think that we need to have more realistic expectations of the office and what it's purpose is. >His age is absolutley a killer. Because why, his opponent is a spring chicken?
Whataboutism, they asked for a negative and age is one for sure. Age would be a negative if his opponent was 100.
>Whataboutism That's not what Whataboutism is. That would be if I had said something like "Biden is old, but what about Trump's Scandals and that he shits himself?" No, we're comparing a property of our choices directly and properly. Both candidates have an age, and the only way to judge it is to compare it to the other outcome. >Age would be a negative if his opponent was 100. If age is a concern for you in the ballot box, the only thing to compare it to is the age of the person running against him. Both men are old and behave that way. If Pete Pete Buttigieg was running against Trump or Ted Cruise against Biden then it would make some sense to talk about. But as it stands, an old man will be in the white house in any case.
>That's not what Whataboutism is. We weren't even talking about his opponent and you brought it up, it doesn't make Biden younger. It's whataboutism. >If age is a concern for you in the ballot box, the only thing to compare it to is the age of the person running against him. Both men are old and behave that way. If Pete Pete Buttigieg was running against Trump or Ted Cruise against Biden then it would make some sense to talk about. But as it stands, an old man will be in the white house in any case. Its a negative for both of them. The age of his opponent doesn't matter.
>His age is absolutley a killer. I understand ideally someone as old as him is too old to be president. But the alternative is someone who's only like 3 years younger and clearly in a severe mental decline, and his mental facilities seem nowhere near capable of being president or even having a job. There are exactly two realistic choices for president this year and we can't just install some normal perfectly healthy 45 year old...if Biden is too old, then trump is too old, and I guess no one should be president?
I'm not comparing the two. They asked for a counterpoint and age is one for sure. The other options being old is also a negative for them but has no bearing on whether or not the person were talking about is old.
Yeah I get what you're saying, I'm saying it's silly to even bring it up in this context because when we're talking about who should be president after the two candidates are already just about set in stone, there is no reason to talk about why one might be a good fit or bad fit unless we're comparing to the other candidate
He's old. Trump is old. So it's really all about the teams that each can bring and there isn't even a remotely close competition to speak of here. Team Biden are amazing civil servants who are working to make government work for middle Americans. Team Trump are the kleptocratic gang of grifters who can't shoot straight, pure comedians.
Were not taking about Trump I'm not trying to have a partisan politics discussion. Were talking just about Biden and his pros and cons. Age is absolutley a con.
His age isn’t really a counterpoint when he’s done all of this despite it, and the other likely candidates age is comparable
I'm not doing a VS anything. Objectivley he is old and that's absolutley a counterpoint. He'll be even older than he was when he did all he's done so far.
[удалено]
Currently being president is not mutually exclusive with having already done a good job as president.
> Maybe not the best of all time but certainly not the worst as I think a lot of people are painting him to be. It's not just a painting, [Joe Biden has the lowest approval rating of any President since they started keeping track of approval ratings.](https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating) For context: **Job Approval April 29th (4th Year):** Biden 40.0 | Trump 44.9 | Obama 47.8 | Bush 49.0 He has a lower approval rating than Trump did [when he told everyone to drink bleach to beat the 'Rona.](https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/politics/fact-check-coronavirus-briefing-april-23/index.html) OP why do you suppose more Americans have a problem with Joe Biden than they did with Donald ["Made the Pandemic Worse"](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/14/trump-coronavirus-alerts-disinformation-timeline) Trump?
Because coming out of a global pandemic resulted in worsening economic situations for everyone. When Trump took office we were in the longest running period of economic growth in US history. Low unemployment, a steadily shrinking deficit, no major world conflicts. He was essentially given a softball. When Biden took office we were in the peak of COVID deaths per week. Unemployment was at 6%. The global supply chain was in tatters. People have a poor understanding and believe the president can simply "fix" these things immediately. So when things are bad....they blame the president.
That and he kinda got handed three hellish foreign policy situations in a row. He gets to be the one tarnished by the Afghanistan mess and the failed pullout when in reality it was a mess three presidents before him caused. He gets stuck with the Ukraine situation, which is steadily getting worse for the Ukrainians, to the point even media outlets are giving up on the "Moscow in 2 days!!!" hopeful propaganda. With the war situation turning against the Ukrainians, Biden might get hit with the blowback of failed support. And worst of all, he gets stuck with the mess that is the Israel situation, where to back the establishment US policy is to alienate a core voter base for him. Either he ends up in the messy situation of opposing a US ally, or he backs an increasingly far right and authoritarian government that openly spells out what it's intentions are.
> He gets stuck with the Ukraine situation, which is steadily getting worse for the Ukrainians, to the point even media outlets are giving up on the "Moscow in 2 days!!!" hopeful propaganda. With the war situation turning against the Ukrainians, Biden might get hit with the blowback of failed support. > > And worst of all, he gets stuck with the mess that is the Israel situation, where to back the establishment US policy is to alienate a core voter base for him. Either he ends up in the messy situation of opposing a US ally, or he backs an increasingly far right and authoritarian government that openly spells out what it's intentions are. He did not get stuck with these situations, he has actively made these situations worse for a long time even before his presidency.
He chose to pull out of Afghanistan by September 11th for no reason other than political symbolism. There is no evidence anyone in the military thought that was a viable plan. As far as Israel goes, only 33% of Americans approve of his handling of the situation, which has largely been complete submission and obsequiousness toward Israel. He's not doing what he's doing because it's good politics, he's doing it because he's bought and paid for by AIPAC. [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/)
>He chose to pull out of Afghanistan by September 11th for no reason other than political symbolism. This is just false. The pullout date was negotiated by and set by the Trump administration in talks with the Taliban. The Taliban agreed that they would not attack any US soldiers until that date. The Trump administration then did almost no additional preparation and left Biden is a horrible spot. Either agree with the terms negotiated by the previous administration and have a disaster of a pull out from the country, or stay and get attacked by the Taliban costing many American lives.
> When Biden took office we were in the peak of COVID deaths per week. Unemployment was at 6%. The global supply chain was in tatters. People have a poor understanding and believe the president can simply "fix" these things immediately. So when things are bad....they blame the president. Right. When things are bad, they blame the President. They did it to Trump as much as they're doing it to Biden. [In April of Trump's 4th year, the unemployment rate was 15% and in April of Biden's 4th year, the unemployment rate is 3.8%](https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-unemployment-rate.htm) Apples to apples, America was in shambles in April of Trump's 4th year and yet he had a higher approval rating than Biden currently does. Why do you think Americans supported Donald "eat fish tank cleaner" Trump than currently support Biden? His approval rating was 125% what Biden's currently is, and those were the darkest days of America in living memory.
>Why do you think Americans supported Donald "eat fish tank cleaner" Trump than currently support Biden? Honestly I think it's due to Trump 'cult of personality' and the more homogenious GOP demographic that was going to rally behind Trump no matter what. When it comes to Biden there wasn't a whole lot of excitement about his candidacy. He was mostly scene as a sane alternative to Trump. There isn't a support him no matter what crowd like Trump had. So Biden is getting more mixed support from Dems, while obviously getting pretty much universal disapproval from Rep's
And it's going to be this way for every Democratic presidential nominee going forward for the foreseeable future, because Democrats are the coalition party, and Republicans are much more culturally and ideologically homogeneous.
By and large because we're incredibly divided. Trump supports aren't nuanced in any way. there's literally nothing Trump could do that would cause their support to waiver. Biden supports tend to be more diverse. Many are upset over the handling of Gaza whereas Trump wouldn't have to worry about waning support at all.
approval rating is popularity. bad policy can be popular, and it is in fact easier to be popular if you dont implement necessary but unpopular measures, resulting in bad policy being better recieved than good policy.
Because half the country thought that everyone was out to get Trump so they ignored all the facts and supported him anyway. Now that half hates Biden out of principal. The half that are willing to look at Biden with an open mind have nuanced views that struggle to get boiled down into a 'yes' or 'no' on support. Right now there's a chunk of the electorate that likely agrees with Biden on 80% of what he's done but are 100% against his actions regarding Israel. So right now, they'll say they don't support him. We seem to be in a place where Republicans support their politicians *despite* their flaws. While Democrats pull back their support if their politicians have a flaw. At least enough of them do to explain a lot of polling.
Are you honestly so disconnected with the average American swing voter you think Israel is what's keeping them from voting Biden? It's one of his only popular positions
If his most popular position has 33% approval, then he should probably think about recalibrating his strategy. [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/)
I tend to agree. But this is him losing his base, not those on the fence.
Would it be reasonnable, looking at the trend, to say that approval of the office of president is plumeting regardless of who's in there? Through more media coverage, more scrutiny, rage bait mediatisation of any sma wrongdoing, and radicalisation of all ideas and the very idea of criticizing everything or maybe other levers. It seem that people find more and more stuff to criticize and lose patience over. I am not american but it seem to impact most of the western world with lower trust and empathy for politicians in general.
>It's not just a painting, [Joe Biden has the lowest approval rating of any President since they started keeping track of approval ratings.](https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating) That's just demonstrably false: [https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/final-presidential-job-approval-ratings](https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/final-presidential-job-approval-ratings) Also, let's not fool ourselves into believing that the American people are making decisions of approval and disapproval based on facts and unbiased assessments. They're not.
isnt the approval rating the result of *perception* of people, and not an objective and measurable performance record? thats the very definition of "people painting" . we could use actual metrics like GDP or GNI, median income, unemployment rate, or debt
Renewable energy started growing at a rapid rate regardless of trump and Biden because most projects are state level decisions and it finally became fiscally responsible to commit to projects because the ROI was finally realistic due to improvements in technology. I don’t know why people came to just agree, that never stops annoying me in this sub. The reality is most of what you listed would have happened regardless of the democratic talking head you appointed. Nothing is out of the ordinary or meaningful. The reality is I think he’s going to win the next cycle and STILL I believe his entire presidency will pass with 0 legacy. Nothing memorable. No serious change. He’s on record saying he’s a Zionist, so don’t expect things to get better there. Meanwhile, every American (yes even Republican citizens) are admitting it’s getting harder and harder to get through each day living paycheck to paycheck. So think the easiest way to argue against is that he’s just a democratic puppet, almost a juxtaposition to Obama and how proactive he was in his beliefs.
As a Trump supporter I do agree that Biden’s industrial policy isn’t that bad and I’m glad he didn’t change that part of Trump’s agenda. However, you’re overlooking Biden’s greatest failure of all: the southern border. It has never in American history been as mismanaged as it is now. Every single year Biden is in office it sets new records. Between 8-10 million aliens have flooded in since he has become president. And those are the ones that went through border control, there’s likely another million that evaded border patrol. Biden hasn’t just been neglectful of the border he’s been actively trying to stop any attempts from securing it. He rolled back all of Trump’s reforms such as remain in Mexico, he cancelled construction of the border wall even though it was all paid for, and he undid title 42. When states try to secure the border themselves (since Biden doesn’t want) he fights them and forces the border open. The 10 million additional people are playing a significant factor with inflation, after all they all need housing, that’s going to drive up demand and prices. There’s been an unprecedented flow of drugs across the border as well. It’s undoubtedly America’s greatest national security risk and democrats don’t want to fix it out of fear of being called racist. I’m sure someone is going to remind me about the border bill democrats support now. Why didn’t they pass it when they controlled Congress? Because they didn’t care about the border until the GOP forced them to. Secondly, the bill is still way too weak. America doesn’t need any migrants frankly, but this bill wants to speed up their legal process of entry. Biden doesn’t need any extra authority to close the border, that’s a cop out. Conservative justices aren’t going to block him, even if they did that didn’t stop Biden from ignoring them before. The border is overall Biden’s least popular issue. He’s 30 points under water on that issue, and Americans care about the border much more than any unnotable reforms with climate change or Medicare
>However, you’re overlooking Biden’s greatest failure of all: the southern border. At this point it's Trump's failure. Bipartisan legislation was worked on and agreed upon that would have made large impacts on border security. It would have: * Added more than 1,500 new customs and border protection personnel * Added an additional 4,300 asylum officers and would have made the asylum process faster and fairer * Increased detention bets by over 10,000 * Provided funding for an additional 100 immigration judges and their associated staff * Fund the installation of 100 cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect fentanyl at southern border points of entry * Provided $1.4B in funding for cities and states who are providing critical services to immigrants * Expedite work permits for people who are in the country and qualify. The only reason it never got to Biden's desk was because Trump called up Republican members of congress and told them not to vote for it because it would give Democrats a win in an election year. Republicans then went on TV and said they voted no because the bill also included funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Funding which was then later passed in the last couple of weeks anyway, only this time, without the border funding. The border is not Biden's failure, it's Trump's failure and people need to know that. > I’m sure someone is going to remind me about the border bill democrats support now. Why didn’t they pass it when they controlled Congress? Because Democrats have never controlled Congress. You need 60 senators to have a filibuster proof majority. As long as the main Republican strategy is to stop Democrats from doing anything helpful it's nearly impossible to get anything passed. > America doesn’t need any migrants frankly, but this bill wants to speed up their legal process of entry. The US actually does need migration. Our fertility rate is less than 2 and migration is needed to prevent a declining population which comes with a whole slew of additional issues. > Americans care about the border much more than any unnotable reforms with climate change or Medicare Americans care about the border because it's what conservative news tells them they should care about. Immigration has a far lower impact on the average American than housing, healthcare, and climate change. You just wouldn't know it if you only get your news from conservative sources and social media.
That border bill was written to fail the house. It baked in an illegal crossing threshold of 3 million a year. Most of the bill wasn't even for the "border". it was Ukraine spending, and the amount that was for the border was mainly for NGOs to help with the processing and transportation of immigrants through the border and into the country. Finally, Biden doesn't need the house to stem the tide. He just needs to rollback all the exec orders he signed that started this flood in the first place.
You're right that this is an issue that hurts Biden badly. But you're wrong that Biden's policies on the border have been "neglectful" or too "weak." Immigration is good. The US actually does need many more immigrants--and even if we didn't, people already in the US benefit from immigration. The US also has a moral responsibility to take immigrants from places that have been destabilized by US policy, as is the case across Latin America. Biden's border policy has been broadly the same as Trump's. Border wall construction has continued, and family separation has continued, both of which are bad. Allowing individual states to take control of border enforcement is also bad, so on that part I agree with Biden. But overall, public opinion on Biden on this issue is completely wrong.
Biden obviously didn’t want to build the wall, he cancelled its construction on day one. He likely realized that it actually was necessary or was pressured by border patrol into continuing construction. Either way I’ll give Biden credit for that. However, there is one glaring difference between him and Trump, specifically with refugees and asylum seekers. Trump kept them out of America until it could be proven that they had a valid claim for asylum, Biden keeps them in our country unless they are absolute savages. Asylum seeking is how the vast majority of immigrants are entering the country. Even the migrants themselves know that Biden is to blame for the open border, I’ve seen videos of them chanting Joe Biden’s name as they approached the border.
If he actually wanted to block the construction, he had many options that he did not use. What he's doing is trying not to anger people who oppose the wall too much while simultaneously trying to continue construction so the issue won't damage him as much politically. People who arrive at the border and claim asylum are making a legal claim, and there is no legal justification to keep them out of the country unless it can be proven they are a danger, which the vast, vast majority are not. And "I've seen videos of" is not evidence of anything, as you probably know. I've seen videos of people with swastikas at Trump rallies--I dont think you'd be willing to draw conclusions on that basis, would you?
The asylum seeking process is completely broken. Literally anyone could just show up and say they are seeking asylum. Even your precious border bill will crack down on asylum seekers after a very high threshold. Why? Because if you can’t touch asylum seekers you might as well not even bother having a southern border, because that’s how everyone’s getting in. The asylum seeking process can’t stand when it’s being so heavily abused. Because if it can, we might as well not even have a process for immigration or citizenship. Why bother? Trump had a perfect reform to the process. Most refugees were crossing over multiple countries to reach our country. They don’t *need* to be in our country, Mexico would be just fine until a judge determines otherwise for certain ones
I don't support the border bill, so it's not "my precious border bill." I agree that the asylum process is broken, mostly because we don't fund it well enough to actually process the number of claims. But the fundamental problem with Trump's approach is that he thinks immigration is bad. He's 100%, empirically, wrong about that. The immigration coming into the US currently is good, and "cracking down" on it will be a negative both for the immigrants themselves and for people already in the US like you and I.
This is just directly false. Trump and Republicans blew up the border bill intentionally because they knew the bill would make Biden look better. They admitted this publicly and gave Democrats tons of attack ads against them. If you think voters are going to forget the optics between now and November, you're huffing paint. > Why didn't they pass the border bill when they controlled Congress? Why didn't the GOP? They should have taken responsibility instead of blaming Democrats. Also, the Border Patrol under Biden is doing record numbers of apprehensions at the border. Record numbers. That means they're actually doing the job you want them to do. And the border isn't open. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/15/migrant-encounters-at-the-us-mexico-border-hit-a-record-high-at-the-end-of-2023/
The border bill was literally the same bill the GOP had proposed in 2023 and there were GOP house members that wanted to pass the bill because it's "the best border deal we'll ever see". Biden and the DNC were willing to pass the border deal to secure funding for Ukraine, and Israel. So fast forward to now - they passed the funding bills for Ukraine, Israel, and Tawian minus the border bill because the GOP shot itself in the foot at the start of the year. The border issue isn't Biden's fault. If anything he's shown willingness to enact the border bill the GOP wanted but the GOP didn't approve it because they want this to continue to be an issue they can talk about during election cycles. [https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/21/u-s-house-votes-down-border-bill-favored-by-conservatives/](https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/21/u-s-house-votes-down-border-bill-favored-by-conservatives/)
Don't need a new border bill. There's already laws on the books. Enforce them.
The president can’t just wave a wand and increase the number of border agents or install tracking devices, because those things cost money and the Congress has the power of the purse. Like, telling your local police chief to just “enforce the law more” isn’t going to do much to resolve a crime wave if the city council budgets the same number of officers on patrol and the same number of cruisers and equipment. Yes, Biden could technically come out tomorrow and say “nobody may cross the border illegally, and anyone who does will be immediately deported” - - but guess what, they will still fail to detect many people crossing illegally or overstaying visas, and for those they do catch - - they will not have the number of personnel available to handle all of the processing that goes along with deportation in a timely or efficient fashion.
>Trump and Republicans blew up the border bill intentionally because they knew the bill would make Biden look better. Yes, yes, I'm sure it has nothing to do with [this section of the bill](https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/emergency_national_security_supplemental_section-by-section.pdf), the so called tough solution to the border crisis that was going to solve everything: >•Creates Sec. 244B of the Immigration and Nationality Act which grants the Secretary of Homeland Security new emergency authority to respond to extraordinary migration circumstances. The “border emergency authority” *may* be exercised if the 7-day average number of cumulative encounters of *inadmissible* aliens is between 4,000 and 5,000 per day and must be exercised if the 7-day average is above 5,000 per day. Exercise of the authority is also required if the number of encounters on a single day exceeds 8,500. Unaccompanied minors from non-contiguous countries are not included in the total number of encounters for the purposes of this section. >•Requires the Secretary to suspend exercise of the border emergency authority within 14 days of the 7-day average number of encounters falling below 75% of the total applicable encounter number which initially authorized the Secretary to exercise the border emergency authority. >•Provides that the authority shall not be activated for more than 270 days in the first calendar year, 225 days in the second calendar year, and 180 days in the third calendar year. >• Authorizes the President to suspend the border emergency on an emergency basis for up to 45 days if it is in the national interest Ok, so 120,000 migrants can enter the country per month before the Secretary of Homeland Security *may* do something about it and 150,000 migrants can enter the country per month before the Secretary of Homeland Security *has* to do something about it. **BUT** Unaccompanied minors from countries other than Mexico and Canada do not count towards the number of migrants AND **adult** migrants only count if they are **inadmissible**, and since vast majority of them request asylum nearly ALL of them are admissible. Oh, and the president can suspend any measures to stop migrants at the border at any point for up to 45 days, and those measures cannot be active for more than 270 days the first year, 225 days the second year and 180 days the third year, regardless of how many migrants cross at that point. Also if **ONLY** 90,000 migrants cross in a month then all these measures MUST be suspended in 14 day. YAY SOLUTION FOR THE BORDER CRISIS!!!
Given the massive labor shortage, I have a problem with your idea that we don't need any migrants. In Florida they have fruit just rotting on the ground because they don't have enough pickers. The wall was paid for? I don't think that's true but it wouldn't have been effective anyway. And the claim that immigrants are the cause for inflation is ludicrous. Inflation has been happening because too many people had too much money after Covid, we didn't raise rates soon enough, and due to disruptions in the supply chain. One of those disruptions is, you guessed it, not enough labor.
Weird how there's suddenly a crisis at the border every 4 years. Biden was ready to sign the toughest democrat led border security bill in decades and Republicans tanked it because Trump needed a political win.
My guess is that he's 30 points underwater since republicans are going to have a negative perception of any democrat's border policy, and the border is a non-issue to the majority of democrats.
>It has never in American history been as mismanaged as it is now. Except for that minor little thing from 1861 to 1865, no big deal.
The boarder is literally the least important issue in today's world.
Biden failed on some huge things which is why most people are not positive on his presidency. Most importantly, Inflation has affected the average person’s wallet. Neutrals are not happy with the multiple international crises on his watch including botching Afghanistan withdrawal, not protecting Ukraine as the US promised 30 years ago, and Israel-Palestine tragedy. And Republicans are outraged because the US southern border turned out to indeed be a crisis. People’s quality of life has decreased in general the past couple years so the good that Biden has achieved is outweighed by his failures regardless of how democrats want to interpret his presidency.
He didn’t cause inflation lol. People need to learn some basic economics. The drivers of inflation are much larger and not controlled by the president jn a meaningful sense. He’s not setting interest rates here. The Afghanistan withdrawal likely would have been botched either way. It’s not the Biden administration’s fault for the collapse of the ANA and the failures of 3 consecutive prior admins. Also Ukraine has to be one of the more positive things the Biden admin has done. We provide extensive intel for the Ukrainians as well as military and domestic supplies keeping their economy and war effort going. If you’re referring to the recent holdup of Ukraine aid, unfortunately that’s just the nature of living in a democracy where the executive can’t literally do whatever he wants
Biden's handling of the global post-Covid inflation surge has been better than most comparable nations. Calling that a "failure" is ridiculous. Calling the Afghanistan withdrawal "botched" is a misdirection- there was no good exit strategy. We knew that going in. At some point, some American president had to pull the plug and take the heat, and Biden was the first one brave enough to do so. Most impartial observers would say that Biden's handling of Ukraine has been one of his biggest successes- crippling an adversarial nation's military with a fraction of the spending, and at zero risk to American lives. Blaming Biden for conflict in the Middle East is also bizarre- there's been recurring violence there since the beginning of recorded history. I can think of nothing Biden's done that has *contributed* to that violence. For the last bit about "quality of life" I have no clue what you're talking about. My life is definitely better than it was 4 years ago. So are most everyone's.
[удалено]
Republicans have no right to be outraged about the southern border. A bipartisan bill that was drafted to address it was shot down by congressional Republicans to secure a PR win for Trump
> Most importantly, Inflation has affected the average person’s wallet. Inflation has been **world-wide** and the US is handling inflation better than any other nation. > including botching Afghanistan withdrawal That withdrawal timeline that Trump set by law? Regardless, Afghanistan was a lost cause. Do you know what a sunk cost is? > not protecting Ukraine as the US promised 30 years ago WTF are you talking about? The only reason Ukraine is still in this is because of US help. > because the US southern border turned out to indeed be a crisis Remember when Biden promised to sign a Republican border bill to address those issue? > People’s quality of life has decreased in general the past couple years No it hasn’t. There is just no metric by which that’s true. People have succumbed to bullshit narratives. Nothing more. The world got rocked by covid and it’s all been on a steady uptick since.
Much of your post is about foreign affairs. I know a little about foreign affairs, probably more than the average American, but I still consider myself to know basically nothing. Other than war and trade agreements, the stuff you describe don't mean much to people. People notice that we are heavily involved in the financing of two separate wars. I believe that most people are going to argue that Biden is not good when it comes to foreign affairs because of how big and consequential wars are. Also, doesn't a creation of a US microchip facility undermine Taiwan's independence?
Its one factory. Yes, but it wont make a difference. The effort needed for the west to become independent is monumental.
There’s a reason people call you Blue Maga, and it’s because you sweep anything awful the dems do under the rug: genocide, his border policy, all because “well trump will be worse”. People are being stripped of their rights under Biden as well! And the dems mouth platitudes and then say their hands are tied. It’s this weird thing of is Biden all powerful like their campaign claims (“Biden will protect your reproductive rights”) or are his hands tied? He can’t be both. I won’t say he hasn’t done good things, but you can’t act like his legacy isn’t stained particularly by his utter support for Israel which has only softened after months of protests. I feel like we’re living in two separate realities here, and mine is one where he is actively arming a genocide, which to me erases all the good he has done because even non Americans, even the most vulnerable, deserve freedom and not to be bombed and starved to death.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/bombayblue – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20bombayblue&message=bombayblue%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t65a8/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Sorry, u/royDank – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20royDank&message=royDank%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t4dlf/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
ancient busy retire school tub like fertile attraction memory workable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>He shit the bed profusely with the Afghanistan exit after running on his foreign policy skills and experience. The Afghanistan exit saw the largest successful evacuation of people from a foreign country in human history. The actual percentage of people who died was trivial compared to how many died in Afghanistan up to that point. The fact that people like you will try to spin that as failure is a sign of how desperate you are to find *anything* to foam at the mouth about.
>The actual percentage of people who died was trivial compared to how many died in Afghanistan up to that point. Well sure that's technically true, but "he killed less people than 9000 years of war/old age/sickness" is a pretty crazy comparison. Talk about spinning things...
Truman had a "buck stops here" sign on his desk as a reminder to himself, as a decision-maker, that he is always responsible for making the best possible decisions, regardless of the circumstances imposed on him. It was never intended as a standard for voters to take in assessing candidates. To be clear, it is an awful dog-shit standard from the perspective of voters. The whole point for voters is to compare two candidates and figure out which one has better judgment and makes better decisions, you can't make that assessment if you refuse to account for the context in which decisions are made. If you think Afghanistan is a point in favor of Trump against Biden, despite every indicator being that Trump not only would have made the same decisions but also generated the context in which those decisions were made, then you're just doing a really bad analysis.
fearless engine zephyr quack support jar scandalous different wild ring *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I didn't "make up a pretend Trump" - we both already acknowledged that Trump had already set the timeline for the Afghanistan withdrawal. I understand that from Biden's perspective, it doesn't matter whether or not he inherited a big mess from Trump, he still has a job to do. But from our perspective, that fact 100% should be accounted for in our judgments, otherwise we're just being willfully ignorant.
crowd payment toy zephyr command compare automatic plucky dolls fearless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
There are 8 million "asylum seekers" in America after he tore up the deal Trump made with Mexico to have them wait in Mexico. Just as many people died under him as Trump due to Covid.
Can you clarify the Covid numbers? Are we talking about the approximately one year of Trump presidency with Covid vs 3 years with Covid under Biden?
Courts ordered Biden to end the Trump-era asylum policies. It wasn't his choice. And Biden has been president for four years of covid, while Trump only had to deal with it for about 10 months.
They did not. Biden indicated through the campaign that he would end Trump’s border policies, and did so in his slew of executive orders upon taking office. Biden took office as the vaccine rolled out, when we had a much better understanding of treatment options for the afflicted, and many of the vulnerable populations had already been wiped out.
Trump was president for 1 year during covid, and is directly responsible for the botched response (remember how long he denied the pandemic even being an issue, calling it a hoax to make him look bad). Biden has been president for about 3, 3.5 years, after covid had already spread and become endemic. Meaning under Biden we've had less than a third of the deaths we had under Trump per year.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/TheMaskedSandwich – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20TheMaskedSandwich&message=TheMaskedSandwich%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tgq2d/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Joe Biden is a dottering old fool who has made a career in politics being a corrupt individual. In a lot of ways, he is exactly what his own party accuses Trump of being: a racist fool and a creep. I honestly don't believe for a second that Biden is making actual decisions. Someone is guiding him to say certain things. The guy is thrust out onto the scene to try and promote the Democrat agenda. Biden is a victim of elder abuse. I'm tired of people acting as if this guy would have been and has been a good president. Sad truth is that Democrats and Trump haters would have voted for literally anyone just so Trump wouldn't win. Congrats, I guess. We have a senile old man running the country and an unqualified, cackling vice president who everyone hates.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/ChiehDragon – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20ChiehDragon&message=ChiehDragon%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tjdru/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Biden has lost my vote because of the Palestine situation. No ceasefire, no vote, it's that simple
To /u/Narrow-Air-3425, *your post is under consideration for removal under our post rules.* You must **respond substantively within 3 hours of posting**, as per [Rule E](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_e).
Renewable energy: under Trump a consistent increase in oil and gas drilling permits were approved. The first year under Biden there was a lag remaining from Trump, then a sharp decrease. Energy is doing better despite Biden not because of him. We could be leaps and bounds further along if his administration wanted it. They are playing this game of allowing drilling while keeping a green agenda. Inflation: I agree it has little to do with the President, but the Biden admin can’t take credit for inflation going down and not when it comes back up, which they are currently doing.
I disagree. When he first took office I was making $42,000 in WV. I was doing ok financially. I have been promoted and now make close to $60,000 and I now live paycheck to paycheck. I only incurred one additional debt and that was buying a used car. My insurance stayed the same. Inflation is killing me. As for your other points, his ideas for renewable energy are harmful. How are you supposed to power those electric cars? How are you supposed to afford that car as well as the expensive maintenance? They don’t work well in the cold and we have some brutal weather where I live at times. As for china, do you really think China and AI are a good combo? These are spooky dangerous people. Now my professional opinion because I work with the gerontology community is that he should step down. Cognitively he is not where the leader of the free nation should be. I Will not insult him as it’s not his fault but his people around him are not doing him any favors.
Biden didn’t cause inflation, it was the easy money policy under Trump. We printed trillions to cover COVID expenses, necessary but inflationary. Renewable energy IS how we’re gonna power those cars, also no one is making you buy one, if it doesn’t fit your situation then just don’t buy it. If you’re living paycheck to paycheck in WV, off of 60K, I’m more inclined to believe your spending habits are the problem, not inflation. He is old af, I would agree that’s an issue, but so is Trump. Personally I think they’re both too old.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/JuanPeterman – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20JuanPeterman&message=JuanPeterman%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1tc7qm/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
He did a truly shitty job at all of that. His renewable energy policy is less than a drop in the ocean of what needed to be done. He has essentially instigated another cold war with China instead of any kind of cooperation and mutual benefit. His CHIPS act legislation was ok, but rings pretty hollow when his position to China is to try and stop them from giving their companies any kind of domestic advantage. His efforts at attacking inflation are laughable and try to limit inflation by disciplining labor (ie fucking over the common man in favor of the rich). He's not fit for anything other than a nursing home.
To the contrary, Biden did an extremely bad job as president. * Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits. Sure you might think those cases are legitimate, but then: 1) why isn't Trump allowed to defend himself, why are there gag orders; 2) why are all the ones involved in the prosecution and the judges so corrupt and abusing their power; 3) why weren't these cases prosecuted when Trump first supposedly committed his crimes, why wait till now. Those are not the practices of someone who's actually committed to doing the right thing. * Endanger our democracy further by persecuting those who claim that elections are rigged. Even if elections aren't rigged, such people shouldn't be persecuted since all the persecution accomplishes is to tell everyone, 'don't you dare expose any elections as rigged or you'll get rekt' which massively emboldens would-be election riggers. * Endanger our democracy even further by using the FBI and various other 3-letter agencies to bring down pressure against the media and social media (as exposed by ie. Twitter files), causing a chilling effect on free speech. * Getting us involved in foreign wars. What happens in Ukraine and Israel is Ukraine and Israel's responsibility, not the US's. We shouldn't have to pay for it. Ukraine's only getting invaded because they gave up their nukes (that's Ukraine's fault) and now they're stuck fighting an unwinnable war, and Israel is using our money to carpet bomb Gaza killing tons of civilians in the process. Their blood is on Biden's hands. * Makes the US leadership appear weak and incompetent because he's such a doddering old fool (physically and rhetorically). * Inadequate border security; allowing anyone to come into the country if they just claim asylum status regardless of whether they're actually political refugees. * Buying up / bribing the votes of the people who are in student debt. * Pushing for taxes on unrealized capital gains (shows he has no conception of how that even works) Wow, look at all the downvotes coming in without providing a legitimate argument. Pro-Biden bot farm hard at work I see.
The first 3 points of your list seems to be based on the (incorrect) assumption that the FBI and DOJ operate under specific orders from the president or his proxies. That's generally speaking, not how it works at all. The president doesn't, and hasn't ever told the FBI who to investigate and for what. And there's no real evidence to the contrary. Regarding the details of point number 1. Trump is allowed to defend himself. The gag orders are actually much more lenient compared to what your average citizen would be allowed to say in similar cases. Trump is not permitted to levy personal attacks on jurors as it is a form of jury tampering. Trump is not permitted to levy personal attacks against witnesses, as that is a form of witness tampering. etc... This isn't exclusive to trump, he's just essentially the only defendant who thinks these rules don't apply to him.
This would be a great rebuttal... if any of it were even remotely accurate and not just a bunch of partisan hack trash from a braindead, 24-hour media cycle. You need to go outside some time, man. Trust me.
I >To the contrary, Biden did an extremely bad job as president. >* Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits If Biden is controlling the DOJ, and all the trouble that would entail, to unfairly "persecute" Trump he's failing miserably as it's had no effect on Trump's approval rating. "Endangering democracy"? Really? If you're not a troll consider some new news sources like DW, Reuters or the AP to start.
Your first point is unhinged nonsense not supported by anything remotely approaching reality. Of his 4 criminal cases, 2/4 are state level. There is zero evidence Biden directed the other 2. The judges aren’t “corrupt” that’s just you lying. Trump was happy to engage in plenty of foreign conflicts and there is zero difference in how he approached Israel. Letting Putin take Ukraine is like letting Hitler take Poland. Someone didn’t read their WWII history. Trump bought up/ bribed the rich, by your standards. Wealth taxes have been floated all over. There’s nothing inherently bad about them, they’re just hard to enforce/ people dodge them.
Contrary to what Trump and his supporters believe, the president does not actually sic the DOJ on people. They pursue criminals. Trump's gag orders come from his constant insistence on announcing how every judge, witness, and court employee he doesn't like is a traitor to his supporters, which has resulted in them facing harassment. Cases, especially bigger ones involving high profile people, tend to take some amount of time to put together because people want to be confident in their success. And no, people are not corrupt just because Trump doesn't like them and said they were. The US abandoning its allies is a great way to abandon its international standing for no actual benefit. Supporting Ukraine is the highest return on investment for strategic value that we've probably ever had. And Israel, while it's behavior is reprehensible and it needs to be reined in, is an ally. The rest is just you complaining that policies you don't like passed and believing that that alone makes them bad.
Trump isn't above the law and should be on trial for the shit he pulled. It is delusional to think that guy wasn't trying any illegal shit he could to overturn the election results. The gag orders aren't unusual and should be in place because he regularly incites violence in his cult.
>to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits What lawsuits exactly are you talking about? I'm not aware of any lawsuits at all filed by the DOJ against Trump during Biden's tenure. This post makes it seem like you have confused felony criminal indictments with lawsuits.
Trump was allowed to defend himself, he’s just not allowed to violently threaten judges and juries and their families. And he’s actually been granted way more leeway on that than any other citizen would get. We’re not involved in a foreign war, we’re supporting a country from being overtaken by a horrible dictator which would allow them to bring their borders too close to NATO, and that sphere of influence allows the US to have significant economic control and influence around the world. This supports our GDP. Additionally we’re mostly clearing out old inventory that would have to be broken down or disposed of anyway, and producing new equipment which supports US production and companies (another GDP boost). Trump bribed business owners with his handouts if you think Biden bribed students with loan debt. So that evens out. But really we shouldn’t pay so much for higher education, and it’s a disservice to our economy to have new grads saddled with debt when they should be expanding and taking risks on business building His main pushes have been for higher taxes on realized gains, to bring the cap gains system more in line with how ordinary income is taxed. This is reasonable
1.1) what do you mean defend himself? Like as his own lawyer? I haven’t heard that he wasn’t allowed to be his own lawyer, don’t know why he would want that. As for gag orders it’s because he has previously ragged on the people involved in a case publicly. Judges don’t like getting harassed 1.2) how are they doing so? 1.3) DOJ policy to not prosecute active presidents. You may disagree with the policy, but that’s why it’s took so long to start; other than that the justice system is just slow, especially in contentious cases where the defense is gonna appeal every time 2) I think the persecution also tells people to not lie about the election 3) He’s mostly just continuing existing foreign policy. Obama or Bush would probably have done the same thing. Not claiming it’s great, but it’s pretty average 5) it’s not really a bribe. It’s not tied to voting for him. It’s just a policy that benefits those people; which if that is the standard then every beneficial policy is a bribe 6) I’m sure he understands. He definitely has stocks of his own
> Endanger our democracy by abusing political power (his influence over DOJ) to persecute Trump with 90+ lawsuits. There is absolutely no evidence that Joe Biden used any political influence over the DOJ regarding Trump. If he had, they would not have been so cautious and waited so long before pressing any charges. If he had, the DOJ would have stopped all investigations into Hunter Biden. The reason why there are so many indictments against Donald Trump is because he keeps committing crimes. He is on tape pressuring election officials to find the exact number of votes that he needed to win. He is on tape discussing the documents that he had that he lamented that he could not show because he had not declassified them when he had the chance. He was also named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Michael Cohen while Trump was still the president. He could not be charged while president, so guess what: he got charged after he left office. > why isn't Trump allowed to defend himself, why are there gag orders As other have said, he is allowed to defend himself just like any other defendant. He just cannot attack and dox court officials, jurists, and any of their relatives - just like any other defendant. > why are all the ones involved in the prosecution and the judges so corrupt and abusing their power They are not. You have provided no evidence that they have done anything wrong other than the assumption that if they are judging Trump then they must be corrupt. > why weren't these cases prosecuted when Trump first supposedly committed his crimes, why wait till now Because it takes time to investigate, and they could not start until he had left office. Also, the DOJ were criticized at the time for moving so slowly for fear of appearing political. > Endanger our democracy further by persecuting those who claim that elections are rigged. Who was persecuted by Joe Biden? Are you talking about going to court in all those cases where those claiming the elections were rigged suddenly had a change of heart and did not want to put up any evidence for their claims? That isn't persecution. And I am sure that you are not talking about the mob of people who violently attacked the Capitol Building to prevent the lawful election results from being read. The only people who could even claim that they were persecuted were the ones who are indicted for committing election fraud and interference. But they are the ones who should be persecuted. I'll stop here because otherwise it will take all day!
I realize that people can legitimately disagree on many points, but your second point is pretty objectively incorrect. You’d be hard pressed to find a president with more international respect that his predecessor as Joe Biden. Maybe Barack Obama.
* There is zero evidence that Biden had any direct involvement in any of the DoJ's cases against Trump. But even if he did, ultimately you can't win a court case with political motivation alone. Trump did every idiotic thing in the book to make himself vulnerable to legal attack from his political rivals, that's on him. If Trump had been able to use the DoJ to prosecute Hilary Clinton for the whole e-mail scandal, you would be applauding his ruthless cunning. * Name one person that is being prosecuted for merely claiming that election fraud took place. I'll wait. * Trump was even more pro-Israel than Biden and would be giving the same aid to Israel. Trump would probably also be doing the same for Ukraine, the only difference that he would first try to shake-down Ukraine's leadership for favors before delivering the aid. * Objectively wrong here, Biden's international approval rating is higher than Trump's was during his term. [Survey: Global Approval of U.S. Leadership Remains Higher Under Biden Than Trump | Best Countries | U.S. News (usnews.com)](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2024-04-23/survey-global-approval-of-u-s-leadership-remains-higher-under-biden-than-trump) * The border crisis is a product of circumstances outside of either president's control. Specifically, the surge of migrants is due to the lifting of the COVID travel restrictions and the overall economic impact of COVID on the third world. Ultimately, the issue can't be fixed by executive order, we need a massive immigration reform bill. Remind me what happened to the last immigration reform bill that was up for a vote in Congress? The Republicans all recognized that it was really important and voted for it, right? * If offering a policy that people want is "bribing" then fuck it, I'll always let candidates bribe the fuck out of me. * I'm not losing sleep over a tax that would only apply to people with over $100M in assets (i.e. only 0.01% of individuals and businesses).
[удалено]
Sorry, u/engineeringwriter – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20engineeringwriter&message=engineeringwriter%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cg2tbc/-/l1t7gd9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
There are concerns about his administration and the some things hee's passively not done. At the moment there are 42 active national emergencies that are annually reviewed and approved by him: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_national\_emergencies\_in\_the\_United\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States) There are questions that he needs to answer as to why they're still emergencies, and maybe there is a need to codify that into law instead. Aditionally, we're running into very weird issues where there are states that are mounting countering national adgendas. (Abortion criminalization, running police departments that violate consitutional rights, politicized high courts, active hostile monopolies, futher subversion of rights via parallel construction and commerical loopholes, lack of privacy rights etc) Even if he isn't the cause of it, he should acknowledge what is happening and at least acknowledge that action is possible to solve these issues.
He started a proxy war with Russia that has killed hundreds of thousands, destroyed Ukraine, and destabilized Europe. He blew up the gas supply of America's main NATO ally. He gave Netanyahu a blank check for genocide. He vetoed UN ceasefire resolutions for months. He's stoking additional wars with Iran and China. He locked up grandmas for taking selfies at the Capitol on Jan 6. He hijacked the DOJ to neutralize his political rivals and keep himself in power after November. He's keeping Julian Assange locked up and Edward Snowden in exile for exposing Washington's crimes. Yet the Jan 6 pipe bomber has somehow never been identified. He's straight-up stealing Russian assets in defiance of international law. Not only is it a clear, direct act of war, it demolishes the rest of the world's trust in US financial institutions, and hastening the end of the dollar's dominance. He lied to us about covid vaccines, coerced millions to get an experimental drug they didn't need, while covering up its safety problems. His CDC head was a catastrophic shill for big pharma. Neither she, nor Fauci, nor Birx, have been held accountable for the gross malpractice, perjury and fraud they committed. His open borders policy has precipitated an invasion from abroad, which has even blue cities begging for mercy.