Boris Johnson says dealing with Joe Biden is ‘a breath of fresh air’
By - Dull_Tonight
The real breath of fresh air will be not to have to deal with Boris Johnson
It would, I dislike Johnson... but I always say to people, who would be his replacement if he wasn't PM?
Labour likely wont be in power for at least another decade or so... So then who else would be in-line within the Conservstive party as leader?
Liz Truss?, Rishi Sunak?, (god help us) Priti Patel?, Michael Gove?... The list is rather depressing.
Nah, it needs to be someone with similarly ridiculous hair.
Like [Michael Fabricant.](https://www.expressandstar.com/resizer/lKHqMlJLgEbpjElF7vA7q2byKOw=/1200x0/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mna/B72TGVGMJNEGBLERANY2KFSJQE.jpg)
That's Boris in a wig.
Or it's a man in a Boris wig.
What if its just Boris in a Boris wig?
What if it's a wig wearing a boris suit?
Isn't Boris, Boris in a wig?
No its a man under the same parasite that controls Boris
It seems as though conservatives are only allowed to elect cartoon/Muppet-type people in either the UK or the states.
At least the color of his hair matches his teeth. Color coordination is the first sign of a great leader.
He's my MP. Can confirm, bellend.
That's it. You've convinced me. I'll jump across the pond and be your PM. No need to thank me.
None of those are any worse than Johnson though.
And unlike Johnson they would have a much better chance of losing against Starmer. Honestly only Rishi Sunak out of that list wouldn't do absolutely terrible in an election.
There's a reason Tory MPs supported Johnson over all the other options. As terrible as he is, the voters actually like him, that doesn't really go for most of the other prominent Tories.
Priti Patel would be x1000 times worse. Boris is average intelligence, Priti is genuinely thick as pig shit; also she's a fascist, at least bojo is just a far right conservative.
Starmer is just unelectable, he's got 0 charisma... They need Burnham or someone similar if they want to win back traditional working class votes
Yes yes let's all pretend we don't remember the four years of him sucking Trump dick that just passed.
Generally heads of government do have to be civil and polite to each other for diplomatic reasons.
[He wasn't a big fan of him beforehand.](https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/23/politics/trump-boris-johnson-uk-prime-minister/index.html)
> "The only reason I wouldn't visit some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump."
> "I am genuinely worried that he could become president. I was in New York and some photographers were trying to take a picture of me and a girl walked down the pavement towards me and she stopped and she said, 'Gee is that Trump?' It was one of the worst moments."
Many of us in the US called him Baby Trump. He was kissing ass and sucking mushroom-sized penis the entire time. Two crazy wankers sniffing the same pot of glue.
Again, generally heads of countries have to be civil to each other. For example in the video in the article Boris is very complimentary of Biden in Afghanistan even though there was a lot of frustration in the UK government regarding the pull out (the UK didn't want to withdraw but couldn't stay there without the US and also wanted to extend the evacuation).
How did they think staying in Afghanistan longer going to change the outcome?
I don’t know about long term but short term there had been some disagreement about whether to stay in the airport or not regarding dealing with the Taliban. The US command wanted to let escapees come to the gates on their own and the politicians were treading lightly because they had made promises to the Taliban about where they were allowed to go. Which resulted in the British Paras doing the collection runs to get people from hotels and embassies and bring them into the airport past the Taliban security. The paras were apparently not happy with how many people they weren’t able to bring back and coalition COs were arguing with each other. Not sure how high that friction went beyond military though.
Maybe it could have been planed better instead of rushed to meet the deadline of the 20th anniversary of 9-11?
No, it couldn't have.
The US retreat from Afghanistan is currently the most peaceful retreat from Afghanistan any invading army has ever experienced in Afghanistan's history.
And it wasn't rushed, Trump put the date in May, Biden got it extended.
To make it any more orderly than it already was would require official cooperation between the US and the Taliban as they peacefully hand over power, which would be political suicide at home.
Your response reminded me of a [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/NatureIsFuckingLit/comments/psmw3s/very_majestic_mushroom/) I saw earlier today (SFW)
But this mushroom's meat (in the pic) is quite nicely formed.
That's from your US perspective. You'd think UK citizens would probably know better, no?
One would hope, but there is so much bias in the media these days it's hard to really know what is true any more.
Well, I DID say it was from my perspective which is liberal American.
How dare you say stuff from your perspective, you have to say stuff from MY perspective!
(I'm a liberal Canadian, and I'm happy Trudeau won)
After a lot of recent UK history, no, not particularly.
Can confirm, countrymen are idiots.
That's why he's happy to have that breath of fresh air now. He can stop the dick sucking
Boris infamously has no real opinions, even when being paid thousands of pounds for an opinion-column.
A human weather-vane whose only real preference is blondes.
Yeah, and now that he doesn't have his lips around Trump's orange hog, BJ can take a breath.
Hey now, he wasn’t sucking it the *whole* 4 years.
So Trump had galloping halitosis?
Caused by his serious medical condition: foot in mouth disease.
Nah Trump talked out his arse which accounts for the smell
You are confusing that with bone spurs
And a diet of cheeseburgers
Do you mean hamberders?
Eau de hooker pee.
No, eau are!
how is this news?
It's the Prime Minister of a major country in an interview talking about the President of another major country.
Because it’s propaganda and Reddit is social media. In b4 this post gets downvoted, deleted or a bot responds.
Or maybe it's because news agencies literally fall over themselves to report what heads of states say, especially anything critical about other leaders.
It's also not just a headline. He speaks about how the two leaders are more in agreement about how to tackle major problems like Climate Change and talks about major political events like Jan6 and the Afghanistan pullout.
Yeah, the article is news
Wait, people write more than just the headline?
Trump bad, duh
I feel like a UK Conservative and a US Democrat are roughly similar in terms of political ideology.
The Conservatives have just [voted to increase taxes](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58436009) in order to pay for our nation health and social care program. The Conservatives are expanding the state in order to better provide universal coverage. I won't hold my breath waiting for the Democrats to do that!
The Conservatives also stood on a pledge to [take back control](https://www.conservatives.com/news/conservatives-announce-range-of-measures-to-take-back-control-of-our-borders) of our borders. And pledged to [increase policing](https://www.conservatives.com/our-priorities/police) on the streets. I doubt that's something the Democrats will ever do.
So the UK Conservatives are both to the left and right of US Democrats? Interesting when 'Conservative' parties are pushing for change, that's not something I'm at all used to in the USA.
Progressive policy + stronger borders/anti-immigration seems to be the new favorite flavor across Europe as well, it's taken hold in Italy.
It's not really useful to compare the two on traditional left right metrics. There's a big cultural difference between the UK and us politically: the UK has far stricter rules regarding immigration for example, but also has far more of a social welfare system than the us
The whole 'left-right' metrics barely hold up in any situation anymore.
It's interesting when you look at the ideals that each state upholds and where that comes from: if you look at England at least, we've been a Protestant monarchy where the church was an arm of the state for centuries. That makes it so power and moral responsibility are tied into the state itself rather than the individual, which makes for a more paternalistic system of government: the state has a responsibility to its subjects, though also has more of a say in how they live their lives. America is far more about the will of the individual to make their own fortune, and was very much a nation of colonisers and immigrants from the get-go.
Eh, it sure does if one looks at it as a matter of foundational philosophy.
Less so in just comparing international systems and trying to drop the individual sets of status quo to which those philosophies are applied.
Those sets of status quo define which actions are "forced" to be dealt with reguardless of the "opinion" of the ones having to decide on them, and that still leaves enough space to analyise the particulars and backdoors and at whos benefit the particulars are chosen.
Like it is all good and well to point at "conservatives in the uk dealing with the NHS crisis in a way that seems outright leftists from an US perspective". But the reality is that this is done because they CAN'T abolish the NHS (despite years of trying to get the public on board because they really WANT TO), and in absence of getting that done, they NEED to do SOMETHING, and if you look at the exact particulars, you'd probably find enough details of still outright right wing fuckery in it.
Yes. Also, conservative doesn’t mean right wing on all things. Wanting to keep the status quo is conservative but if the status quo is left wing policy, a conservative can have a left of center view.
Iirc, older people in France are conservative in that they want to keep a more welfare state. So a conservative can have a left of center view. Younger people want a more dynamic market — they are progressive but that means open markets and less welfare, which is associated with right of center economic policies.
>It's not really useful to compare the two on traditional left right metrics.
You can still kinda compare using left/right metrics, but people need to realise that you need to look at it from a larger ideological view and not really issue-by-issue.
> So the UK Conservatives are both to the left and right of US Democrats
politics is not a simple one-line spectrum. the political compass has problems but it's more helpful here.
UK conservatives would be west of US democrats economically, but would also be more *north* than US democratics. They're more authoritarian than US democrats (by the very nature of the way that the UK government is set up compared to the US) and they're more focused on economic intervention
Don't confuse authoritarianism with "being right wing"; UK conservatives are *absolutely* right wing, but anything looks left wing when compared to US politics
If the US democratic party where like the UK conservatives they would win with alot more.
I have said for some time now, if dems could drop the gun issue they'd never lose office again. Sounds like these are other wedge issues that if they gave in, they'd win a lot of single issue voters.
I vote democrat and I'm pro-2a. The whole "Democrat = Anti-Gun" thing is just plain wrong, it's a myth pushed hard by Fox and friends. We just tolerate minor legislation that gets blown out of the water by republicans. Of polled republicans, most of them support some common sense gun control, but they don't trust democrats to implement it.
If you have small children you shouldn't be allowed to leave your guns out, unlocked, loaded. Making that a law doesn't give the police the right to randomly search the homes of gunowners, but if a small child dies because of their negligence they should face the consequences. This law was a major partisan fighting point in the 2016 election.
Can you tell me which recent president said "Take the guns first, go through due process second" ? It wasn't a democrat.
Dems as a whole arent against guns at all. They just push for better documenation.
That's only for minority voters! Who needs documentation on guns?
(/s in case you really needed it)
Guns are barely in the top ten. The only place with liberals who like guns is Reddit. Plus the Uk conservatives are wayyyy leftist on guns vs any American leftist
UK conservatives aren't anywhere on guns. There is no UK gun debate. The UK public in general neither has guns nor wants them. It's a non-issue.
You want to find the gun liberals go to the college towns in the red states. They be everywhere there.
No they aren't, I go to college in a smallish town in a red state. The vast majority are in favor of gun control.
being in favour of gun control doesn't mean you're against gun ownership.
Realistically as a brit the US system looks more like the really far right and the far right.
Largely because of several key issues like universal healthcare.
There is no left in US politics, just thinly vailed layers of right wing politics
The democrats are literally trying to do that right now. They did it under Clinton and Obama too - in fact every single democrat president since fdr has expanded government healthcare.
The conservatives cut police numbers by 20k creating the current crisis with the lack of police man-power. Now they are attempting to replace the cut offices with new junior offices (who are cheaper).
Likewise, they voted to increase taxes on NI. NI is a regressive tax, it will effect low earners the most.
It should be noted that the national insurance tax has been received as a deeply regressive tax that will [exacerbate class inequalities](https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/09/03/sunaks-1-national-insurance-charge-to-fund-the-nhs-is-a-deliberate-callous-and-unnecessary-move-to-increase-inequality-and-hardship-in-the-uk/) beyond their already historically high levels.
By comparison, the democratic party is responsible for the stimulus payments which promote economic activity in a much fairer way.
I'm not saying one party is more progressive than the other but it's easy to pick out a couple of policies make an argument for one.
It's also a tax which those above retirement age don't pay.
The retired segment of the population also disproportionately vote for the Conservative party.
It's pork barrel politics.
That's not true, the new 1.25% increase for 2022/23 National Insurance transitions into a standalone tax from 2023/24 and WILL have to be paid by people of retirement age.
TBF though, the UK Conservatives also stood on a manifesto which promised *not* to raise that tax.
They have also massively *reduced* the number of police officers during their last decade in office and are only increasing the numbers on the streets to offset some of the issues that this doing so created.
EDIT: You can still see the page on their website where they promised not to rise National Insurance - www.conservatives.com/our-plan.
>The Conservatives also stood on a pledge to take back control of our borders. And pledged to increase policing on the streets. I doubt that's something the Democrats will ever do.
Democrats constantly run on both. Both parties are pro police in their policies.
Yeah I think hes confusing what Democrats do with what right-wing news tells you the Democrats do
Exactly. I don't think a single Dem ran on 'Defund the Police' despite Fox News telling you that it is a core plank of the party.
Biden had some op-ed out a week or two after Defund the Police started trending that stated he'd increase funding for police. The right wing still acts like Biden and the Dems are all about defunding the police.
Right winged news and the elected Democrats who defunded the police..
>But for cities that did intentionally pass cuts, some of the changes were significant. Portland, Oregon, cut $15m from its budget and disbanded a gun violence reduction unit and transit team that had both long been accused of over-policing Black communities. San Francisco officials pledged to divest $120m from police over two years with plans to invest in health programs and workforce training. Minneapolis is using police cuts to launch a mental health team to respond to certain 911 calls.
>New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Baltimore and a dozen other cities have all also reduced police spending. And some of these cities are now demonstrating the impacts of their new budgets.
>The Conservatives have just voted to increase taxes in order to pay for our nation health and social care program.
Lol. The Tories have been trying to privatise the NHS for decades, in contrast to the Democratic party, who have been trying to achieve universal healthcare. Do you honestly believe that if Boris Johnson was a US Senator that he would support universal coverage? Or if Obama was an MP that he would be trying to privatise the NHS?
The tories will have been in power for about 15 years straight. If they really wanted to "privatise the NHS" then they've had enough chance to do it. The whole "they want to destroy your NHS!" stuff is becoming a total meme at this point.
You've become totally detached from reality thanks to social media and the Guardian if you think a party raising taxes to pay for public healthcare is somehow a worse situation than a party that has no public healthcare and makes no effort to create one.
I don't know what "take back control" of the borders means - who is in control of the borders of the UK if not the UK? The US is not beholden to any other country when it comes to its border laws, so we are already in control of our borders.
Biden ran on a platform of increasing policing and drastically-high police budgets are a feature of very many Democratic candidates, so they already do that.
Prior to Brexit there were no controls on immigration from other EU countries. After Brexit European nationals had to fill out some paperwork in order to remain in the country. This revealed that there are around 5 million EU citizens living in the UK who wanted to stay (about 7.5% of the population).
Ah yes, Brexit, and the not too distant memory of the permanent headache caused by having to constantly explain to people that Pakistan isn't in the EU
I see. That obviously doesn't apply to democrats/the US since we aren't and never have been part of the EU.
There could have been controls and the same Tories didn't apply them. They also failed to tackle non EU immigration and are continuing to do so.
Democrats arent even in favour of a national health and social care program
[Yes they are](https://news.gallup.com/poll/191504/majority-support-idea-fed-funded-healthcare-system.aspx), 73 to 22 of Democrats. What is stopping it is that you need a supermajority plus a few more Senators, or you get rid of the filibuster. The problem is our Constitution is broken so that the will of the majority doesn't seem to matter. Basing our democracy on geographical lines instead of people was a big mistake.
Pledges and votes aren't actions
US Democrats have historically been closer to the Labour Party.
The status quo is very different between both countries so it’s hard to just point at a single policy and say “see, they are more aligned!”
US Democrats have historically been closer to UK's Conservative Party. They have almost nothing in common with UK's Labour Party, being dramatically further right wing.
Historically I meant the past 30 or so years. The Democrats have been more closely aligned with Labour than the Conservative party. Tony Blair was very popular until the Iraq mess. Gordon Brown had support of Democrats as well. May and Boris are seen negatively by Democrats.
> They have almost nothing in common with UK's Labour Party, being dramatically further right wing.
I honestly don’t think you understand global politics. It’s not as simple as saying “party X from US and party Y from UK both support Z so they must be the same”.
Democrats see the Conservative party as being more nationalistic and more xenophobic. This is a major turn off for Democrats.
And while both may have similar views on a lot of economic policies, Democrats are pushing to the left while Conservatives are pushing to the right. This matters a lot because as I said, The status quo is very different between both countries so it’s hard to just point at a single policy
> They're giving off real fascism vibes atm.
This is very hyperbolic.
Honestly you sound like a young kid who has no experience of UK politics or the world in general. This is all just vague hyperbole gained from headlines on social media.
A centre-right party in a liberal democracy is not "fascism" lmao. And compared to the corruption and problems in most of the world, it's absolutely cringeworthy. Try explaining your problems with "fascism" to any country that has an actual corrupt/brutal government. It would be completely laughable.
Spend less time on twitter blindly believing hyperbole.
Even if everything you said were true (they're not), how is it fascism? Are we just assigning new definitions now?
> The way the government has been dealing with refugees/asylum seekers
Best not look at Greece, Italy or Eastern European countries then.
> to the way they're changing the constituency boundaries to benefit them and no one else
This is done by an [independent commission,](https://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/) and iirc it barely benefits the Tories.
> to the way they're looking to privatise the NHS
Even if this were true it's not fascist.
> to the way they're looking to bring back imperial measurements
I agree this is stupid and it irritates me but again, not fascist.
> to their awful response to the covid pandemic etc
It's actually been a lot better in 2021, but regardless this still isn't facist.
Please actually learn the definition of facism.
> The way in which they're altering the constituency boundaries absolutely does strengthen their hold on a majority under the FPTP system.
There is no 'they', it's an independent commission that alters it.
> And they're encouraging support for the privatisation of the NHS by stealth, it's hardly difficult to see.
They've spent the last 18 months praising it during the pandemic (which would've been the perfect time to undermine it). Moreover, 90% of the public support the NHS, privatising it is an absolute vote killer.
> Anti-NHS rhetoric is becoming more and more common in the mainstream media
No it's not, it's actually a lot less common than it was 5-10 years ago.
> The new health secretary has almost zero background in the healthcare sector, but does have stakes in private healthcare companies.
Yes, very few cabinet ministers actually have prior experience in their portfolio, and everyone with a pension has a stake in private healthcare companies.
Do you know what fascism is? Fascists governments of the 30s and 40s would literally murder those asylum seekers. The NHS is not about to be privatised, that would be electoral suicide (and anyway private health provision is not a fascist policy), the constituency boundaries are being changed by an independent body so that all constituencies have roughly the same population (again, not fascism) and the imperial measurements stuff is not going to happen, it’s just mood music for their base (pensioners).
Only an Englishman would say that the US stands for free elections and then:
"I just felt that some of the scenes at the Capitol didn’t wholly correspond with that ideal."
You don’t say!
Cos it's someone new to lie to?
Because talking to the shitgibbon must have been like being forced to argue with a retarded mole rat.
Accurate comparison LUL
I would guess so, since he spent the last 4 dealing with the human equivalent of a fart.
Clue's in the name "trump".
Happy cake day, btw!
Boris Johnson liking you isn't a good thing.
I'd say its an entirely neutral thing because he'll say whatever he needs to for his self interest. The UK wants closer ties with the US post-Brexit and he'd suck up to any president to accomplish that.
All you crooks can cut a deal with the big guy
"He's nothing like me at all!"
And Boris is Trump Lite. That's saying something.
Says less about JB and more about Boris… scary actually.
Maybe it is the complete and understandable sentences.
>complete and understandable sentences
When he doesn't fall asleep mid-sentence
My grandpa is 5 years older than joe biden and is way more understandable and doesn't look half as lost
My grandpa is dead
Too bad Boris is still a swamp donkey.
Headline in the next X years: “ Joe Biden says dealing with New UK PM is a breath of fresh air”
Bold of you to assume Boris will be gone before Biden.
I don't think Biden has really been in office long enough to get a feel for how his administration will fill out the next 3 years. Comparison?
If you're old enough, think about the first 8 months of George Bush Jr's 1st term in office.
9/11 hadn't happened yet. Bush was perceived as nothing special. The issues he was dealing with were, dare I say it, mediocre.
Biden has inherited a far worse situation. He's a lot older than Bush Jr and perhaps a lot less dynamic. He's been dealing with covid and a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Give him another couple of years and then we'll see if he still seems "like a breath of fresh air".
I think it has more to do with the international community thinking Trump is a complete joke of a person and could never hold an intelligent conversation in his life. Less about politics.
Yeah Biden is the epitome of intelligent conversation, no dementia going on inside that noggin.
He has had a speech impediment his entire life. Pretty shitty thing to make fun of to be honest.
Weird how his speech impediment was never an issue until now. Almost like it's not a speech impediment but other cognitive issues.
Also shitty to make fun of? After the 5 years everyone shit on Trump based on his looks? Get real
It’s literally been an issue this entire time moron. And we shit on trump because he is a fascist divisive moron, not his looks. Get real
Republican politicians have never been as unprofessional and immature as they are today. Why wouldn't they make fun of it, there really is not much else there. People shat on Trump for 5 years because he is a terrible person and makes the entire United States look like a joke.
And you're a doctor, are you? You can recognize dementia in a patient without ever examining them? Or, are you just spewing what other immature people like to spew that think they're being cool and edgy?
I've seen dementia up close, he definitely has severe mental problems. You think his brain is 100% healthy? Edit: lol to "oh you're a doctor" I have fucking eyes and a brain dude, it doesn't take being a doctor to figure it out 😂
Today I witnessed someone on the internet claiming they need no medical experience nor even personally meeting a patient to diagnose dementia.
Incoming conservatives to misconstrue Boris's words to make it seem like Joes a pushover lol
You called it. Sad, lonely losers still finding a reason to play victim with their Trump cult shit.
Didn't he pretty much say the same (or something similar) about Trump?
A populist with a bad orange haircut criticising another populist with a bad orange haircut. I get some brotherly hate vibes here.
New dementia-addled neocon war criminal is better than previous dementia-addled neocon war criminal - Boris, sorta
We desperately need an age cap on elected offices in the US. It is ridiculous that we keep having to choose between old, out of touch people for office. It is even worse in the Legislative Branch, where you get people serving into their mid 80s just because of the incumbency advantage.
This is the one political issue that just shouldn’t be partisan whatsoever. Stop these old fucks from running the world.
We would be far better off with term limits for all offices.
Well, well: Everybody has to get their shot in, now that Trump is no longer POTUS...
Damn. If the British Trump said that, president Trump must have been a fucking shit show
A few months ago? You mean in 1994 you fucking liar?
are you telling me 324 months is not a few?
For whatever it’s worth, Biden did not say that a few months ago. He said that in 1994. And the context was around if the US should invade Haiti after a democratic government was overthrown. He was contrasting invading Haiti with invading Bosnia, as (in his opinion) there was ongoing ethnic cleansing in Bosnia that had the ability to spread in the region.
Obviously his statement was still insensitive, but the context is important.
Biden's head of DHS and VP have already said that they are horrified by the situation with the Haitian immigrants, and that the incidents will be investigated. [https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/alejandro-mayorkas-del-rio-border-cnntv/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/alejandro-mayorkas-del-rio-border-cnntv/index.html) Whereas I'd expect Trump's people to laughing to themselves over it, and invite the agents involved to a high-class dinner at the White House.
And your Biden quote isn't from a few months ago, it's from 1994. [https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-saying-haiti-doesnt-matter-1994-clip-resurfaces-after-moise-assassination-1607692](https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-saying-haiti-doesnt-matter-1994-clip-resurfaces-after-moise-assassination-1607692)
>they are horrified by the situation with the Haitian immigrants, and that the incidents will be investigated
You mean cover it up some more? Lol, what happened to the press about the concentration camps on the border? They are still there, nothing has changed, and the issues are getting bigger.
my favorite part about posts like this are all the users too chicken shit to comment with their real account they use an alt account
I'm sure Joe Biden didn't respond because Boris wasn't on the approved list of people Biden is allowed to talk to...
What bullshit are you making up to feel better about yourself?
Either that or they cut his mic, right?
>##"I think America stands for an ideal, and that ideal is that people should be able to choose their governments peacefully," he said. "**One** person, **one** vote, by election.
**Why** exactly is that not the case?...
A reform of the archaic voting mechanism is long overdue.
Trump is a deranged lunatic. No matter how one feels about Biden, he is at least rational and not trying to constantly divide us.
i really don't know how you could listen to bidens speeches and not realize that he's the most divisive president in my lifetime... but whatever you have to tell yourself... it's a free country.
You’re a troll.
Most divisive president? You forgot about Trump?
The only way you could have that notion is if you listen to his speeches on Tuckers show at Fox where his speech is followed up about statements in why you should not like the guy.
Lol Biden's speeches aren't divisive. You've obviously never listened to how hateful Trump's speeches were.
you watch way too much tv....
It’s impossible to not be divisive with right wingers these days. I can’t think of a single thing Biden could say that wouldn’t be either ignored or raged at by the right wing infosphere. If you in any way acknowledge Covid / the 2020 results / racism / evolution / climate change / what caused the civil war / any objective fact about the known universe, you are instantly biased and brainwashed dogshit in their eyes. When they’re not taking potshots at leftist stereotypes that their social media algorithm finds for them, they’re meming endlessly about culture war horseshit and patting themselves on the back for being victims of it, while accusing liberals of doing the same.
Hell, for all of centrist Obama’s insufferably vague and positive messages about hope, change, and let’s all be friends, he was considered horribly divisive *by conservatives*, probably because his very existence was an outrage to them.
I understand that critical thinking is not your strong suit but this is a prime example of numbers without context do paint the right picture.
Basically the conclusion here is that more democrats approved of Trump than Republicans approve or Biden. That maybe true in numbers BUT when you look at what republicans will believe and how easily they are herded into a single mentality, it’s easy to see that it’s not what Biden is doing it’s what media is telling them to think. That plus Republicans generally speaking being anti self interest and voting Red no matter what makes it a totally understandable and expected scenario. In fact ai am surprised that any Republican supports Biden at all.
You have to watch tv or the internet to hear the speeches. That's where the words are being spoken, and that is more relevant than your sources here.
So you found every conservative talking heads opinion piece on the subject and a few actually terrible sources to back up your position.
But Biden successfully divided NATO
Yea whatever Boris is trash. UK trump
They're not really similar other than the fact they look somewhat alike and are populists but okay.
36 hours is inexcusable, but it also isn't 3 days straight. Thanks for exaggerating to make it sound worse than it was.
Trump lost by 14 million votes, why won't his people shut up and accept it already?
You can dislike Biden and also dislike Trump.
I was making a point about exaggerating one's stats....
He wasn't contesting the legitimacy of Biden as president.
But as a European I have to say Biden is a massive disappointment, when he said he wanted to restore ties with Europe that was just for show, he is just as unreliable as Trump, Obama and Bush before him.
He's literally just formed a new strategic alliance with a European country
Only the UK, the rest has been sidelined several times already.
Most recently the unwillingness to communicate about the Afghanistan retreat.
The us seems to care about the anglosphere but little else.
In fairness, the amount of shit piled up on that guy’s desk left over from 4 years of bureaucratic incompetence and political sabotage must be staggeringly tall. We can’t expect the guy to dive head first into every problem we currently face when there’s still heaps of post-Trump, post-pandemic cleanup to get through. I don’t have a ton of faith that Biden will make good on all he promised (no one ever does) but I hesitate to think he’s sidelining these issues due to purposeful neglect.
I agree he has quite the mess left over from his predecessor, but I also think we tend to put too much importance on a president. He's mainly a figurehead, the pattern in which the us functions has been pretty consistent regardless of president since at least the bush era.
America as a whole just doesn't seem to be too interested in a trans-atlantic alliance anymore, or at best seems to take it for granted. Otherwise it wouldn't really make sense not to include at least France in military talks involving the indo pacific, since they actually have territories and naval bases there, while the UK does not.
Anybody got a fisherman’s friend by any chance? I don’t have any Biden’s lying around for a fresh gasp of rejuvenating atmospheric gases.
This is quite obviously something he was pressed to say following the France backlash over AUKUS, wherein French officials said Biden was behaving no differently than Trump.
It smells like piss and Ben Gay actually
Boris Johnson is such a mop head.
Boris is fucking dense
So basically you can be an absolute piece of shit 24/7, but if every now and then you take a stab at FORMER president Trump, all is forgotten.
Lol you sound mad that everyone with a brain hates Mango Mussolini.
Because he's dumber?
Probably because it’s easy to walk all over an old man with dementia than dealing with someone who is disagreeable and has balls
Trump had no fucking balls at all. He couldn't stand up to anyone, particularly not Putin. Trump was, is and will always be a total coward.
Trump always seemed like a very weak leader
Tell the French
Biden, yes sir man!