To be fair, I think the Biden Presidency would have gone better if they’d let him go out there and ramble about swimming pools in the 1950s and forget what he’s saying mid-sentence. It couldn’t have gone much worse. Literally the only asset Joe has is that people find him personally likeable and his aides have worked to stop him from using that asset because of their delusion that people value competency over charisma.
This is Trump, word for word.
3 Likes
Exactly. We demand senile Joe!
Look man I know inflation … in my day you could go with your girl, buy a malt for a quarter and still get enough change for the jukebox. We need those people you know the fats to stop eating all the food and making the inflation … well I don’t know … you know I shouldn’t have said that I’m sorry man … but yeah it was the time all right and we did it.
2 Likes
I love the complete lack of accountability. Such a fucking boomer.
Hey asshole, your pitch was “I’ll convince Republicans to work with me.” That isn’t happening so the public is very justifiably blaming you.
JUST YESTERDAY YOU DEFENDED MITCH MCCONNELL AND JOHN CORNYN YOU FUCKING IMBECILE
5 Likes
It’s eye-opening seeing focus groups react to debates and speeches and stuff. You’ll see someone answer a question with completely incoherent drivel and people will be like “yeah I thought that was a great answer”. I think the aides gatekeeping Joe are in the same category of wrong as the Dem voters who constantly try to judge who the rest of the country will think is “electable”. Like half the voting public are also lead-poisoned Boomers. They like Joe’s style.
Is this actually the problem though, or is the problem that he’s not going out and being like:
Serious question. Like I really don’t know.
Biden is awful but the actual problem is it doesn’t matter at all who is president. The system is designed to not work for citizens. The cult of personality around the president is just one part of that system to distract everyone from the fact that inaction is the point.
Inaction is not the point of the system. The point was to have a society based on rationality and mutual respect where no single faction could dominate. This system turned out to be vulnerable to being gamed if factions decided not to participate in good faith.
It is designed out of the belief that citizens are too ignorant to determine what is best for the common good. Does social media prove the Founding Fathers wrong in that regard?
The problem is an outdated system based on flawed assumptions about human nature.
Just write every senior a check for the differnece you clown
Fuck the olds. Absolutely not in favor of sending them an extra dime.
Saved this one for the student loan promise, doesn’t look great for the other one either. Working hard as President! Wielding that executive power!
Edit: I guess this promise doesn’t directly relate to the tweet. Oh well, he hasn’t lowered the age either.
Yeah, 100% this. It’s so incomprehensible that it takes years to get used to.
Now that I am, it has changed how I view other’s assessments of “debates and speeches and stuff”. If someone said that X gave a great speech or crushed Y in a debate and then I go watch it I nearly never agree.
And it’s not exactly because they are wrong. In some objective vacuum, X may have in fact given a great speech or crushed Y in a debate. But that’s not the relevant standard. You have to view it through the lens of someone who hates X and loves Y, keeping in mind the absolute horseshit people like that will slurp up.
When you view it that way there are very few great speeches or crushings. They happen, but they are extraordinarily rare. Unless someone like that would be ready to deploy the “worst person you know made a great point” meme, it doesn’t qualify.
Mostly agree but I think genuine crushings … happen pretty frequent in today’s politics
Coming to mind for me is Obama’s speech addressing the Jeremiah Wright stuff. That was, what, like 14 years ago now or something.
I remember Matt Christman saying that people process speeches, debates etc “like a dog”, by which he meant they are looking at intonation and body language and stuff more than really parsing the words, and that has stuck with me. I wonder if this is one of those things where a background in poker changes you. For example, I think for sure being involved in gambling makes one vastly more likely to assume that events are purely random rather than having a parsimonious explanation. I also think it has left me much more skeptical of my own ability to “get a read” on whether someone is good or bad or trustworthy or whatever. I think regular people lean on that stuff very heavily when appraising political speeches and debates.
1 Like
I’ve said this like twenty times but it is truly amazing:
America: “THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH LOW SKILLED, LOW WAGE EMPLOYEES…”
Biden: thumbs up
How do you not just swing the door open right now? Because those demographic vote democrat and they don’t want to win? Stupid_Or_In_On_It.jpeg
The entire eDem brain trust is trying to win mythical Ohio steel workers who they think are swing voters but who actually inhale QAnon Facebook content for several hours a day.
7 Likes
