Biden presidency predictions

[jimboston]

... because Gerald Ford was just the most popular presidential candidate ever.

It wasn’t a popular move... but it was the right move.

[jimboston]

Harris taking over as POTUS might not be a direct decrease on our freedom, but it will be touted as the USA having the "first woman President", and "look, it's a minority", when she was basically appointed. She got slaughtered in the D primary, so she isn't and/or wouldn't have ever been elected POTUS.

So, in an indirect way, Harris becoming POTUS is a way in which US voters did not get to choose the chief executive.

That's the closest I can come to making it be "a decrease in freedom".

It’s a stretch and convoluted logic.

... we also have no clue if she ever will become President or not.

[Zieborn]

I would argue to his point that it may be the first time someone so unpopular was also so very likely to get the presidency. If Joe Biden does not die from natural causes during his first term, I will be so shocked I myself may die. To be fair, I would have said the same of John McCain, but somehow he kept going through a brain tumor. I can only assume the best treatment for brain tumors is to think of nothing but evil every day of your life.

[saxitoxin]

I would argue to his point that it may be the first time someone so unpopular was also so very likely to get the presidency. If Joe Biden does not die from natural causes during his first term, I will be so shocked I myself may die. To be fair, I would have said the same of John McCain, but somehow he kept going through a brain tumor. I can only assume the best treatment for brain tumors is to think of nothing but evil every day of your life.

Every day Biden looks older and more decrepit. On the rare occasion they show him walking he's shuffling gingerly along like he might tip over at any moment. It's going to be very telling during the first state visit where he has to make the Grand Staircase entrance. I would not be surprised if they simply don't schedule any state visits for that reason. Seeing the president go tumbling down two flights of stairs is not exactly a confidence booster.

[jonesthecurl]

maybe they coukd arrange a ramp. I hear that makes one look nimble.

[Zieborn]

Maybe they'll tell him if he makes it down the stairs he gets to start another war. Like offering an aging pet a favorite treat.

[saxitoxin]

Maybe they'll tell him if he makes it down the stairs he gets to start another war. Like offering an aging pet a favorite treat.

Lol prob. Have you seen the White House YouTube channel? Like 40 videos and not a single one has more likes than dislikes.

The most popular person in world history.

[Zieborn]

I remember, here in small town Newfoundland Canada, people at work watching the Obama inauguration live, while crying. I don't agree with the sentiment anymore, but I remember it being huge and incredibly moving. People here, in the middle of the North Atlantic, were wearing "Change" T-shirts everywhere. Following on the heels of George "Neocon" Bush, who they sold entire punk CDs (I bought them) just based on hating him. The entire world watched Obama's election and wore his merchandise, as he represented (allegedly) the transition to something better following 9/11 and all that followed. And I am to believe Biden DUNKED over him. Okay. People can pretend they believe that all they want. And they can keep voting afterwards, while pretending they believe it matters. Good luck.You'll need it.

[The ram]

so my memory might be fuzzy,

Didn't your mammy and daddy escape a socialist republic, to give you a better life?

And yet we see you daily praising the left and socialism. Those nice words they use always hoodwink the mentally deficient.

[saxitoxin]

In the spirit of this thread, here is my prediction: Old Joe will tip over in public at least once prior to May 1.

[Dukasaur]

so my memory might be fuzzy,

Didn't your mammy and daddy escape a socialist republic, to give you a better life?

That's close to the truth, but it's incorrect in a couple of minor details.

First, they didn't escape to give me a better life. They escaped to give themselves a better life. They left me behind and didn't really care what happened to me. As it turned out, during the Soviet invasion in '68. the borders were opened and about 100,000 people left without a struggle, including my grandparents and my aunts and myself. Then, being a child I was reunited with my parents according to the way international law works. But when they left in '64, they couldn't have predicted that would happen. For all they could have known, I would be stuck there forever, and it didn't bother them as long as they got what they wanted.

Second, they didn't escape from a socialist republic, they escaped from a communist republic. Yes, we all know that communists like to pretend that they're socialists, and they like to label their countries as socialist republics, but we all know that's a self-serving lie. It suits their propaganda purposes to pretend they're part of the same movement. As for those on the opposite side who repeat the same lie, it's good for their propaganda, too, but they also know, or ought to know, that it's a lie.

Communism is a system of state ownership. Socialism, or more properly social democracy, is a system of private ownership, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure that the working man gets a piece of the pie. Right-wingers scream that socialists are planning to expropriate everyone's properties, but if you look at real socialist countries like Sweden or Germany, you see that not only are they not expropriating everything, but in fact the role of the private sector remains strong and in some ways is increasing.

And yet we see you daily praising the left and socialism. Those nice words they use always hoodwink the mentally deficient.

I don't know why you find it necessary to include insults in discussions. I'm quite secure with my 157 IQ so I won't overreact.

In case you are interested in having a civil discussion, I'll tell you this: I wasn't always a leftist. In fact, quite the opposite. I used to be a libertarian activist, and in the Reagan-Thatcher era I celebrated their successes. I have gradually moved to the left over the years because I realized that we on the right were, in fact, being hoodwinked. There used to be theories. They went by many names -- monetarist, supply-side, classical liberalism, trickle-down -- and their common thread was that if you were to cut taxes, reduce regulations, kick out the unions, stop giving people handouts, you would unleash the power of the economy and have a huge boom, and yes, the rich would get first kick at the can, but eventually the money would trickle down to the poor also and raise their income proportionately. A rising tide lifts all boats!

Well, we did all that. Meaning "we" as in "all the major industrial nations". We cut income taxes, we cut corporate taxes, we deregulated industries, we broke the power of the unions. And the first part of the promise seemed to be coming true -- the economy was unleased, there was a huge boom that (with a couple minor blips along the way) has basically been sustained for 40 years. But the second part of the promise never happened. In the words of the Tragically Hip, we're still waiting on the trickle-down! It never happened. The economy has gone through a massive 40-year boom, and in that time, the worker has not seen any rise in his standard of living. On the contrary -- the working man of today is less likely to own his own home, less likely to be able to send his kids to university, less likely to be able to take a tropical vacation, than his counterpart of 40 years ago. All that vast, incredible, stupendous increase in productivity has just fueled record profits which the executive class has stashed in its offshore accounts. Not one fucking penny has trickled down to the working man. After accounting for inflation, the working man today makes less than his father.

When I was a kid, if you met a poor person, it was a safe bet that they were unemployed. Today, that isn't true. Most poor people work, many work two or three shit-paying jobs, and still can't make ends meet. It was all a lie.

It was always assumed that the rich would get the bulk of the benefit of the bursting economy. But most people, whether left or right, assumed that they would give some of the benefit to the workers. Almost everyone, both on the left and right, really did believe that a rising tide would life all boats. I don't think anybody 40 years ago would have believed you if you told them that companies who just had their best year ever would celebrate by cutting the wages of their staff. Nobody is surprised when struggling companies do it, but when companies posting record profits continue to kick people in the nuts, continue chiseling away, cutting wages and benefits, you come to realize that trickle-down was bullshit from the beginning.

Bottom line, the right is pissed off that they ever abolished slavery, and they want it to return one way or another.

A friend of mine died last week. 80 years old and couldn't afford to retire. Shot through with arthritis, you could see the agony in his eyes when he'd hoist himself up into the cab of his truck, but day after day he did it, because he had no other choice. He was getting dressed for yet another day at work when he dropped dead. Unfortunately, that's exactly where I see myself in 20 years.

That wouldn't happen in Germany or Sweden. Not because they have public ownership, but because they have private ownership combined with a few basic safeguards to make sure the workers get a little slice of the pie. Yeah, I've moved to the left. Not because I've been hoodwinked, but because I've stopped being hoodwinked.

[Zieborn]

Second, they didn't escape from a socialist republic, they escaped from a communist republic. Yes, we all know that communists like to pretend that they're socialists, and they like to label their countries as socialist republics, but we all know that's a self-serving lie. It suits their propaganda purposes to pretend they're part of the same movement. As for those on the opposite side who repeat the same lie, it's good for their propaganda, too, but they also know, or ought to know, that it's a lie.

Communism is a system of state ownership. Socialism, or more properly social democracy, is a system of private ownership, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure that the working man gets a piece of the pie. Right-wingers scream that socialists are planning to expropriate everyone's properties, but if you look at real socialist countries like Sweden or Germany, you see that not only are they not expropriating everything, but in fact the role of the private sector remains strong and in some ways is increasing.

You're describing fascism, not socialism. I don't hate that as much as some systems (slightly better than globalism at least), but I'm guessing you do. Don't take my word for it. Read Mussolini or, more properly, Giovanni Gentile. They describe your exact system. In fact, the way you describe it is word for word a description of National Socialism (go to a free speech space anywhere and you'll figure that out quickly enough). So, you know. There's that. This isn't even an attack on your position. I literally don't care if you're a fascist. Politics isn't a real concern to me. Not my circus, not my monkeys. But if you read up on it, that's what you just described in any case.

Your parents were cowards by the way. It appears you know that. That's bonus points for you.

[The ram]

so my memory might be fuzzy,

Didn't your mammy and daddy escape a socialist republic, to give you a better life?

That's close to the truth, but it's incorrect in a couple of minor details.

First, they didn't escape to give me a better life. They escaped to give themselves a better life. They left me behind and didn't really care what happened to me. As it turned out, during the Soviet invasion in '68. the borders were opened and about 100,000 people left without a struggle, including my grandparents and my aunts and myself. Then, being a child I was reunited with my parents according to the way international law works. But when they left in '64, they couldn't have predicted that would happen. For all they could have known, I would be stuck there forever, and it didn't bother them as long as they got what they wanted.

Second, they didn't escape from a socialist republic, they escaped from a communist republic. Yes, we all know that communists like to pretend that they're socialists, and they like to label their countries as socialist republics, but we all know that's a self-serving lie. It suits their propaganda purposes to pretend they're part of the same movement. As for those on the opposite side who repeat the same lie, it's good for their propaganda, too, but they also know, or ought to know, that it's a lie.

Communism is a system of state ownership. Socialism, or more properly social democracy, is a system of private ownership, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure that the working man gets a piece of the pie. Right-wingers scream that socialists are planning to expropriate everyone's properties, but if you look at real socialist countries like Sweden or Germany, you see that not only are they not expropriating everything, but in fact the role of the private sector remains strong and in some ways is increasing.

And yet we see you daily praising the left and socialism. Those nice words they use always hoodwink the mentally deficient.

I don't know why you find it necessary to include insults in discussions. I'm quite secure with my 157 IQ so I won't overreact.

In case you are interested in having a civil discussion, I'll tell you this: I wasn't always a leftist. In fact, quite the opposite. I used to be a libertarian activist, and in the Reagan-Thatcher era I celebrated their successes. I have gradually moved to the left over the years because I realized that we on the right were, in fact, being hoodwinked. There used to be theories. They went by many names -- monetarist, supply-side, classical liberalism, trickle-down -- and their common thread was that if you were to cut taxes, reduce regulations, kick out the unions, stop giving people handouts, you would unleash the power of the economy and have a huge boom, and yes, the rich would get first kick at the can, but eventually the money would trickle down to the poor also and raise their income proportionately. A rising tide lifts all boats!

Well, we did all that. Meaning "we" as in "all the major industrial nations". We cut income taxes, we cut corporate taxes, we deregulated industries, we broke the power of the unions. And the first part of the promise seemed to be coming true -- the economy was unleased, there was a huge boom that (with a couple minor blips along the way) has basically been sustained for 40 years. But the second part of the promise never happened. In the words of the Tragically Hip, we're still waiting on the trickle-down! It never happened. The economy has gone through a massive 40-year boom, and in that time, the worker has not seen any rise in his standard of living. On the contrary -- the working man of today is less likely to own his own home, less likely to be able to send his kids to university, less likely to be able to take a tropical vacation, than his counterpart of 40 years ago. All that vast, incredible, stupendous increase in productivity has just fueled record profits which the executive class has stashed in its offshore accounts. Not one fucking penny has trickled down to the working man. After accounting for inflation, the working man today makes less than his father.

When I was a kid, if you met a poor person, it was a safe bet that they were unemployed. Today, that isn't true. Most poor people work, many work two or three shit-paying jobs, and still can't make ends meet. It was all a lie.

It was always assumed that the rich would get the bulk of the benefit of the bursting economy. But most people, whether left or right, assumed that they would give some of the benefit to the workers. Almost everyone, both on the left and right, really did believe that a rising tide would life all boats. I don't think anybody 40 years ago would have believed you if you told them that companies who just had their best year ever would celebrate by cutting the wages of their staff. Nobody is surprised when struggling companies do it, but when companies posting record profits continue to kick people in the nuts, continue chiseling away, cutting wages and benefits, you come to realize that trickle-down was bullshit from the beginning.

Bottom line, the right is pissed off that they ever abolished slavery, and they want it to return one way or another.

A friend of mine died last week. 80 years old and couldn't afford to retire. Shot through with arthritis, you could see the agony in his eyes when he'd hoist himself up into the cab of his truck, but day after day he did it, because he had no other choice. He was getting dressed for yet another day at work when he dropped dead. Unfortunately, that's exactly where I see myself in 20 years.

That wouldn't happen in Germany or Sweden. Not because they have public ownership, but because they have private ownership combined with a few basic safeguards to make sure the workers get a little slice of the pie. Yeah, I've moved to the left. Not because I've been hoodwinked, but because I've stopped being hoodwinked.

No socialist system stops until it reaches Marxism or communism, they just call it socialism. You should realise that. Give me one example that goes against my statement.

I don't like you, you are the perfect example of the intolerant left. You banned me and tried to get me perma banned because I made a thread about 2 asylum seekers spitting and punching an old lady in her 70s. Not one word of racism. Your reason given for the ban was that you were an asylum seeker once. So by your logic, you are angered by people highlighting horrific behaviour by people that have something in common with you, but I can't be angered for someone vulnerable that has something in common with myself, being attacked. Shall I bring the thread up again? It was a small minded abuse of your position here.

You cost conquer club a loyal customer that day and stopped me playing with your fascist mindset.

[saxitoxin]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

[Zieborn]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

This thread has become a bigger mess than an Obama drone strike.

[saxitoxin]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

This thread has become a bigger mess than an Obama drone strike.

This thread has become a bigger mess than one of Biden's adult diapers.

[Zieborn]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

This thread has become a bigger mess than an Obama drone strike.

This thread has become a bigger mess than one of Biden's adult diapers.

This thread has become a bigger mess than Hunter after a weekend with $10,000

[saxitoxin]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

This thread has become a bigger mess than an Obama drone strike.

This thread has become a bigger mess than one of Biden's adult diapers.

This thread has become a bigger mess than Hunter after a weekend with $10,000

This thread has become a bigger mess than Sleepy Joe after a visit to the congressional pages girls' dormitory.

[Zieborn]

This thread has become a bigger mess than Stacey Abrams' feeding time.

This thread has become a bigger mess than an Obama drone strike.

This thread has become a bigger mess than one of Biden's adult diapers.

This thread has become a bigger mess than Hunter after a weekend with $10,000

This thread has become a bigger mess than Sleepy Joe after a visit to the congressional pages girls' dormitory.

This thread has become a bigger mess than the back of the head of someone with dirt on the Clintons."

[Dukasaur]

No socialist system stops until it reaches Marxism or communism, they just call it socialism. You should realise that. Give me one example that goes against my statement.

I already gave you two in the thread above. Germany and Sweden. Both stable social democracies for 70 years that show not the slightest indication of ever becoming communist.

I don't like you, you are the perfect example of the intolerant left. You banned me and tried to get me perma banned because I made a thread about 2 asylum seekers spitting and punching an old lady in her 70s. Not one word of racism. Your reason given for the ban was that you were an asylum seeker once. So by your logic, you are angered by people highlighting horrific behaviour by people that have something in common with you, but I can't be angered for someone vulnerable that has something in common with myself, being attacked. Shall I bring the thread up again? It was a small minded abuse of your position here.

Be honest, please. It wasn't because you made one thread. You made numerous threads over the years about crimes committed by dark-skinned people. You never made a single thread about any crime committed by a fair-skinned person. In fact, when I provided some examples of crimes committed by whites you became enraged and asked me to stay out of your thread.

If you wanted to talk about criminality in general, you would talk about it without regard to the races of the people involved. The fact that your threads were exclusively about crimes committed by dark-skinned people and never about crimes committed by fair-skinned people shows a clear intent to foment ill will towards people of certain skin tones. In a word, racism.

As for my role in it, banning you is not my first choice. I would honestly prefer to let you have your say, and then debate you and demonstrate the moral bankruptcy of your racist ideas. But it's not my decision. Racism is against the rules of the site, which I help enforce as objectively as possible. We have gotten in trouble in the past for not enforcing these rules, so in the last couple years we have become more stringent. We have lost a lot more loyal members through not enforcing the rules strictly enough, than from enforcing them. So the pendulum, which for years was swinging in the direction of less moderation, has now swung in the direction of more moderation. I do have a part in these decisions, but only a small part.

[The ram]

No socialist system stops until it reaches Marxism or communism, they just call it socialism. You should realise that. Give me one example that goes against my statement.

I already gave you two in the thread above. Germany and Sweden. Both stable social democracies for 70 years that show not the slightest indication of ever becoming communist.

I don't like you, you are the perfect example of the intolerant left. You banned me and tried to get me perma banned because I made a thread about 2 asylum seekers spitting and punching an old lady in her 70s. Not one word of racism. Your reason given for the ban was that you were an asylum seeker once. So by your logic, you are angered by people highlighting horrific behaviour by people that have something in common with you, but I can't be angered for someone vulnerable that has something in common with myself, being attacked. Shall I bring the thread up again? It was a small minded abuse of your position here.

Be honest, please. It wasn't because you made one thread. You made numerous threads over the years about crimes committed by dark-skinned people. You never made a single thread about any crime committed by a fair-skinned person. In fact, when I provided some examples of crimes committed by whites you became enraged and asked me to stay out of your thread.

If you wanted to talk about criminality in general, you would talk about it without regard to the races of the people involved. The fact that your threads were exclusively about crimes committed by dark-skinned people and never about crimes committed by fair-skinned people shows a clear intent to foment ill will towards people of certain skin tones. In a word, racism.

As for my role in it, banning you is not my first choice. I would honestly prefer to let you have your say, and then debate you and demonstrate the moral bankruptcy of your racist ideas. But it's not my decision. Racism is against the rules of the site, which I help enforce as objectively as possible. We have gotten in trouble in the past for not enforcing these rules, so in the last couple years we have become more stringent. We have lost a lot more loyal members through not enforcing the rules strictly enough, than from enforcing them. So the pendulum, which for years was swinging in the direction of less moderation, has now swung in the direction of more moderation. I do have a part in these decisions, but only a small part.

What a load of bullshit, you're nothing more than a compulsive liar! I have an email from you, with you saying that you can only ban me for 3 days but will be asking the admin if they can make the ban much longer. You loved handing out the ban and were hungry for a more severe ban than your position allowed you to permit.

That was the only thread I made about non terrorism or sexual crimes committed by in your words dark skinned people. There is very little white terrorism to highlight, but I did highlight white politicians that committed paedophilia. However, they were always socialist or the few that were more conservative were Jewish.

I won't be wasting any more time reading your lies and certainly won't be replying to you. You have your position here, that you do for free but you generate nothing of interest. Good riddance.

[Dukasaur]

So you had no intention of having a meaningful conversation about my transition from rightist to leftist. You just wanted to whine about one of your bans.

I'm always caught off guard when people ask what seems like an honest question but has an ulterior motive.

[Zieborn]

a meaningful conversation about my transition from rightist to leftist.

You transitioned from something to fascist. You just don't know it yet. But please, explain how you were a "rightist."

[mookiemcgee]

a meaningful conversation about my transition from rightist to leftist.

But please, explain how you were a "rightist."

Uh, I guess you missed the big long post where he just did that? Probably too busy not playing CC games or contributing anything of value.

[Zieborn]

a meaningful conversation about my transition from rightist to leftist.

But please, explain how you were a "rightist."

Uh, I guess you missed the big long post where he just did that? Probably too busy not playing CC games or contributing anything of value.

Fair.

I do play CC.

He tells a very disjointed story. He is of the mind that "Libertarian" is "right." Michael Malice and Tom Woods would agree with him. There are worse people to have agree with you. At least he isn't defining "right" as "conservative." However, he then says, for no reason whatsoever that "Bottom line, the right is pissed off that they ever abolished slavery, and they want it to return one way or another." Given that he just defined the right as Libertarian, that's pretty dumb for a guy with a 150+ IQ. But then, he doesn't even know he's a national socialist yet.