Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

13567660

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 40,060 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    paw patrol wrote: »
    you aren't accurate, deliberately so I'd imagine.
    Sure he is going to help small businesses BUT the priority will be those minority groups listed.
    if you are white , back of the queue - you aren't as worthy.

    the priority will be that minority owned businesses will have the same opportunity for assistance as every other business. this is somehow controversial to you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    paw patrol wrote: »
    you aren't accurate, deliberately so I'd imagine.
    Sure he is going to help small businesses BUT the priority will be those minority groups listed.
    if you are white , back of the queue - you aren't as worthy.
    I mean unless you can explain how the ordinary meaning of the words spoken in the video suggests this in any way, go for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 880 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    Based on posting history any implication is entirely appropriate.

    Then you haven't read my posts properly or at all most likely. In any case I think you're posting in bad faith. I'll leave the last word to you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    the priority will be that minority owned businesses will have the same opportunity for assistance as every other business. this is somehow controversial to you.
    I mean it's literally the sentence he spoke, so it's wild that they're attempting to claim it isn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 44,883 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    paw patrol wrote: »
    you aren't accurate, deliberately so I'd imagine.
    Sure he is going to help small businesses BUT the priority will be those minority groups listed.
    if you are white , back of the queue - you aren't as worthy.

    because statistics show they don't need help in getting access to the assistance being offered.

    the statistics show that minority owned business have recieved proportionally much less of the assistance on offer - so they are putting emphasis on making sure those minorities have as much access and ability to secure assistance as some (white) already have.

    What you are arguing for, by arguing this, is that minorities should be rejected from assistance in greater numbers than white people.

    If that isn't what you actually want, then you need to actually understand the point and the reason, and start again.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭1800_Ladladlad


    Identity politics in full swing for the Biden campaign

    https://twitter.com/6abc/status/1351495311299117061


    This is the one who removed her parents from their nursing home, who would then go on to fill the said nursing home with covid patients leading to several deaths.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,137 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Identity politics in full swing for the Biden campaign

    https://twitter.com/6abc/status/1351495311299117061


    This is the one who removed her parents from their nursing home, who would then go on to fill the said nursing home with covid patients leading to several deaths.

    "Levine was accused of removing her own mother from a personal care home, after creating a policy whereby nursing homes throughout the Commonwealth would readmit residents testing positive for Coronavirus after they were declared healthy enough to leave the hospital. Levine has stated that personal care homes (as opposed to nursing homes) do not fall under the jurisdiction of her own agency." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Levine

    Can you refute the above?

    According to your own link, "She won confirmation by the Republican-majority Pennsylvania Senate and has emerged as the public face of the state's response to the coronavirus pandemic."

    Are the Republican-majority in the Commonwealth guilty of the same identity politics, or just Joe Biden? Why? What is your evidence beside the mere fact of her being transgender (assuming that is the 'identity' you are taking umbrage with, and not that she is a woman, or white, or blonde)?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    Identity politics in full swing for the Biden campaign

    https://twitter.com/6abc/status/1351495311299117061


    This is the one who removed her parents from their nursing home, who would then go on to fill the said nursing home with covid patients leading to several deaths.

    Looks like Danny DeVito dressed up for a skit.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Identity politics in full swing for the Biden campaign

    https://twitter.com/6abc/status/1351495311299117061


    This is the one who removed her parents from their nursing home, who would then go on to fill the said nursing home with covid patients leading to several deaths.

    Have you considered that she might be qualified for the job


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,043 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Carried over from the tail end of the Trump v Biden thread and discussion on changing of the constitution:
    The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

    Have they already dealt with pronouns such as this throughout the constitution and agreed that "he" just means "person" or are we going to get a bunch of stupid arguments about if Harris is even allowed to be president because she's not a he in a couple of years?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,137 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    robinph wrote: »
    Carried over from the tail end of the Trump v Biden thread and discussion on changing of the constitution:



    Have they already dealt with pronouns such as this throughout the constitution and agreed that "he" just means "person" or are we going to get a bunch of stupid arguments about if Harris is even allowed to be president because she's not a he in a couple of years?

    Oh count on it. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,060 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Overheal wrote: »
    Oh count on it. :rolleyes:

    interesting to see what the originalists on the SC make of it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    He wants them to have equal access. What's the problem here?
    What "access" is Joe going to give Black, Latino, Asian, Native American people to "business" that has been denied to them during his 36 years in the Senate and 8 years as vice president?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,430 ✭✭✭RWCNT


    Identity politics in full swing for the Biden campaign

    https://twitter.com/6abc/status/1351495311299117061


    This is the one who removed her parents from their nursing home, who would then go on to fill the said nursing home with covid patients leading to several deaths.

    Minorities having jobs!? Political correctness gone mad.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,060 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    What "access" is Joe going to give Black, Latino, Asian, Native American people to "business" that has been denied to them during his 36 years in the Senate and 8 years as vice president?

    is your issue that Joe hasn't solved the problems with racism during his career or that he is trying to solve this particular problem?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    is your issue that Joe hasn't solved the problems with racism during his career or that he is trying to solve this particular problem?
    Neither but the idea that Joe is bringing fresh energy or perspectives to this or any other issue is laughable. He is the establishment.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 36,787 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    What "access" is Joe going to give Black, Latino, Asian, Native American people to "business" that has been denied to them during his 36 years in the Senate and 8 years as vice president?

    No idea. Why not either research it yourself or ask whoever pasted the Tweet?

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    What "access" is Joe going to give Black, Latino, Asian, Native American people to "business" that has been denied to them during his 36 years in the Senate and 8 years as vice president?
    Am I dreaming? Access to resources needed to reopen and rebuild. In other words, money.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,060 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Neither but the idea that Joe is bringing fresh energy or perspectives to this or any other issue is laughable. He is the establishment.

    so you don't think he should try? he is trying to address a very specific problem. should he just ignore it?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 36,787 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Neither but the idea that Joe is bringing fresh energy or perspectives to this or any other issue is laughable. He is the establishment.

    No but he can hire people who can.

    There are plenty worse things than being part of the establishment. That's the lesson in twice-impeached POTUS #45's disaster of a term.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,137 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Sure Trump became the establishment when he was established as President.

    It's been turned into a dirty word for the sake of politics, much like socialism.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    so you don't think he should try? he is trying to address a very specific problem. should he just ignore it?
    Of course he should try, i just dont know what the optimism i'm sensing is based on. New broom perhaps, well best of luck to him.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure Trump became the establishment when he was established as President.

    It's been turned into a dirty word for the sake of politics, much like socialism.

    Trump is certainly of the establishment yes but not to the same degree as Biden with his 50 years in Washington leading to the Trump presidency and finally his own.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 36,787 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Trump is certainly of the establishment yes but not to the same degree as Biden with his 50 years in Washington leading to the Trump presidency and finally his own.

    I'd be inclined to view that as a positive. As I said, establishment is only a dirty word if we don't get to experience what an damage unqualified moron can wreak.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,137 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    I'd be inclined to view that as a positive. As I said, establishment is only a dirty word if we don't get to experience what an damage unqualified moron can wreak.

    Agree. He was in the Congress before Mitch was even a blip on the legislative radar: He joined the Senate in 1973, Mitch entered the DC scene as a Deputy AG in 1974 and didn't join Congress until 1985. He knows the games they play because he's been there and done that. Also why he made a fantastic VP for freshmen-senator Barrack Obama.

    (also since nobody asked, the longest serving member of congress is Don Young(lol) (D-Alaska), who also joined Congress in 1973)


  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Overheal wrote: »
    Sure Trump became the establishment when he was established as President.

    It's been turned into a dirty word for the sake of politics, much like socialism.

    He was and is clearly an anti Establishment politician. The problem wasn't his rudeness or his sexism, or racism those were claims to enrage the masses; but that he didn't seem to be -- at the start -- as much a warmonger as the US Establishment would like. He drained no swamps but there war a fear throughout that he might have started to.

    Except for his sabre rattling with Iran, he was clearly less likely to go to war. Given that the US is a military oligarchy, not unlike Imperial Rome, the real powers that be wanted rid.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 36,787 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    He was and is clearly an anti Establishment politician. The problem wasn't his rudeness or his sexism, or racism those were claims to enrage the masses; but that he didn't seem to be -- at the start -- as much a warmonger as the US Establishment would like. He drained no swamps but there war a fear throughout that he might have started to.

    Except for his sabre rattling with Iran, he was clearly less likely to go to war. Given that the US is a military oligarchy, not unlike Imperial Rome, the real powers that be wanted rid.

    No, he isn't. His sexism, racism and xenophobia were perfectly mainstream and the GOP was all too willing to turn itself into the Trump cult hence their near unanimous refusal to hold him to account.

    The war thing isn't really a trump card (pardon the pun) given his sabre rattling with Iran, the plethora of drone strikes and his presiding over hundreds of thousands of needless American deaths from covid because he wanted to peddle conspiracy theories and bleach-based remedies.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,568 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    interesting to see what the originalists on the SC make of it.


    We can all guess where the handmaid ACB will fall


  • Registered Users Posts: 44,883 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    He was and is clearly an anti Establishment politician. The problem wasn't his rudeness or his sexism, or racism those were claims to enrage the masses; but that he didn't seem to be -- at the start -- as much a warmonger as the US Establishment would like. He drained no swamps but there war a fear throughout that he might have started to.

    Except for his sabre rattling with Iran, he was clearly less likely to go to war. Given that the US is a military oligarchy, not unlike Imperial Rome, the real powers that be wanted rid.

    I don't think it was or is clear at all.

    He spun himself as much, the repubs believed it. But does his tax policies or treatment of wallstreet etc show him to be fighting for the little guy or helping the rich get richer?

    He was elected to drain the swap, and did no such thing.

    To say it is clear he is anti-establishment is a stretch, unless you simply mean that is what people voted him as, rather than what he is.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,137 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    He was and is clearly an anti Establishment politician. The problem wasn't his rudeness or his sexism, or racism those were claims to enrage the masses; but that he didn't seem to be -- at the start -- as much a warmonger as the US Establishment would like. He drained no swamps but there war a fear throughout that he might have started to.

    Except for his sabre rattling with Iran, he was clearly less likely to go to war. Given that the US is a military oligarchy, not unlike Imperial Rome, the real powers that be wanted rid.

    Over 400,000 Americans have died under his tenure and care, due to a pandemic he himself declared a 'war' and he a 'war time president.' We haven't lost that many Americans to a tragedy since the Civil War. He tried, in vain, several times to deploy the military in US Cities, and at our southern border. He was simply too busy waging wars at home and on television to give a toss about the rest of the world, and even at that he still has dropped more bombs than any other President save for FDR during WWII. Easily dropped more than Bush or Obama. https://www.2lt.com.au/trump-who-vowed-to-end-wars-has-dropped-more-bombs-than-bush-or-obama/


Advertisement