Joe Biden to leave early?

[john999boy]

54 minutes ago, @Lee said:

I do wonder why the OP chose Off Topic to post this, though. Perhaps he feels it would be less rigorously moderated than had it been in Roadside where I think it would be better suited.

I wondered that too when it was started but let it pass - seems I was wrong and will move it to RH.

That’s a not too subtle hint BTW. 

[EnterName]

7 hours ago, john999boy said:

I wondered that too when it was started but let it pass - seems I was wrong and will move it to RH.

That’s a not too subtle hint BTW. 

I'm obviously missing something here, so the hint just seems like an in-joke at my expense.

Can someone please explain the distinction between the two forums?

Edited 27 August, 2021 by EnterName

[Ootohere]

As i understand it,

One lets the threads go Off Topic by quite a stretch and the other is supposed to cover a subject and stay on the subject of the OP & not too much deviation or discussion of potential deviants or hesitations or procrastination.

So that is Donald Trump covered right there.

Edited 27 August, 2021 by e-Roottoot

[KenONeill]

12 hours ago, EnterName said:

Personally, I'd like to see Joe Biden impeached and kicked out formally.

On what charges?

[EnterName]

11 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

As i understand it,

One lets the threads go Off Topic by quite a stretch and the other is supposed to cover a subject and stay on the subject of the OP & not too much deviation or discussion of potential deviants or hesitations or procrastination.

So that is Donald Trump covered right there.

Fair enough.

Not sure why people didn't point that out, instead of insinuating I'm up to something by posting on one forum and not another.

If one forum is less rigorously moderated, surely that would be suited to subjects where people are liable to disagree, without getting the discussion shut down?

 

I don't mind people venting their TDS in a thread, but there is already a thread for that.

There isn't a thread for discussing Joe Biden's early departure (if it happens), which is why I started one.

It's all well and good people saying "I knew that would happen!" after the event. I'm saying "I think this is going to happen!" before an event. Which might not happen.

If people don't want to discuss that issue, then fine. It just seems odd that I can't find any support for the most voted-for President ever.

Edited 27 August, 2021 by EnterName

[EnterName]

11 hours ago, KenONeill said:

On what charges?

I've listed a fair few high crimes and misdemeanours already.

But if you want more, his dodgy dealings in the Ukraine are more than enough to get him booted out.

[KenONeill]

9 minutes ago, EnterName said:

I've listed a fair few high crimes and misdemeanours already.

Have you? No really have you?

[john999boy]

13 hours ago, EnterName said:

I'm obviously missing something here, so the hint just seems like an in-joke at my expense.

Can someone please explain the distinction between the two forums?

 

12 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

As i understand it,

One lets the threads go Off Topic by quite a stretch and the other is supposed to cover a subject and stay on the subject of the OP & not too much deviation or discussion of potential deviants or hesitations or procrastination.

 

1 hour ago, EnterName said:

Fair enough.

Not sure why people didn't point that out, instead of insinuating I'm up to something by posting on one forum and not another.

If one forum is less rigorously moderated, surely that would be suited to subjects where people are liable to disagree, without getting the discussion shut down?

 

George covered the main points but this was moved because it's also a politically biased topic - something which has had to have extra monitoring in place due to past experiences.

Notwithstanding that you also tried to broaden the scope of the thread with superfluous and irrelevant comments about his family members. That's a no-no.

It's not as if other similar threads in which you've participated haven't had to have some sort of intervention is it?

 

Anyway, due to Colin re-enacting the sermon on the mount, here it will stay and my 'not too subtle hint' obviously was still too subtle.

[mac11irl]

i cant find my **** stirring stick at the moment so my only contribution right now is to say - the OP has taken part in plenty of, and started a few, threads designed just make use of his own stirring stick, so my advice is: 

 

 

[EnterName]

I think the current "Let's go Brandon!" chants are endorsing my original point beautifully.

[EnterName]

On 24/08/2021 at 19:26, EnterName said:

Is it just my imagination, or has there been a sudden sea change in the way the media is reporting on Joe Biden?

Suddenly he's being asked serious questions, and more importantly the media are not happy when they're not getting answers.

 

There certainly seems to be a cold wind blowing from the media in Biden's direction.

Meanwhile Kamela Harris seems to be still in their good books.

I'm wondering whether the ground is being laid for a "Biden must go!" media narrative?

 

Certainly, the right-wing media seem to have smelled blood in the water and are starting to push a "Joe must go" narrative, but it's telling that there's no apparent pushback from leftist media against the narrative.

 

The media (of whatever persuasion) seldom act in isolation, whoever pays the piper calls the tune, and they seem to have changed the tune recently.

But how "they" (whoever they is) will get him to go, is what puzzles me.

Whether the media will finally discover the guy has some form of dementia, and they'll use the 25th to ease Kamala into the hot-seat, or whether he'll be the target of a "Me too!" frenzy, as the media finally notice they have spent years recording Biden's penchant for sniffing and touching people he shouldn't.

 

But however they decide to ease him out of the Oval Office, I suspect he will not complete his first term.

Well kudos to Joe for hanging on in there, or perhaps being propped up in there might be more accurate, but really, just how long can they keep the poor old duffer propped up?

 

 

 

[BTandSid]

I read somewhere that Biden was hanging in there just to offer an alternative to DT getting back in.  Still cannot get my head around the idea that DT is even allowed to stand given what he’s already been charged with, found guilty of and is still awaiting to face charges on 😳

[EnterName]

2 minutes ago, BTandSid said:

I read somewhere that Biden was hanging in there just to offer an alternative to DT getting back in.  Still cannot get my head around the idea that DT is even allowed to stand given what he’s already been charged with, found guilty of and is still awaiting to face charges on 😳

It is indeed remarkable that the Biden regime, despite their best efforts, have not yet found a way to determine who is or isn't allowed to stand in opposition to them in the next Presidential election.

[BTandSid]

3 minutes ago, EnterName said:

It is indeed remarkable that the Biden regime, despite their best efforts, have not yet found a way to determine who is or isn't allowed to stand in opposition to them in the next Presidential election.

Quite honestly I don’t really understand how the US system works. They seem to have elections in every state which eventually decides who goes forward to the final 2-person head-to-head. From what I’ve seen, DT has already won numerous states?  In the UK we have people stand to be an MP in a set constituency and if they’re in the majority party go ahead and chose their leader. Our MPs don’t stand in more than one constituency 🤔

[Ootohere]

It is only people supporting their particular party choosing who they want representing their state voting in a caucus. 

 

Trumps is not much better about being in touch with reality and has as much confusion over leaders and countries as Biden does.

[@Lee]

While Biden may have appeared confused it's admirable that he's never confused rape for consent or Stormy Daniels for Melania. 

[EnterName]

On 09/02/2024 at 22:22, @Lee said:

While Biden may have appeared confused it's admirable that he's never confused rape for consent or Stormy Daniels for Melania. 

I wouldn't bet on it.

https://nypost.com/2024/02/09/news/doctors-call-for-biden-to-take-mental-competency-test-after-scathing-classified-docs-report-something-isnt-right/

[Aspman]

Being President or PM for that matter must be an immensely physically and mentally taxing role.
Really there should be an upper limit on taking that job. The rest of us are effectively forced into retirement at the final retirement age or we get punished by the tax regime if nothing else so why is it ok for politicians to run on into their dotage.

I find it odd that the US seems right now to like to have very elderly people in charge. After all JFK seems to be regarded as a political top trump and he was in his 40s as president.

https://potus.com/presidential-facts/age-at-inauguration/

 

• Joe Biden was the oldest president sworn-in at 78 years 61 days.
• John F. Kennedy was the youngest elected president at 43 years 236 days.
• After McKinley died, Theodore Roosevelt became the youngest president at 42 years 322 days.
• William Henry Harrison became the oldest president at 68 years 23 days in 1841. He held that record for 140 years when, in 1981, Ronald Reagan was sworn in at 69 years 348 days.
• On average presidents are sworn in at 55 years old.

 

[mac11irl]

8 hours ago, Aspman said:

Being President or PM for that matter must be an immensely physically and mentally taxing role

 

it definitely is.

just look at Obama at his inauguration vs at the end of his second term. i know 8yrs passed, but im sure that job stress aged him more quickly, he hasnt changed a huge amount in the almost 8yrs since he left office...