Is Biden the luckiest US president ever? - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Is Biden the luckiest US president ever?

Yes
1
8%
No
8
67%
Other(Who else was luckier?)
3
25%
#15261311
As far as I know, Biden is the first president to already suffer from dementia when he still was in the candidate race, and yet he "won" that (that was really just because Obama arranged it such) and the presidential race as well. I dont know if I would really call that "lucky" though. More another sign of the decay of the US empire.

Trump lost because he triggers priviledged people who dont actually need anything from politics and got offended by Trump, and because he didnt offer anything to regular people. Legalizing Marihuana, Universal Health Care, Student Debt Forgiveness, or simply keeping sending checks with his name on it, any of these would probably have worked, even more so if he would have done multiple things of these. But Trump did nothing and so he lost.

I have no idea why anyone would claim that Biden handled COVID well. He really did nothing about it. It was Omicron who resolved the pandemic, not anything any politican anywhere did. The USA reduced its medical capacities further during COVID19 and they didnt even offer universal health care during a pandemic.

Ukraine is f-ed.



Rancid wrote:I'm not so sure about that. We have a lot of Bluto's in the US. Lots of morons.


I dont know about Bluto, but lots of people who actually want, NEED something from politicians - and Biden gave them zip. Neither did Obama or any president since Ronald Reagan.

Trump ... send checks with his name on it.

Istanbuller wrote: US Congress cannot fund Ukraine for ever.


Oh but that they could, easily.

Russia has raised its military spending from around 60 to around 80 billion dollar last year. So they spend 20 billion on the war with Ukraine, or thereabouts.

The USA spent 110 billions so far on Ukraine.

The problem is that Ukraine in the end doesnt need money, but it needs actualy military goods, and the USA simply doesnt have the ability to produce sufficient amounts of those in a short enough timeframe. Instead they send their overengineered overpriced junk thats not actually designed for a real war with an equally well equipped foe (such as Russia) and it takes ages before the actual product is sent and the USA doesnt have the ability to increase production either.

Which is why Ukraine is doomed.

late wrote: Biden was talking about *avoidable* deaths.


Which unsurprisingly was a complete lie, Biden has no archievement whatsoever in that area either. All that Biden brought is vaccine mandates, and those only served to maximize profits for the pharma industry, not actually improve anyones life.

late wrote:Trump cut the deal to get out of Afghanistan.


WTF ? It was Biden who got out of Afghanistan, and it wasnt voluntary.

Trump wanted to get out of Afghanistan and Syria, but he failed to archieve that. The US is still in Syria.
#15261323
Negotiator wrote:Russia has raised its military spending from around 60 to around 80 billion dollar last year. So they spend 20 billion on the war with Ukraine, or thereabouts.

The USA spent 110 billions so far on Ukraine.


No, Russia is spending far more on this war than that. Direct costs, lost productivity in other sectors and missed opportunities are spiraling. Ukraine has suffered far worse, yes, and would be in a truly dire situation without foreign support. It seems that they are finally getting their tanks at least. :)

How much has Russia spent on Ukraine war? A quarter of its annual budget

Estimates suggest Russia has spent a quarter of its annual budget on the Ukraine war in the last nine months since Moscow began its invasion in February this year. Russia has spent $82 billion on its invasion, according to Forbes.

Forbes also said that Russia's federal budget revenues from the export of oil and gas are decreasing, after it lost most of the European gas market. It is happening as the cost of war expenses doubled this autumn, with the conflict requiring at least $10 billion a month.


'Free the Leopards!' Campaign aims to 'embarrass' Germany into sending tanks to Ukraine

Until now, no Western country has given main battle tanks to help the Ukrainian military -- although France announced this week that so-called light tanks, the AMX-10 RC armoured fighting vehicles, will be supplied for the first time.

The US said it would consider sending similar Bradley Fighting Vehicles as well.
#15261853
late wrote:Republicans left behind a series of disasters, Biden's done a good job at dealing with them.

But thanks for that joke.



The joke is Biden giving Afghanistan to the Taliban, the southern border to the cartels and the go-ahead to Russia to invade Ukraine and destabilize Europe.

It's a toss up if Jimmy Carter or Let's Go Brandon is worse. Maybe Bidenflation will blow through the Misery Index and settle the question once and for all.
#15261856
BlutoSays wrote:Hmmm? Wut?


Image


Image


Image



reposting other peoples thoughts and lies again Bluto they are very definition of a useful idiot.

posting stuff you neither understand or can explain.

How are the Nazi woke Bluto can you explain that?

No you will not. Because you don't understand it it was someone else's lie.

It's anotehr loop around the fish bowl posting more nonsense you do not understand.



What the difference between a car salesman and a computer salesman?


A car salesman knows when he's lying to you..
#15261861
BlutoSays wrote:
The joke is Biden giving Afghanistan to the Taliban

the southern border to the cartels

and the go-ahead to Russia to invade Ukraine

and destabilize Europe.



Trump cut that deal.

That doesn't make sense.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine again. Read what he says...

Europe has united against their common threat. To be honest, I expected a lot of instability, but so far, there hasn't been much. Btw, a lot of what Trump did hurt European stability. What a coincidence that this was what Putin wanted...
#15261867
BlutoSays wrote:The joke is Biden giving Afghanistan to the Taliban, the southern border to the cartels and the go-ahead to Russia to invade Ukraine and destabilize Europe.

It's a toss up if Jimmy Carter or Let's Go Brandon is worse. Maybe Bidenflation will blow through the Misery Index and settle the question once and for all.



Afghanistan to Taliban is the Trumps deal that Biden honored. Arguably both Biden and Trump are not really responsible for the mess since they weren't the presidents who started it but had to clean up the mess. That you know yourself.

Southern Border to the cartels: They have been under the cartels since like Reagan and may be even before. Not sure who to even blame here besides the Mexican government not being able to solve the problem.

Russia invasion of Ukraine is weird. Probably Merkel leaving German politics was the defining factor that made Putin launch the invasion on top of his need to rule forever. Trump, Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr or Reagan being at power at the time wouldn't matter at all. Putin bet that Europe would be divided that Ukraine would fall fast which was a drastic miscalculation.

Biden is not the worst by any measure. I would say even that he will be remembered as somewhere near the best after his 2 terms(If his health allows him a 2nd term), post-Covid/Ukraine boom, victory over Russia and so on. His lucky in that regard.
#15261877
Unthinking Majority wrote:
No doubt


True, he got the bulk of the time between the fall of the Soviet Union and 9/11. That was a good time to be president. Aside from blow jobs, the economy was mostly good (except .com bubble.. which wasn't that bad), and Serbia/Bosnia was his other legacy. A non-solution type of solution. That one was probably the most impactful to the planet going forward. We still see its effects today.
#15262013
JohnRawls wrote:Afghanistan to Taliban is the Trumps deal that Biden honored. Arguably both Biden and Trump are not really responsible for the mess since they weren't the presidents who started it but had to clean up the mess. That you know yourself.

Southern Border to the cartels: They have been under the cartels since like Reagan and may be even before. Not sure who to even blame here besides the Mexican government not being able to solve the problem.

Russia invasion of Ukraine is weird. Probably Merkel leaving German politics was the defining factor that made Putin launch the invasion on top of his need to rule forever. Trump, Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr or Reagan being at power at the time wouldn't matter at all. Putin bet that Europe would be divided that Ukraine would fall fast which was a drastic miscalculation.

Biden is not the worst by any measure. I would say even that he will be remembered as somewhere near the best after his 2 terms(If his health allows him a 2nd term), post-Covid/Ukraine boom, victory over Russia and so on. His lucky in that regard.


Image


Biden is responsible for the mess. All of the mess. He's been a fucking disaster.
#15262015
BlutoSays wrote:Image


Biden is responsible for the mess. All of the mess. He's been a fucking disaster.


Sure, as a president he is if you don't want to consider circumstances.

He still will get elected for a 2nd term if he runs.
#15262024
If Biden is a disaster, then Trump was an atrocity.

JohnRawls wrote:He still will get elected for a 2nd term if he runs.


I don't know about that. Americans are pretty fucking stupid (see Bluto).
#15262035
wat0n wrote:Luckiest POTUS ever was Bill Clinton, hands down...

It was rather Truman. Bill Clinton was a skillful and talented politician who almost made his wife the first female president, whereas Truman was just a lucky ordinary guy that became president at the best of times in US history by mere luck.

Biden's biggest luck was that he got picked by Barack Obama.
#15262055
Beren wrote:It was rather Truman. Bill Clinton was a skillful and talented politician who almost made his wife the first female president, whereas Truman was just a lucky ordinary guy that became president at the best of times in US history by mere luck.

Biden's biggest luck was that he got picked by Barack Obama.


Truman was President in tougher and more dangerous times for the US than Clinton did, so I don't agree with you here.
#15262060
wat0n wrote:Truman was President in tougher and more dangerous times for the US than Clinton did, so I don't agree with you here.

Truman inherited a country winning the biggest war in human history, and it was the time when the US was still on the rise and stepped up as the dominant superpower setting a new world order and making the US dollar the world currency, so he could really make history, while Clinton could only ride the waves after the US had won the Cold War. The point, however, is that it happened to Truman by mere luck rather than due to his political skills or talent, while Clinton was a real politician.
#15262061
Beren wrote:Truman inherited a country winning the biggest war in human history, and it was the time when the US was still on the rise and stepped up as the dominant superpower setting a new world order and making the US dollar the world currency, so he could really make history, while Clinton could only ride the waves after the US had won the Cold War. The point, however, is that it happened to Truman by mere luck rather than due to his political skills or talent, while Clinton was a real politician.


Bolded part is exactly why Clinton was so lucky. He was also lucky because he was elected after 12 years of GOP administrations and the erosion of popularity that comes with that, with a recession on the election year and a previous POTUS who had broken a promise not to raise taxes. And let's not forget about the economy, he also got to enjoy a positive productivity shock (the start of the massification of the Internet) while as President.

Real politician or not, none of this was Clinton's merit.
#15262062
wat0n wrote:Bolded part is exactly why Clinton was so lucky. He was also lucky because he was elected after 12 years of GOP administrations and the erosion of popularity that comes with that, with a recession on the election year and a previous POTUS who had broken a promise not to raise taxes. And let's not forget about the economy, he also got to enjoy a positive productivity shock (the start of the massification of the Internet) while as President.

Real politician or not, none of this was Clinton's merit.

Nothing was Truman's merit, though, and he got a lot more with the presidency than Clinton did. I mean the presidency itself was more meaningful than it was under Clinton, in a more historic time as well. It may have been easier for Clinton, although I wonder if it really counts as luck. I'd have been POTUS instead of Truman rather than Clinton anyway.
#15262064
Beren wrote:Nothing was Truman's merit, though, and he got a lot more with the presidency than Clinton did. I mean the presidency itself was more meaningful than it was under Clinton, in a more historic time as well. It may have been easier for Clinton, although I wonder if it really counts as luck. I'd have been POTUS instead of Truman rather than Clinton anyway.


IMHO an easy presidency is probably as lucky as a President can get. I would definitely not rate Truman's as "easy".

The problem with saying "white men" as […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Yet the Germans eventually came to accept the All[…]

It was smallpox which defeated the Aztecs, not Co[…]

Jews were not considered German and the nsdap p[…]