Split Biden or Trump too old?

[Derec]

All presidents rely very very heavily on their staff and cabinet. Decent CEOs do as well.

They do. In order to help them implement their vision. Not to serve as a figurehead for somebody's else's vision to be implemented.

Which does not make them figure heads but effective leaders. Attempting to do everything yourself is as foolish and ineffective as attempting to plow and plant and harvest and mill and market and sell produce from 10000acres of la

Who said that Biden should micromanage everything? But he ran as a moderate. And we the voters expected him to govern as one.

What an effective leader does is to assemble a team that shares a vision, is more than competent, dedicated, well informed and also willing to give push back and who can work independently to carry out the vision.

Exactly. And Biden failed to do that.

Trump’s buffoonery would have been of little consequence of he had a thing like a coherent plan—or competent staff. We should all be grateful they were so grossly incompetent that they failed to completely destroy the nation.

Even Trump managed to accomplish some things - tax cuts for example, and rapprochement between many Arab states and Israel was also started by his administration. But even he ran as more moderate than he turned out to be.
But yes, one big problem with Trump was lack of follow-through. Like when he droned Soleimani. Iran then attacked a US base with missiles and Trump effectively did not respond. He should have bombed IRGC targets. And also their nuclear sites.
Because where are we now? We are back to rotten deals and giving the theocratic regime in Tehran billions of dollars. Another of Biden's foreign policy blunders.

 

[Toni]

All presidents rely very very heavily on their staff and cabinet. Decent CEOs do as well.

They do. In order to help them implement their vision. Not to serve as a figurehead for somebody's else's vision to be implemented.

Which does not make them figure heads but effective leaders. Attempting to do everything yourself is as foolish and ineffective as attempting to plow and plant and harvest and mill and market and sell produce from 10000acres of la

Who said that Biden should micromanage everything? But he ran as a moderate. And we the voters expected him to govern as one.

What an effective leader does is to assemble a team that shares a vision, is more than competent, dedicated, well informed and also willing to give push back and who can work independently to carry out the vision.

Exactly. And Biden failed to do that.

Trump’s buffoonery would have been of little consequence of he had a thing like a coherent plan—or competent staff. We should all be grateful they were so grossly incompetent that they failed to completely destroy the nation.

Even Trump managed to accomplish some things - tax cuts for example, and rapprochement between many Arab states and Israel was also started by his administration. But even he ran as more moderate than he turned out to be.
But yes, one big problem with Trump was lack of follow-through. Like when he droned Soleimani. Iran then attacked a US base with missiles and Trump effectively did not respond. He should have bombed IRGC targets. And also their nuclear sites.
Because where are we now? We are back to rotten deals and giving the theocratic regime in Tehran billions of dollars. Another of Biden's foreign policy blunders.

The thing is, Derec, Biden is not just a figurehead. The so called progressive legislation that has been put over seems progressive only compared with Trump and Bush II. Frankly, Richard Nixon was more progressive and actually advocated for a negative income tax (aka universal basic income).

 

[laughing dog]

Because where are we now? We are back to rotten deals and giving the theocratic regime in Tehran billions of dollars. Another of Biden's foreign policy blunders.

Stop pushing rightwing lies. We are not giving Tehran billions of dollars. We are unfreezing some of their assets so that they can use them for humanitarian purposes. Yes, I know money is funigible. But the point is charges like yours should be accurate.

Another point is that the world being what it is, there will be only rotten deals with regimes like Iran. The adult question is whether one can live with the degree of "rottenness" and its foreseeable outcomes.

Right now, Iran's regime is slowly throttling itself. Frankly, short of a miracle, I cannot think of a better longer run outcome than Iranians cleaning up themselves because any other alternative seems to present simply more death and destruction to the region and the world.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Derec]

Stop pushing rightwing lies.

Not lies, and not right wing either.

We are not giving Tehran billions of dollars. We are unfreezing some of their assets so that they can use them for humanitarian purposes.

I did not say that these were US tax dollars. They are being given moneys they did not have before, no matter the provenance of those moneys. The verb was correct.
As to "humanitarian", not even the theocrats in Tehran are claiming that.
Iranian president says Tehran will spend the $6 billion released in prisoner exchange ‘wherever we need it’

Yes, I know money is funigible.

That too.

But the point is charges like yours should be accurate.

I did not say anything inaccurate.

Another point is that the world being what it is, there will be only rotten deals with regimes like Iran. The adult question is whether one can live with the degree of "rottenness" and its foreseeable outcomes.

I do not think this deal was particularly favorable for the US.

now, Iran's regime is slowly throttling itself. Frankly, short of a miracle, I cannot think of a better longer run outcome than Iranians cleaning up themselves because any other alternative seems to present simply more death and destruction to the region and the world

Brutal dictatorships can sustain themselves a long time. Just look at North Korea. And once they get the bomb, it will be nearly impossible to unseat them. Better to strike while the striking is good.

 

[Derec]

The thing is, Derec, Biden is not just a figurehead.

He seems to be it more and more as the time goes on.
The so called progressive legislation that has been put over seems progressive only compared with Trump and Bush II. [/quote]
And also compared with Obama or Biden in Senate.

Frankly, Richard Nixon was more progressive and actually advocated for a negative income tax (aka universal basic income).

Many people (usually those with kids) have negative federal income taxes. That's called reversible tax credits (like child tax credit and EITC), not UBI. After those credits, many people have a negative net tax rate.

When has Nixon advocated UBI?

 

[Patooka]

I did not say that these were US tax dollars. They are being given moneys they did not have before, no matter the provenance of those moneys. The verb was correct.

Firstly, the correct verb would be "returning". An even more correct description would not be mentioning the US at all since it is Qatar that is unfreezing the assets. Secondly, you absolutely did imply that Iran was receiving US tax dollars for hostages. That was your intent.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Who said that Biden should micromanage everything? But he ran as a moderate. And we the voters expected him to govern as one.

did you personally vote for him? If not then there was no bait and switch because you didn’t take the bait. If the people who *did* vote be or him are unhappy with his performance they can vote for someone else in the next election.

 

[Toni]

Stop pushing rightwing lies.

Not lies, and not right wing either.

We are not giving Tehran billions of dollars. We are unfreezing some of their assets so that they can use them for humanitarian purposes.

I did not say that these were US tax dollars. They are being given moneys they did not have before, no matter the provenance of those moneys. The verb was correct.
As to "humanitarian", not even the theocrats in Tehran are claiming that.
Iranian president says Tehran will spend the $6 billion released in prisoner exchange ‘wherever we need it’

Yes, I know money is funigible.

That too.

But the point is charges like yours should be accurate.

I did not say anything inaccurate.

Another point is that the world being what it is, there will be only rotten deals with regimes like Iran. The adult question is whether one can live with the degree of "rottenness" and its foreseeable outcomes.

I do not think this deal was particularly favorable for the US.

now, Iran's regime is slowly throttling itself. Frankly, short of a miracle, I cannot think of a better longer run outcome than Iranians cleaning up themselves because any other alternative seems to present simply more death and destruction to the region and the world

Brutal dictatorships can sustain themselves a long time. Just look at North Korea. And once they get the bomb, it will be nearly impossible to unseat them. Better to strike while the striking is good.

Eh, we were holding THEIR money and they were hiding OUR people. We traded.

The thing about unseating ( or propping up) brutal dictatorships is what comes next. It’s not neat and clean and is not always an improvement.

 

[Toni]

The thing is, Derec, Biden is not just a figurehead.

He seems to be it more and more as the time goes on.
The so called progressive legislation that has been put over seems progressive only compared with Trump and Bush II.

And also compared with Obama or Biden in Senate.

Frankly, Richard Nixon was more progressive and actually advocated for a negative income tax (aka universal basic income).

Many people (usually those with kids) have negative federal income taxes. That's called reversible tax credits (like child tax credit and EITC), not UBI. After those credits, many people have a negative net tax rate.

When has Nixon advocated UBI?
[/QUOTE]

Negative income tax, explained | MIT Sloan

Could a negative income tax replace the welfare system?

mitsloan.mit.edu

 

[laughing dog]

Stop pushing rightwing lies.

Not lies, and not right wing either……

We are not giving Tehran billions of dollars. We are unfreezing some of their assets so that they can use them for humanitarian purposes.

I did not say that these were US tax dollars. They are being given moneys they did not have before, no matter the provenance of those moneys. The verb was correct.
As to "humanitarian", not even the theocrats in Tehran are claiming that.
Iranian president says Tehran will spend the $6 billion released in prisoner exchange ‘wherever we need it’

Yes, I know money is funigible.

That too.

But the point is charges like yours should be accurate.

I did not say anything inaccurate.

of course it is. Iran is getting access to their funds in a limited manner. Their funds.

Of course they will claim they can do anything they want. Just like we will say only for humanitarian purposes. Talk is cheap. Only time will tell who (if anyone in this deal) tells the truth.

But you keep repeating the right wing lies.

 

[bilby]

I did not say that these were US tax dollars. They are being given moneys they did not have before, no matter the provenance of those moneys. The verb was correct.

Firstly, the correct verb would be "returning". An even more correct description would not be mentioning the US at all since it is Qatar that is unfreezing the assets. Secondly, you absolutely did imply that Iran was receiving US tax dollars for hostages. That was your intent.

Iran is also collecting a decent income from international aviation, as a consequence of the war in Ukraine, and instability in Iraq. Three years ago, almost no international flights transited Iranian airspace. Today it's a difficult story; To avoid both Ukrainian and Iraqi airspace, almost all flights between Europe and Southeast Asia or India have to overfly Iran and Turkey.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Biden too old?
Trump, too old, too crooked, too stupid.
Vivek Ramaswamy, too incompetent, too stupid.
Ron DeSantis, too stupid, extreme, too incompetent.
All other GOP candidates, too stupid, too useless, not a chance in hell of winning election.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Trump’s buffoonery would have been of little consequence of he had a thing like a coherent plan—or competent staff. We should all be grateful they were so grossly incompetent that they failed to completely destroy the nation.

Even Trump managed to accomplish some things - tax cuts for example, and rapprochement between many Arab states and Israel was also started by his administration. But even he ran as more moderate than he turned out to be.
But yes, one big problem with Trump was lack of follow-through. Like when he droned Soleimani. Iran then attacked a US base with missiles and Trump effectively did not respond. He should have bombed IRGC targets. And also their nuclear sites.
Because where are we now? We are back to rotten deals and giving the theocratic regime in Tehran billions of dollars. Another of Biden's foreign policy blunders.

Jacking up the credit card is hardly an accomplishment. The rest of that, you'd be hard-pressed to find even a small minority of people in polling who give a damn. Then again I've yet to find polling that directly asks the American people if they give a good goddamn about Israel or not.

Most Important Problem

What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today? [Open-ended]

news.gallup.com

Nope. Doesn't even make the "Things I give a damn about the most" list.

 

[Elixir]

Biden too old?
Trump, too old, too crooked, too stupid.
Vivek Ramaswamy, too incompetent, too stupid.
Ron DeSantis, too stupid, extreme, too incompetent.
All other GOP candidates, too stupid, too useless, not a chance in hell of winning election.

I think I have detected a recurrent theme.
Stupid-Republican

You imply that this is a disqualifier. But Murkins are stupid and ignorant, and Republican efforts to keep them that way, have been paying off in spades.

 

[Derec]

Firstly, the correct verb would be "returning".

I do not think they had those funds before, so I do not think "returning" is right.
But this is becoming a semantic quibble. The main point is that the illegitimate regime in Tehran got funds that they would have had otherwise. I think "giving" is the right verb here. Even if you and others disagree, it does not change the facts that the regime is not several billion dollars richer than before this act by the Biden administration.

An even more correct description would not be mentioning the US at all since it is Qatar that is unfreezing the assets.

Technicalities. Big picture is, without that deal, Tehran regime would not have these funds. Period.
And what are they doing with the moneys? It funds terrorism.

Secondly, you absolutely did imply that Iran was receiving US tax dollars for hostages. That was your intent.

No, I did not. It is not my fault that you may have inferred what was never implied.

 

[Derec]

Jacking up the credit card is hardly an accomplishment.

Tell that to those who have been pushing the B³ spending bill.

The rest of that, you'd be hard-pressed to find even a small minority of people in polling who give a damn.

Just because an issue does not make (it high on) a list of what the most important issue is does not mean that the voters do not care about it.
Abortion is not high on this list either, and yet it did play a decisive role in the 2022 election.

 

[Derec]

Vivek Ramaswamy, too incompetent, too stupid.
Ron DeSantis, too stupid, extreme, too incompetent.

Somebody who graduated from Harvard and Yale, esp. without the benefit of racial preferences in admissions, is hardly "stupid".

 

[Derec]

Stupid-Republican

Plenty of very stupid Democrats too.

 

[laughing dog]

Firstly, the correct verb would be "returning".

I do not think they had those funds before, so I do not think "returning" is right.
But this is becoming a semantic quibble. The main point is that the illegitimate regime in Tehran got funds that they would have had otherwise. I think "giving" is the right verb here. Even if you and others disagree, it does not change the facts that the regime is not several billion dollars richer than before this act by the Biden administration.

The regime cannot possibly be richer by getting limiting access to their funds. The regime’s liquidity has improved but their wealth has not changed. Do try to be more precise in your vocabulary.

No, I did not. It is not my fault that you may have inferred what was never implied.

Writers are responsible for their vagueness which may lead to incorrect inferences.