Joe Biden

[maryportfuncity 10,331]

7 minutes ago, Grim Up North said:

Are women and men that seek powerful roles that much different?

 

I think I could argue quite successfully that Margaret Thatcher was one of our most aggressive PMs whereas David Cameron was a wet lettuce. I don’t see Kier Starmer as aggressive either but I didn’t want someone to say that was a party political difference.

 

 

Spitting Image had loads of fun with a tough male Thatcher, can't find it in a quick search and morning coffee with Mrs MPFC beckons, but there's a cracking sketch on Spitting Image set in a gents toilet where she muscles up to the front and none of the rest of the cabinet can get their piss out because she terrifies them so much. 

[Deadboy999 170]

I'm so pissed they done this to president Biden,a total coup, Biden should just say “Fuck you” and take back what is rightfully is.

I'm ridin' with Biden!

[En Passant 3,418]

1 hour ago, Grim Up North said:

Are women and men that seek powerful roles that much different?

 

I think I could argue quite successfully that Margaret Thatcher was one of our most aggressive PMs whereas David Cameron was a wet lettuce. I don’t see Kier Starmer as aggressive either but I didn’t want someone to say that was a party political difference.

 

Oh I meant in general.

Sure one can name massively aggressive individual women (and Thatcher sure was one), and less aggressive men (not sure I want to equate it with 'wet', that's half the problem imo - though may apply in Camercons case).

And also yes, it also has been the case that those who covet power are those we'd least like to have it in many cases.

 

My theory is just that if you'd replaced every male leader in history with a female counterpart there'd have been less wars, less deaths and less pain overall. 'Tis just a theory of course.

 

[Grim Up North 3,650]

2 hours ago, En Passant said:

 

Oh I meant in general.

Sure one can name massively aggressive individual women (and Thatcher sure was one), and less aggressive men (not sure I want to equate it with 'wet', that's half the problem imo - though may apply in Camercons case).

And also yes, it also has been the case that those who covet power are those we'd least like to have it in many cases.

 

My theory is just that if you'd replaced every male leader in history with a female counterpart there'd have been less wars, less deaths and less pain overall. 'Tis just a theory of course.

 

Did you watch Game of Thrones? 
 

I understand your theory I just think your faith in women is misplaced.

 

The UK has had three female PMs - Thatcher, May and Truss - I don’t see any of them as the caring compassionate sort.

[TQR 13,936]

19 minutes ago, Grim Up North said:

The UK has had three female PMs - Thatcher, May and Truss - I don’t see any of them as the caring compassionate sort.

True, but they all have one political party in common too so maybe not the best representation.

 

Australia’s Gillard, NZ’s Ardern and Finland’s Marin, though none of whom had faultless premierships, all had largely compassionate dispositions.

[En Passant 3,418]

17 minutes ago, Grim Up North said:

Did you watch Game of Thrones? 
 

I understand your theory I just think your faith in women is misplaced.

 

The UK has had three female PMs - Thatcher, May and Truss - I don’t see any of them as the caring compassionate sort.

 

Sure, it was good fun, but with respect it's fictional. Cersei was even more hateful to me than Joffrey in the end, he was too dim to be as dangerous as her.

 

I wouldn't describe it as 'faith in women' per-se, more that on average they are somewhat less aggressive than men. From at one end fewer female murderers particularly of the multiple/serial kind, not one female mass shooting culprit in the US that I can think of down to at the other end statistics as banal as less aggressive drivers attracting lower insurance premiums.

 

One can always find examples that show the opposite, and to some degree politics is an aggressive endeavour in the first place, particularly so in the UK and US with our combative systems, so perhaps it is the case that only above averagely aggressive women will succeed in it. Thatcher is a bit of an outlier, I don't personally believe May was a terrible PM (aside from being a Tory) and Truss was a loon even they couldn't support in the end.

 

5 minutes ago, TQR said:

True, but they all have one political party in common too so maybe not the best representation.

 

Australia’s Gillard, NZ’s Ardern and Finland’s Marin, though none of whom had faultless premierships, all had largely compassionate dispositions. 

 

Yes, I was thinking of Ardern and Marin myself.

 

Ultimately it's not that 'there would be no wars - deaths - pain' had there been women in charge. Merely 'less' and as such I'd personally like to see more going forward until I'm inevitably proven wrong.

'tis all, I'm not suggesting it's gospel .

[msc 18,129]

Theresa May, if we can overlook her blinkered lack of pragmatism and authoritarian streak for a second, did liberalise laws to protect domestic abuse victims, renters rights, and brought in the energy cap we all know now as an attempt to block bigger bills. Even being Theresa May she still had more good points than Boris Johnson or David Cameron, despite all her numerous flaws and being the architect of our crap Brexit deal.

 

But then America wise if we were to list the US Presidents who had been genuinely good people it might be a small list. Quincy Adams, Ulysses Grant, Abe Lincoln, Jimmy Carter for example and then you'd have people pointing out their flaws because they were human. 

 

Depends on the individual circumstances. Biden would have been a better candidate in 2016 than Hilary but in 2024 Kamala Harris is probably a better candidate than Joe Biden. Meanwhile going back a bit, Hilary Clinton would have been a far better candidate than John Kerry but chose to sit that election out for a better option that never arose.

[Comped 449]

2 hours ago, msc said:

Hilary Clinton would have been a far better candidate than John Kerry but chose to sit that election out for a better option that never arose.

I met John Kerry not terribly long before he was appointed SoS under Obama, maybe a year or two before. Nice guy, but I'm still confused why my state kept electing him for so long.

[MrWonderful 440]

12 hours ago, En Passant said:

I'd love her to pick Gretchen Whitmer. I think a world run entirely by women would primarily be a less aggressive one than men have managed throughout history with the US leading the way for once instead of simply proclaiming that they do.

Won't happen of course, far too risky, but one can dream.

Whitmer has already made it clear that she doesn't want the VP slot.  Same as Gavin Newsom.  Overnight, Kelly's odds have gone up slightly, still the favorite now at +140.  Shapiro is next at +300, with Cooper at +375.  Then it's Beshear at +1000, with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz at +1400.  

[YoungWillz 20,225]

It was extremely sad to see his speech to the US.

 

Bronzed up like Trump, stumbling profusely, but the message and hope for America still there.

 

I wonder if he is still quite ill.

[MortalCaso 1,528]

45 minutes ago, YoungWillz said:

It was extremely sad to see his speech to the US.

 

Bronzed up like Trump, stumbling profusely, but the message and hope for America still there.

 

I wonder if he is still quite ill.

It was sad indeed. As someone that voted for him especially.

 

Glad he made the right decision and I hope he gets a few healthy years with his family.