Joe Biden

[Comped 375]

29 minutes ago, TQR said:

Hmm.

 

Honest people who are economically right-wing for non-nefarious reasons who haven’t been taken in by a cult, would criticise him. Just as “decent Tories” would fucking despise the last 13 years of government in the UK.

Some of us do...

[Sinbabad 842]

28 minutes ago, TQR said:

Hmm.

 

Honest people who are economically right-wing for non-nefarious reasons who haven’t been taken in by a cult, would criticise him. Just as “decent Tories” would fucking despise the last 13 years of government in the UK.

Ok, Trump is very obnoxious and rude when he speaks and in his behavior. But I think a lot of people were exaggerating when they say he was insane or mentally impaired. As you are when you’re using the terms ‘nefarious’ and ‘taken in by a cult’.

[TQR 12,384]

4 minutes ago, Sinbabad said:

Ok, Trump is very obnoxious and rude when he speaks and in his behavior. But I think a lot of people were exaggerating when they say he was insane or mentally impaired. As you are when you’re using the terms ‘nefarious’ and ‘taken in by a cult’.

Ok, Trump is mentally impaired and leads a nefarious cult of insane people.

[Imelda 606]

Oh dear oh dear. Heart of stone not to laugh etc 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66314934

 

An agreement expected to see US President Joe Biden's son, Hunter, plead guilty to tax charges and admit a gun offence has dramatically fallen apart in court.

The plea deal, negotiated over several weeks, was expected to spare the younger Mr Biden prison time.

But a judge on Wednesday said she could not "rubber stamp the agreement".

The case marks the first time the justice department has charged the child of a sitting president.

 

 

[Sinbabad 842]

24 minutes ago, Imelda said:

The case marks the first time the justice department has charged the child of a sitting president.

Has the justice department ever charged the child of a former president ?

[Ulitzer95 11,205]

 

[Commtech Sio Bibble 1,386]

1 minute ago, Ulitzer95 said:

 

I mean, he isn't wrong...

[DeathClock 378]

Joe Biden should be on the list next year (maybe spot 50). An 81-year-old is forced to travel around the United States to campaign and attend multiple events a day while also continuing to run the United States. Seems like a lot for someone already not in great shape. 

[Summer in Transylvania 1,627]

The House of Representatives is opening an impeachment inquiry into Biden.

[DeathClock 378]

On 30/08/2023 at 15:15, DeathClock said:

Joe Biden should be on the list next year (maybe spot 50). An 81-year-old is forced to travel around the United States to campaign and attend multiple events a day while also continuing to run the United States. Seems like a lot for someone already not in great shape. 

Does anybody want to debate me instead of giving me facepalms? Tell me where I am wrong

[Commtech Sio Bibble 1,386]

22 minutes ago, DeathClock said:

Does anybody want to debate me instead of giving me facepalms? Tell me where I am wrong

I won't say he's in the best of shape but considering the list only has 50 slots, there's probably at least 3x that many people in worse off shape who are also high profile and deserve slots over him.

[MortalCaso 1,435]

10 minutes ago, Commtech Sio Bibble said:

I won't say he's in the best of shape but considering the list only has 50 slots, there's probably at least 3x that many people in worse off shape who are also high profile and deserve slots over him.

Agreed. Consider that they left Pope Benny off last year.

 

50 spots and they missed him. You want to use one of them for Biden now? Just a tad deluded. 

Give it another year or so. I don't think it would be the worst idea near the end of his 2nd term.

[tracy 1,888]

36 minutes ago, DeathClock said:

Does anybody want to debate me instead of giving me facepalms? Tell me where I am wrong

 

Sure, I'm bored, why not.

 

1. Why would Biden "travel[ing] around the United States to campaign and attend[ing] multiple events a day" have such a dramatic effect on his health that he'd actually croak? Just glancing at his schedule this month, he's already made about ~12 flights, and obviously he still attends events. This seems like something that'd be quite unlikely to take him out.

2. Why would Biden be "forced" to travel? I imagine with his age/senility, his handlers have a tight leash on him. If, in the event that somehow this stuff puts him on death's door, they would likely come up with an excuse to make his rallies "virtual"/just trot someone like Jill out. 

3. We all know Biden is, to put it politely, not especially sharp, but it's more than possible to be mentally fried and still live for years. In Biden's case, he doesn't seem very physically fragile; there are several octogenarians who would have been crippled by the tumbles he's taken over the years, and his parents were both long-lived.

4. Why should the list gamble on someone who is not outwardly dying and likely being constantly watched by a medical staff when theoretically everyone on the list should be very likely to die? Yes, they do wishful thinking picks occasionally (why else would Cheney have been on 5 times by now) but those are middling selections and shouldn't be imitated. I'd also at the moment be against adding McConnell, even though he's clearly declining, because he's still in the "ailing-but-potentially-not-imminent" phase.

[Perhaps 1,367]

@Paul Bearer surely @DeathClock and @DeathClock2 are the same person and number 2 should be banned.

[Clorox Bleachman 2,036]

7 minutes ago, Perhaps said:

@Paul Bearer surely @DeathClock and @DeathClock2 are the same person and number 2 should be banned.

Don't know why that's relevant when DeathClock2 has made 2 posts (and only 3 reactions, because I know reactions annoy you) in 2 years. If they were having arguments with 1 hand in each sockpuppet then I would understand.

[Perhaps 1,367]

2 minutes ago, Clorox Bleachman said:

Don't know why that's relevant when DeathClock2 has made 2 posts (and only 3 reactions, because I know reactions annoy you) in 2 years. If they were having arguments with 1 hand in each sockpuppet then I would understand.

 

Nope. 2 accounts of any form aren't allowed if I recall. He's had that second account since January 2022 and, for some reason, is still active on it as of last week. Given his reputation for horseshit quality posts he's probably sitting on it for a rainy day.

[TQR 12,384]

30 minutes ago, Perhaps said:

 

Nope. 2 accounts of any form aren't allowed if I recall. He's had that second account since January 2022 and, for some reason, is still active on it as of last week. Given his reputation for horseshit quality posts he's probably sitting on it for a rainy day.

 

I've just looked through the guidelines (first time in nearly 7 years of being here), as it turns out there's no actual mention of having more than one account being prohibited, though I always just assumed it was (and it bloody should be). Mind, a fair few people are or have been at it though, including at least one mod.

[DeathClock 378]

4 hours ago, Perhaps said:

@Paul Bearer surely @DeathClock and @DeathClock2 are the same person and number 2 should be banned.

Hi Perhaps,

 

First of all, if I had a burner account why would I make it completely obvious by naming it DeathClock2 lmao. Are you actively searching for a potential burner of mine? Do I live rent-free in your mind? And you want to get me banned because I ask questions to create discussions such as if Biden should be put on the list lmao. Go outside and stop spending so much time on this website. 

[Perhaps 1,367]

Just now, DeathClock said:

Hi Perhaps,

 

First of all, if I had a burner account why would I make it completely obvious by naming it DeathClock2 lmao. Are you actively searching for a potential burner of mine? Do I live rent-free in your mind? And you want to get me banned because I ask questions to create discussions such as if Biden should be put on the list. Go outside and stop spending so much on this website. 

 

Eat my ass you lil ragebaiter

[Bibliogryphon 8,711]

If we assume that we lose both the Carters this year (not a given) then 2024 could be the first list since 2012 which did not contain a US former President or First-Lady. However I do not think Biden would be my first choice to go on here out of that pool

 

Though it is worth noting that the 2012 list did contain Henry Kissinger

[Toast 14,890]

1 hour ago, Bibliogryphon said:

both the Carter's

 

Biblio!  I'm shocked at this apostrophe abuse from you!

We should all know by now that an apostrophe is never* used to form a plural. 

 

* IMBW, but I think the one exception is words of a single letter, eg "mind your p's and q's". 

[Bibliogryphon 8,711]

2 minutes ago, Toast said:

 

Biblio!  I'm shocked at this apostrophe abuse from you!

We should all know by now that an apostrophe is never* used to form a plural. 

 

* IMBW, but I think the one exception is words of a single letter, eg "mind your p's and q's". 

 

Corrected

 

 

[Deadboy999 157]

Lock him up!!

[Deadboy999 157]

It's annoying isn't it just saying stupid slogans , now you know how trump's people feel right now.

[Luis Palominio 10]

7 hours ago, Bibliogryphon said:

If we assume that we lose both the Carters this year (not a given) then 2024 could be the first list since 2012 which did not contain a US former President or First-Lady. However I do not think Biden would be my first choice to go on here out of that pool

 

Though it is worth noting that the 2012 list did contain Henry Kissinger

When Jimmy Carter pass away, I think the next president to debut would be Joe Biden.