219
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Biden was emerging from his Delaware campaign headquarters when the car ploughed into an SUV guarding his motorcade

President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden were rushed to safety by the Secret Service after a car suddenly ploughed into a parked SUV that was guarding the presidential motorcade.

Mr Biden was walking out of his campaign headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware, on Sunday night to his waiting armoured SUV when a silver copper sedan hit a US Secret Service vehicle that was closing off intersections for the president’s departure.

The sedan, which carried a Delaware licence plate, then tried to continue into a closed-off intersection, before Secret Service personnel surrounded the vehicle with their weapons drawn and instructed the driver to put his hands up.

Mr Biden was captured looking stunned and froze when he heard the loud bang close by.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] dhork@lemmy.world 145 points 11 months ago

The article says that Biden "looked stunned and froze", but there is video embedded in the article and it's clear that Biden was stunned in the sense of "Holy shit, what was that?", and not in terms of having some sort of episode. But now we're gonna get all the idiots reminding us that they think Biden is too old for all this.

[-] cmbabul@lemmy.world 73 points 11 months ago

I mean Biden is too old, so is Trump, so is Nancy, so are most of the folks currently running our government. It’s a problem, but it’s not one unique to Joe, it’s systemic

Biden the a far better and more mentally qualified candidate than Trump for virtually any position but especially president, not to mention not expressing desires to be a dictator or echoed Hitler.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago

He is to old for this, hell he even says he doesn't want to do this anymore but is because trump is running....but this is not why he is to old for it.

[-] TigrisMorte@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

Given the lunacy of cult45 and their delusions of empires pay master pootie, I suspect everyone is too old for this shit.

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

he did not even want to run the first time but did for the need to defeat trump.

[-] DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 5 points 11 months ago
[-] Tavarin@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Unlikely to win the moderate vote, and also in his 80s.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

~~Unlikely~~ More likely to win the ~~moderate~~ independent vote

FTFY.

There are a whole bunch of leftists and anti-authoritarians who are almost as disillusioned with the Democrats as they are with the Republicans. The notion of the general election hinging on "moderates" is nothing but Democratic Party fiction.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

They don’t contribute enough votes to matter.

[-] Tavarin@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

leftists and anti-authoritarians

They'll vote democrat since republicans are way further out from their desires, and will actively pull the country even further right. Democrats know this, so they don't have to work as hard for the left vote.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

That's another fallacy: they might vote Democrat, or they might vote Green or Libertarian as a protest, or they might not vote at all. And it's those latter two possibilities that matter, because (even Democrats admit that) elections are won on turnout, not flipping mythical swing voters.

Appealing to leftists and/or anti-authoritarians is what increasing turnout looks like, but neoliberals would rather lose than admit that.

[-] Tavarin@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

they might vote Green or Libertarian

Most won't, because that's a surefire way to get a Republican elected.

There are far more "centrists" in the US who need to be swayed to a party than there are leftists who will usually just vote democrat anyway to avoid a Republican in office.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

If you can win without the left, you can lose without blaming them.

[-] Remmock@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They won’t vote at all. A vote is a demonstration that you are picking something that represents you. If neither party of statistical significance represents you, don’t vote. If you do, you’re just giving carte blanche to corporatist Dems to keep doing business as usual. Letting the Dems fail until they get the message seems to be the only thing they might notice any more.

[-] Tavarin@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If neither party of statistical significance represents you

If one party is wholly and entirely opposed to everything you are (republicans), and the other at least won't attempt to make your life actively worse, then yes, you do vote for the lesser evil.

[-] Hegar@kbin.social -2 points 11 months ago

he did not even want to run the first time but did for the need to defeat trump.

That's just nonsense put out by his campaign.

It's obviously not true that a career politician who was already VP didn't really want to be president. He ran in a heavily contended primary and wasn't always the front-runner.

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

I don't agree it was just his campaign. Who and when was someone else the front runner? I mean early on when the small states are in anyone can be but once some major ones are under the belt its not exactly neck and neck.

[-] chakan2@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

that they think Biden is too old for all this.

He IS too old for this...so is Trump. The fate of the US is in the hands of the coronary health of two fucking assholes that should be in nursing homes.

[-] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm too old for all this shit and I'm younger than the youngest president in history

Maybe we should swap the age limit so 35 is the upper limit not the lower.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 11 months ago

Having it as an upper age limit was a response to Europe having a century of wars where young men ascended to thrones, and made impulsive decisions to launch invasions, expand conflicts, etc. It's not crazy to lower it slightly, but it's also not something we want to bring down by much.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

The electorate should get to choose whoever it wants. We don’t need som group of assholes amending the Constitution to limit voter choice. Biden was the clear and decisive victor of a primary with over 20 candidates, none of whom came close to beating him. If anything we should change the voting age.

[-] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 11 months ago

The idiots who rattle on about Biden's age back a guy 3 years younger and hate when you remind them about that.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

The dick holes complaining about Biden being too old in 2020 are saying absolutely nothing about Trump being that old now.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

The people who screamed that Sanders was too old have stopped caring about age now.

[-] Unaware7013@kbin.social 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They've been pushing hard on the 'Biden is senile' bullshit for years, and no surprise they're going extra hard to weaken him in the minds of the stupid and easily swayed.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago
[-] Unaware7013@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Biden, autocorrect can only do so much for those who past first thing in the morning.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

Oh, okay.

Thought this was some new magat lingo.

[-] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

They say it unprompted, so nothing in the conversation will change.

this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
219 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
1585 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS