-42
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] afk_strats@lemmy.world 33 points 8 months ago

Wow. The NYT will just publish an opinion piece for anything. I learned nothing from reading this

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

I’ve made a habit of skipping any outlet’s “Opinion” section and have been much happier for it.

[-] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Opinions are like buttholes...

[-] Binzy_Boi@supermeter.social 17 points 8 months ago

Amazing. Not a single mention of Palestine.

Putting his backing of Netanyahu aside, there's a number of things he could do to up his popularity. Naming two from the top of my head, he could forgive medical debt at the federal level and federally legalize marijuana and remove it as a Schedule 1 drug.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

He can only forgive debt owed to the government, and people don't generally owe the government for medical services.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

This was an issue before Israel was attacked.

As far as I can tell he’s done a lot of the right things, and has been as effective as you can given the political situation. I never understood why so many people seem to have an issue

[-] archomrade@midwest.social -1 points 8 months ago

before Israel was attacked

I never understood why so many people seem to have an issue

Having framed the current conflict as having started "when Israel was attacked", it's not surprising that you don't understand why people might have an issue with Biden broadly

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

I believe that's the opposite of their point. They're saying he was loudly on Israel's side well before the attack.

It was an attack. There were and are hostages. Whether it was retaliatory can be a topic, but that it was an attack hasn't been in dispute.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

I'm not sure it is exactly 'opposite' of their point, but Biden being largely on the side of Israel is the reason a lot of leftists have always been unsupportive of him as a president.

Like most liberals, he gives a lot of lip-service to progressive causes, but ultimately finds excuses to avoid having to really upset the current hegemony. The reason he is unpopular despite his objectively skilled politic-ing around progressive issues (i think) is because more people are seeing liberalism generally as a failed political project and want actual change rather than lip-service and half-measures.

His support of Israel is only the most pertinent example of his politics clashing violently with reality.

[-] mister_monster@monero.town 7 points 8 months ago

It's not hard. It's easy if you see with your eyes instead of understanding the world as others would like you to.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


As The Washington Free Beacon’s Joe Simonson noted recently, just surfing around most American media and pop culture, you probably wouldn’t realize that Biden’s job approval ratings are quite so historically terrible, worse by far than Trump’s at the same point in his first term.

When Barack Obama was at his polling nadir, most observers blamed the unemployment rate and the Obamacare backlash, and when Bill Clinton struggled through his first two years, there was a clear media narrative about his lack of discipline and White House scandals.

Attempts to reduce his struggles to the inflation rate are usually met with vehement rebuttals, there’s a strong market for “bad vibes” explanations of his troubles, a lot of blame gets placed on partisan polarization even though Biden won a clear popular majority not so long ago, and even the age issue has taken center stage only in the past few months.

Some of this mystification reflects liberal media bias accentuated by contemporary conditions — an unwillingness to look closely at issues like immigration and the border, a hesitation to speak ill of a president who’s the only bulwark against Trumpism.

But in practice, this push tended to treat representation and progressive politics as a package deal, making nonwhites with moderate-to-conservative views more exotic, not less — as mystifying, in a way, as any MAGA-hat-wearing white guy in a rural diner.

But if you take that kind of constituency as a starting place, you may be able to reason your way to a clearer understanding of Biden’s troubles: by thinking about ways in which high borrowing costs for homes and cars seem especially punishing to voters trying to move up the economic ladder, for instance, or how the hold of cultural progressivism over Democratic politics might be pushing more culturally conservative minorities to the right even if wokeness has peaked in some elite settings.


The original article contains 889 words, the summary contains 312 words. Saved 65%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
-42 points (21.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4642 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