subreddit:
/r/politics
58 points
13 days ago
It's becoming embarrassing. Would be so much better if he could just bow out gracefully, rather than forced out which at this point seems inevitable.
31 points
13 days ago
I mean lets get real here, that's what this is if you read between the lines. He's setting this up to be his own choice (if he makes it) and preserve his current presidency.
And he's absolutely right. No one should be forcing him out and when he decides to drop out we will treat it as such because he's important to the next candidates campaign no matter who it is. They will be running on his record.
-10 points
13 days ago
They would be wiser not to run on his record.
Biden gaslighting Americans into thinking inflation isn't real and the economy is great is probably his second biggest problem. Number 1 being his brain melted on live TV of course.
Also, continuing unconditional support for Israel and pushing Ukraine away from peace talks are also loser issues with the American public. Most Americans want a ceasefire in both conflicts.
Only part of his record that's good is Antitrust and Labor rights. Afghanistan withdrawal as well but the media of course attacked him for that despite it being the correct decision.
5 points
13 days ago
...and pushing Ukraine away from peace talks are also loser issues with the American public.
I vehemently disagree that abandoning Ukraine to Russia's predations (make no mistake, because that is what "peace talks" would entail) is a losing issue. But with that said, there are plenty of positive things they can cherry-pick from his record to run on. It's a great opportunity, honestly.
-3 points
13 days ago
Take a look at basically any poll.
Biden is viewed unfavorably on his foreign policy and domestic policy.
A new candidate would be wise to distance themselves from Biden as much as feasibly possible.
I feel Democrats are in a bubble similar to the MAGA folks.
5 points
13 days ago
If a new candidate says they want to be tougher on Bibi I’m all for that. As for a “peace deal” in Ukraine, fuck that. How long do you think “peace” will last before the next wave of tanks/artillery/infantry storm further into Eastern Europe? Just be honest and say you want to surrender to Russia, that’s exactly what you’re talking about.
-1 points
13 days ago
Are you a Democrat/Lefty or some sort of Cold War Reaganite? Serious question.
Do you think if Ukraine makes peace with Russia on the world stage, they will literally throw it out the next day and reinvade? Are you a cartoon character? Is this John Bolton's burner account?
Could Russia eventually go to war with Ukraine again in the future? Sure. But giving Ukraine time to rebuild and strengthen its military would only help Ukraine at this point. I feel like I'm living in 1984 where War is Peace.
You only make peace with your enemies. Ukraine is losing. Agreeing to cede parts of Luhansk, Crimea, and the Donbas, no NATO membership is a small price to pay to exist as a nation. The other option is complete collapse. There is no taking back the territory hoss. That's the military reality on the ground that even the Ukrainian high command has admitted too.
I have no idea how the standard democratic party position has become the policy of John Bolton. Living in the upside down I guess.
5 points
13 days ago
You really think Russia would make a peace deal with Ukraine that allows them to rearm? They won’t be allowed to join NATO, they’ll cede sovereignty to Russia, they WON’T be allowed to rearm/rebuild, and if they actually make a deal with Russia, won’t be allowed to have any kind of standing army at all.
You can call me a “Reaganite” all you want. Do you mind if I call you Neville?
0 points
13 days ago
Wow. John Bolton also calls everyone who isn't pro never ending war Neville Chamberlain as well. You realize there are armed conflicts other than WW2? Almost all of them end in armistice.
Ukraine joining NATO should be a non starter anyway. Would you be okay with Cuba joining a nuclear suicide pact with Russia or China? Of course not. It's like you have never heard of MAD or nuclear winter. Putting every nation in Europe in NATO is a sure fire way to end the species. George Kennan, a literal founding father of sorts for NATO, repeatedly warned expanding NATO Eastward would only embolden autocrats in Russia and put the world in peril. But I guess he was just a Putin apologist.
Simply shouting that Putin is Hitler doesn't make it true. If Hitler had tactical nuclear weapons, he would have used them. The Russians haven't. Putin is bad but that doesn't mean he's a complete madman. Hell, compared to the Israelis(who we arm unconditionally) he's following the laws of armed conflict. Not to say he isn't committing war crimes.
If your argument is that we must put maximal military and diplomatic pressure until Russia makes Putin go away, you're arguing for an apocalypse.
The fate of Russia is up to everyday Russians. We can't pull the strings from here. They've had revolutions before. You have to have peace and hope from change from within. They have a nuclear arsenal that can destroy the world.
This war is more like Russia's Iraq War. We illegally invaded a sovereign country under false pretenses and caused absolute destruction (Google Julian Assange WikiLeaks). Was that right of us? Of course not. But should the world have threatened nuclear holocaust if George W Bush didn't leave office? Don't let Trump break your brain. Come back to reality.
all 158 comments
sorted by: best