Biden resorts to Trump tactics: flat out lies and misleading claims

[blackangst1]

Seems lying and making misleading claims arent exclusive to Republicans. His whole speech was filled with both.

Fact check: Biden's midterms message includes false and misleading claims (msn.com) (CNN)

Or maybe they were all just gaffes? To me, it just reeks of desperation.

 

[Tsinni Dave]

You care about truth at this moment? https://news.yahoo.com/trump-documented-lies-misleading-statements-231200563.html

and https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...publican-talking-points-midterms-robert-reich

 

[eelw]

Stretching the truth is something most politicians will do. At least they aren’t bold faced lies like Repugnicans.

 

[Tsinni Dave]

I don't like the lying of either side, but man, there's no competition this election. 2020 election deniers are just on another scale. Not sure why overstate what democrats accomplished when there are actual legislative wins he could tout.

 

[Brainonska511]

Republicans are clearly on a bender to create a one party state that says "fuck you" to Joe American while giving out huge tax cuts to the rich, and this is what you're worried about?

 

[blackangst1]

I don't like the lying of either side, but man, there's no competition this election. 2020 election deniers are just on another scale. Not sure why overstate what democrats accomplished when there are actual legislative wins he could tout.

Ah right. The time honored tradition of yeah my guy is bad but not as bad as the other guy.

 

[blackangst1]

Republicans are clearly on a bender to create a one party state that says "fuck you" to Joe American while giving out huge tax cuts to the rich, and this is what you're worried about?

Whataboutism.

 

[blackangst1]

Stretching the truth is something most politicians will do. At least they aren’t bold faced lies like Repugnicans.

Theres a difference between stretching the truth and flat out lying.

 

[Tsinni Dave]

Ah right. The time honored tradition of yeah my guy is bad but not as bad as the other guy.

He's not "my guy". Just that the republican party definitely aren't in the same league with the dangerous bullshit being spouted every goddam day.

 

[blackangst1]

I don't like the lying of either side, but man, there's no competition this election. 2020 election deniers are just on another scale. Not sure why overstate what democrats accomplished when there are actual legislative wins he could tout.

I agree. Which is why as Ive stated on other threads my red line is election deniers. I didnt vote for any of them. But thats not the topic of the thread.

 

[Tsinni Dave]

Pardon me, I meant "dangerously detached from reality and bordering on flat out insane" bullshit being spouted every goddam day.

 

[blackangst1]

Pardon me, I meant "dangerously detached from reality and bordering on flat out insane" bullshit being spouted every goddam day.

Nice deflection. How about stick to the topic of the thread?

 

[Amused]

Nice deflection. How about stick to the topic of the thread?

OK. I will. It's unfortunate that he lied. He should be fact checked and shamed. But he is, by far, by any measure, head and shoulders, the lesser of two evils.

If all the candidates lie, I'll pick the one who lies less, and less dangerously.

 

[blackangst1]

OK. I will. It's unfortunate that he lied again. He should be fact checked and shamed. But he is, by far, by any measure, head and shoulders, the lesser of two evils.

If all the candidates lie, I'll pick the one who lies less, and less dangerously.

So the best of two evils? Hellofaway to elect a POTUS. Oh...fixed it for you.

 

[pmv]

Theres a difference between stretching the truth and flat out lying.

Well, saying

“On our watch, for the first time in 10 years, seniors are going to get the biggest increase in their Social Security checks they’ve gotten.”

Isn't quite lying, but it is playing silly games with statistics (and 'stretching the truth' would, conversely, be an insufficient term to describe the degree of dishonesty), because it's only referring to dollar increases, not real-terms ones.

I do find it hard to understand how Biden could say that with a straight face because the flaw in it is so glaringly obvious he surely has to know it's a dishonest comment. I'd have more respect for him had he looked embarrassed when saying it.

But ignoring inflation when talking about budget increases is something that many politicians have done at various times, it's a common trick, the Tories do it regularly when talking about NHS spending. e.g.

Access Restricted

(Actually that case was even worse, becuase he specifically used the phrase "real terms")

 

[pmv]

So the best of two evils? Hellofaway to elect a POTUS. Oh...fixed it for you.

What's your solution, then? I mean, it's a dilemma that often comes up, most notoriously in Weimar Germany.

 

[eelw]

So the best of two evils? Hellofaway to elect a POTUS. Oh...fixed it for you.

But what can you do with only 2 viable political parties? Sure here in Canada, we have 3 major parties and a few flanker groups. Regionally, some places have voted out both the conservative and liberals. But federally only one of the 2 major parties will ever win. But with minority elections, they do at least work with the other groups to serve the majority

 

[blackangst1]

But what can you do with only 2 viable political parties? Sure here in Canada, we have 3 major parties and a few flanker groups. Regionally, some places have voted out both the conservative and liberals. But federally only one of the 2 major parties will ever win. But with minority elections, they do at least work with the other groups to serve the majority

Well, for the last 3o ro 4 POTUS elections, I dont agree with voting for the best of the worst. I think its disingenuous to the voting system. I would rather vote who I think is the best candidate for the job...which in those 3 or 4 elections has been independent. I just couldnt live with myself voting for the best of the worst.

edit: if no one ever votes for independents, we will never have a 3 party system.

 

[blackangst1]

Well, saying

“On our watch, for the first time in 10 years, seniors are going to get the biggest increase in their Social Security checks they’ve gotten.”

Isn't quite lying, but it is playing silly games with statistics (and 'stretching the truth' would, conversely, be an insufficient term to describe the degree of dishonesty), because it's only referring to dollar increases, not real-terms ones.

I do find it hard to understand how Biden could say that with a straight face because the flaw in it is so glaringly obvious he surely has to know it's a dishonest comment. I'd have more respect for him had he looked embarrassed when saying it.

But ignoring inflation when talking about budget increases is something that many politicians have done at various times, it's a common trick, the Tories do it regularly when talking about NHS spending. e.g.

Access Restricted

(Actually that case was even worse, becuase he specifically used the phrase "real terms")

Well, I think the Democrat's mistake is focusing on abortion. Its wrong headed. Most Americans dont vote on the basis of abortion. As the saying goes, its the economy, stupid. Which, right now, sucks.

 

[Captante]

Simply shocking that politicians are generally full of hot air and not much else.

🙄

 

[Pohemi]

Another faux concern thread? Ho hum.

 

[Brainonska511]

Well, for the last 3o ro 4 POTUS elections, I dont agree with voting for the best of the worst. I think its disingenuous to the voting system. I would rather vote who I think is the best candidate for the job...which in those 3 or 4 elections has been independent. I just couldnt live with myself voting for the best of the worst.

Then to put it frankly, you're being kind of an idiot. In first-past-the-post systems that we mostly operate under, the best strategy is the lesser-of-two-evils. The primary is where you get to put your idealism down for the candidate you want, not the general. If we had ranked choice voting, sure, vote for who you want at first, but we don't have that.

 

[pmv]

Well, for the last 3o ro 4 POTUS elections, I dont agree with voting for the best of the worst. I think its disingenuous to the voting system. I would rather vote who I think is the best candidate for the job...which in those 3 or 4 elections has been independent. I just couldnt live with myself voting for the best of the worst.

So you'd favour third period Stalinism over the Popular Front?

I don't deny it's a real dilemma, that arises repeatedly. But your approach didn't work out too well in the '30s.

 

[Brainonska511]

Well, I think the Democrat's mistake is focusing on abortion. Its wrong headed. Most Americans dont vote on the basis of abortion. As the saying goes, its the economy, stupid. Which, right now, sucks.

The economy, that has added 250000 jobs in the last month, has unemployment at ~3%, and you could easily get a new job tomorrow, is bad? LOL.

 

[blackangst1]

Then to put it frankly, you're being kind of an idiot. In first-past-the-post systems that we mostly operate under, the best strategy is the lesser-of-two-evils. The primary is where you get to put your idealism down for the candidate you want, not the general. If we had ranked choice voting, sure, vote for who you want at first, but we don't have that.

We'll agree to disagree. I am just as opposed to Biden (or president Kamala as Biden stated last week lmao) as I am for Trump (for different reasons) thus would never vote for either.