Biden steps down

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Biden steps down

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 4 of 17 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.11am
Originally posted by Badger11 Pedant alert. Unfortunately Biden isn't stepping down although he should, somebody should invoke the 25th amendment. It would not surprise me if the Republicans try something like this not because it will succeed but just to tie the democrats up fire fighting. Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 7.31am) Why should he step down? Remaining President for 6 months is not the same as becoming President for another 4 years. He obviously has stability issues and I would not now be surprised if he started to use a wheelchair and severely limit his travel. Not being a candidate means such things cannot now be used against him. He can quietly concentrate on doing his job with dignity and allow the circus to perform without him. If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.11am

Originally posted by Badger11

Pedant alert.

Unfortunately Biden isn't stepping down although he should, somebody should invoke the 25th amendment.

It would not surprise me if the Republicans try something like this not because it will succeed but just to tie the democrats up fire fighting.

Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 7.31am)

Why should he step down?

Remaining President for 6 months is not the same as becoming President for another 4 years. He obviously has stability issues and I would not now be surprised if he started to use a wheelchair and severely limit his travel. Not being a candidate means such things cannot now be used against him. He can quietly concentrate on doing his job with dignity and allow the circus to perform without him.

If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 22 Jul 24 8.18am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Why should he step down? Remaining President for 6 months is not the same as becoming President for another 4 years. He obviously has stability issues and I would not now be surprised if he started to use a wheelchair and severely limit his travel. Not being a candidate means such things cannot now be used against him. He can quietly concentrate on doing his job with dignity and allow the circus to perform without him. If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy. No they would be wasting the time and energy of the Democrats who will have to defend Joe even though he is clearly unfit to lead. At every opportunity Trump is going to ask the question to Harris why did you allow this to continue, how much did you know etc. I'm not saying it's right it politics. Harris will be in the firing line because it is the responsibility of the VP and the cabinet to invoke the 25th amendment if they believe the President is unable to serve. If I was Trump I would hammer away at this asking her why she did not do it thus calling her competency into question. Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 8.21am) One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 22 Jul 24 8.18am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why should he step down?

If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy.

No they would be wasting the time and energy of the Democrats who will have to defend Joe even though he is clearly unfit to lead. At every opportunity Trump is going to ask the question to Harris why did you allow this to continue, how much did you know etc.

I'm not saying it's right it politics.

Harris will be in the firing line because it is the responsibility of the VP and the cabinet to invoke the 25th amendment if they believe the President is unable to serve. If I was Trump I would hammer away at this asking her why she did not do it thus calling her competency into question.

Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 8.21am)

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 22 Jul 24 8.24am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Why should he step down? Remaining President for 6 months is not the same as becoming President for another 4 years. He obviously has stability issues and I would not now be surprised if he started to use a wheelchair and severely limit his travel. Not being a candidate means such things cannot now be used against him. He can quietly concentrate on doing his job with dignity and allow the circus to perform without him. If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy. Because if his health and memory were sufficiently poor for him to avoid being charged over the classified files they are sufficiently poor to prevent him doing the job properly.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

22 Jul 24 8.24am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why should he step down?

If the Republicans tried to remove him they would be wasting both their time and energy.

Because if his health and memory were sufficiently poor for him to avoid being charged over the classified files they are sufficiently poor to prevent him doing the job properly.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.30am
Originally posted by Badger11 No they would be wasting the time and energy of the Democrats who will have to defend Joe even though he is clearly unfit to lead. At every opportunity Trump is going to ask the question to Harris why did you allow this to continue, how much did you know etc. I'm not saying it's right it politics. Harris will be in the firing line because it is the responsibility of the VP and the cabinet to invoke the 25th amendment if they believe the President is unable to serve. If I was Trump I would hammer away at this asking her why she did not do it thus calling her competency into question. Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 8.21am) Very easy to answer. So easy it would be stupid to ask it. He has withdrawn as a candidate. Not as President. He believes, as Harris and the cabinet believe, he is capable of serving his full term. He is serving. That you believe him to be unfit is nothing new and nothing that requires an answer. Next question. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.30am

Originally posted by Badger11

I'm not saying it's right it politics.

Edited by Badger11 (22 Jul 2024 8.21am)

Very easy to answer. So easy it would be stupid to ask it.

He has withdrawn as a candidate. Not as President. He believes, as Harris and the cabinet believe, he is capable of serving his full term.

He is serving. That you believe him to be unfit is nothing new and nothing that requires an answer. Next question.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.43am
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Because if his health and memory were sufficiently poor for him to avoid being charged over the classified files they are sufficiently poor to prevent him doing the job properly. What the special prosecutor, who was a Trump appointee and widely believed to be making political jibes, actually said was that he believed that a jury would be unlikely to convict. Not that his health and memory were poor. Prosecutors aren’t competent to decide that. He was commenting on perception, which was linked to his other conclusions that the case was very different to that involving Trump. It was staffers who had failed to check the contents correctly. It was Biden’s lawyers themselves who drew attention to them and they cooperated fully. In all these circumstances he felt a prosecution was unjustified. Of course that didn’t stop the attack dogs pouncing on one phrase and boosting it to become a reason for him to resign. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 8.43am

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Because if his health and memory were sufficiently poor for him to avoid being charged over the classified files they are sufficiently poor to prevent him doing the job properly.

What the special prosecutor, who was a Trump appointee and widely believed to be making political jibes, actually said was that he believed that a jury would be unlikely to convict. Not that his health and memory were poor. Prosecutors aren’t competent to decide that. He was commenting on perception, which was linked to his other conclusions that the case was very different to that involving Trump. It was staffers who had failed to check the contents correctly. It was Biden’s lawyers themselves who drew attention to them and they cooperated fully.

In all these circumstances he felt a prosecution was unjustified. Of course that didn’t stop the attack dogs pouncing on one phrase and boosting it to become a reason for him to resign.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

MFW94 Sutton 22 Jul 24 8.47am
I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win. Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won. Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won. I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning. Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise. Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been.
Alert a moderator to this post

MFW94

Sutton 22 Jul 24 8.47am

I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win.

Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won.

Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won.

I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning.

Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise.

Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 22 Jul 24 9.00am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle What the special prosecutor, who was a Trump appointee and widely believed to be making political jibes, actually said was that he believed that a jury would be unlikely to convict. Not that his health and memory were poor. Prosecutors aren’t competent to decide that. He was commenting on perception, which was linked to his other conclusions that the case was very different to that involving Trump. It was staffers who had failed to check the contents correctly. It was Biden’s lawyers themselves who drew attention to them and they cooperated fully. In all these circumstances he felt a prosecution was unjustified. Of course that didn’t stop the attack dogs pouncing on one phrase and boosting it to become a reason for him to resign. But Hur insists in his opening testimony that “The evidence and the President himself put his memory squarely at issue”
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

22 Jul 24 9.00am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

In all these circumstances he felt a prosecution was unjustified. Of course that didn’t stop the attack dogs pouncing on one phrase and boosting it to become a reason for him to resign.

But Hur insists in his opening testimony that “The evidence and the President himself put his memory squarely at issue”

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 9.07am
Originally posted by MFW94 I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win. Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won. Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won. I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning. Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise. Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been. I think any polls taken whilst the actual choice was still Biden are quite meaningless. Only if she does become the choice and people have a while to digest the implications will they mean anything. Harris is looking like a near certainty now. I would have preferred Newsom myself but that’s me looking at things from here. Calculating what needs to be won where demands specialist knowledge. Part of their crazy system. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 9.07am

Originally posted by MFW94

I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win.

Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won.

Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won.

I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning.

Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise.

Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been.

I think any polls taken whilst the actual choice was still Biden are quite meaningless. Only if she does become the choice and people have a while to digest the implications will they mean anything. Harris is looking like a near certainty now. I would have preferred Newsom myself but that’s me looking at things from here. Calculating what needs to be won where demands specialist knowledge. Part of their crazy system.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

MFW94 Sutton 22 Jul 24 9.15am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I think any polls taken whilst the actual choice was still Biden are quite meaningless. Only if she does become the choice and people have a while to digest the implications will they mean anything. Harris is looking like a near certainty now. I would have preferred Newsom myself but that’s me looking at things from here. Calculating what needs to be won where demands specialist knowledge. Part of their crazy system. Agreed - but I do have a feeling a Black Woman beating Donald Trump is meant to be. As seen from the 2000 & 2016 elections though, you never really know until all the votes are counted.
Alert a moderator to this post

MFW94

Sutton 22 Jul 24 9.15am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Agreed - but I do have a feeling a Black Woman beating Donald Trump is meant to be.

As seen from the 2000 & 2016 elections though, you never really know until all the votes are counted.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 22 Jul 24 9.19am
Originally posted by MFW94 Agreed - but I do have a feeling a Black Woman beating Donald Trump is meant to be. As seen from the 2000 & 2016 elections though, you never really know until all the votes are counted. Meant to be what? Another con job on the American people? More corruption? More illegal immigrants? More over representation of minorities?
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

22 Jul 24 9.19am

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by MFW94

Agreed - but I do have a feeling a Black Woman beating Donald Trump is meant to be.

As seen from the 2000 & 2016 elections though, you never really know until all the votes are counted.

Meant to be what?

Another con job on the American people? More corruption? More illegal immigrants? More over representation of minorities?

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 9.24am
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle But Hur insists in his opening testimony that “The evidence and the President himself put his memory squarely at issue” What testimony would that be? To the investigating committee examining his report? Perhaps you can send a link so the full context can be revealed? In the meantime you may find this interesting and illuminating:- [Link] For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 22 Jul 24 9.24am

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

But Hur insists in his opening testimony that “The evidence and the President himself put his memory squarely at issue”

What testimony would that be? To the investigating committee examining his report? Perhaps you can send a link so the full context can be revealed?

In the meantime you may find this interesting and illuminating:-

[Link]

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen Hong Kong 22 Jul 24 9.24am
Originally posted by MFW94 I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win. Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won. Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won. I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning. Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise. Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been. No mention of policies, only candidates' personal traits. Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.
Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen

Hong Kong 22 Jul 24 9.24am

Originally posted by MFW94

I think as long as the democrats are bold with their nominee they can still win.

Clinton was a 46 year old up against an Incumbent and WW2 veteran and won.

Obama the African American up against a Vietnam Veteran and won.

I think they need to be bold to have any chance of winning.

Harris could be that but the polls suggest otherwise.

Side note It is still baffling that the country of the free let the sitting President pick supreme court judges - always a recipe for disaster and always has been.

No mention of policies, only candidates' personal traits.

Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 4 of 17 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Biden steps down

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors