Swalwell on Biden age: ‘I’ll take the guy who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony counts’
Swalwell on Biden age: ‘I’ll take the guy who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony counts’
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) went after former President Trump for his legal woes in an interview on MSNBC Saturday. “I’ll take the individual who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony c…
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) went after former President Trump for his legal woes in an interview on MSNBC Saturday.
“I’ll take the individual who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony counts,” Swalwell said, making a reference to President Biden’s age in an interview on MSNBC’s “The Katie Phang Show” on Saturday.
“It’s not about two individuals,” Swalwell continued, speaking about the 2024 election. “It’s about the idea of competence versus chaos, or even greater, freedom versus fascism. If we make it about those ideas, and what they mean in our daily lives, we’re gonna win.”
Swalwell’s comments come after Trump was ordered to pay almost $355 million in penalties in a civil fraud case and amid increased scrutiny faced by the president on his age and memory in the wake of a special counsel report on Biden’s handling of classified documents. The report noted that Biden had problems with memory and recall.
You're viewing a single thread.
The comments by septics on Biden's age reek of ageism.
His age is irrelevant. Can he do the fucking job?
Yes?
Then vote for him.
The poor bastard is destroying his retirement, health and twilight years to stop the US falling to fascism and all you can do is whine about his age?
I don’t think it’s particularly ageist to say that octogenarians should generally be avoided for a 4 year commitment to leadership roles. It’s no more ageist than barring 16 year olds from the job imo.
That said, in a battle between risky to lose competence midway and blatantly incompetent now the former always wins
Agreed. That being said it sucks to be stuck choosing between two ppl who won't live long enough to see the ramifications of their decisions and policies.
I don't see how that matters. Do you think Clinton, Bush or Obama made better choices because they got to live to see the outcomes materialize? I don't think so which is why I don't think it matters.
You want a president who makes decisions that benefit the people not a president who makes decision s that benefit them (or a group of elites). In that sense it doesn't matter if Biden won't see the results of his decisions, as long as he makes decisions that benefit the people. When it comes to Trump we can now be pretty certain he will make decisions that benefit him.
Exactly this. One could even argue that Biden being older makes him harder to be influenced by exterior factors such as bribes and whatnot. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
Trump isn't exactly a spring chicken either. He now has a half a billion dollars in judgements that he owes in addition to being within 4 years of Biden's age. The issue is the double standard and blatant disregard for the fact that he has numerous conflicts of interest that should disqualify Trump
Oh I fully agree and this is absolutely being used to try to give another too old person the same position. Especially considering trump is both already senile and most importantly a fucking fascist who has attempted to overthrow the government after losing an election
Dark Brandon’s last act will be to bring about the first female US president. Based.
I think it is different, 16 year olds have no experience, limited knowledge of the world, and under developed pre frontal lobes. You want experienced leaders with wisdom, much more than inexperienced leaders with a lack of wisdom, they aren't equivalent
Yes, it's obviously a different scenario. The risks are different. But, along with wisdom, you want presidents to be alive.
When Biden took office in 2020, he was 78. The government's actuarial tables say that there was basically a 50/50 chance he'd make it 8 years.
Having survived 4 years, if he's elected again he'll be 82. The actuarial tables say he'll probably still be alive at the end of his term, but he might not make it to the next set of midterms.
Now, Biden is in good health. With his health and the great medical care he gets, he'll probably do better than the actuarial tables say. I'd say the odds are good he'll outlive Trump, even if he's an older man. But, it seems reckless to put a guy into office when there's a very decent chance he'll be dead before the end of his term.
Then there's the matter of his mental sharpness. There are strong signs it's fading. President is mostly a job about delegation, but still, you need to make some decisions, and at least understand what it is you're delegating. Trump, again, is probably as bad or worse, but it doesn't seem good to trust a guy with clearly fading mental abilities to a stressful job that benefits from a sharp mind.
If we all trusted his VP to step in and run things well if there were a problem, that would be one thing, but her approval ratings are even worse than his. Sometimes that happens when a president doesn't want the VP to steal the spotlight. But, in this case you'd think both Biden and Harris would benefit from everybody thinking that she's doing a lot of work, doing it extremely well, and could easily step in as president.
Also, I'm not convinced there are strong signs his mental acuity is degrading. Everything people point out are things Biden had been doing for decades, or since birth. The amount of times I've seen people say look, he is cognitively impaired because he can't get his words out! The guy has had a stutter his whole life, he mixes up some facts here and they're, he's been doing that forever. Memory and cognitive specialists don't seem to think he has some growing problem (see On the Media show this week).. So what are these strong signs, except for the media publishing no led than 45 articles about this, with no facts to justify them?
Also, I’m not convinced there are strong signs his mental acuity is degrading.
I think it's clear that he's not as sharp as he was 30 or 40 years ago. But, he was always someone who made a lot of gaffes. But, I think it's not dementia, just a typical lack of sharpness that comes from getting old.
Not that I disagree with you, but what do you base that on? The cognitive experts I've heard on the radio don't seem to agree and they have specialty training.
They don't agree that there's any difference between him 30-40 years ago and how he is now?
I base it on what he was like 30-40 years ago and what he's like now.
Look at him in this video:
https://youtu.be/zTrObD_lnfQ?t=35
Or in this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_v00iGJCLY
Compare that to a modern Biden speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia2sy7z1Cqs
I don't think it's dementia or anything, he's just old. I don't know of any person his age who is as sharp as they were 40 years ago.
I don't think septics is the right word but I am also high
@aussie.zone
Points out septics as not the right word
You sure?
His age is irrelevant. Can he do the fucking job?
His age is the main reason that he can't do the job particularly well.
He can't do the job. He's a terrible candidate and he's not mentally fit. His only qualification is that he's not openly fascist. Definitely vote for the not fascist, but that won't stop fascism in the long run.
Being forced to choose between senile and psychotic is fucking bullshit, and I'm sick of being told to just suck it up.
To be fair, Trump is also senile.
Yeah, I mean, beyond senile. He doesn't even pass for human, he's indistinguishable from a racist LLM. Fuck he's not even an LLM, he's a Markov model.
But compared to Biden, Trump does enough drugs to make him appear like he's less senile. Also probably even more crazy.
Citation needed for Biden being senile.
Afghanistan withdrawal alone was a fucking abortion. SO hella dumb, SO rushed, I mean that was done in the worst way possible. We left so much shit behind, we didn't destroy it, we didn't burn it up & just shoot the shit out of the Taliban before we left, we left our people there with no way home, what was it 13 American soldiers died?? It couldn't have been done any worse. And that's on Biden's head, that's on all the people that just went along with it & were like, "Okay, whatever you say President Potato Head".
It's just not enough to say these people shit the bed with Afghanistan. They shit the bed multiple times, rolled around in their filth, slaughtered a goat on the bed, lit the bed on fire, tried to put the fire out by spraying it with gasoline, burning down the whole goddamn house, and shuttling in the Taliban in a full service limo on the American dime to do a Gangnam Style breakdance where the house once stood.
Biden is putting the country at serious risk of having another Trump term vs if he were to concede to literally any other Democrat.
Voter shaming has never worked as a strategy and has only made people want to be less involved in politics. People need something to vote for, not against.
Also note how both sources strongly lean towards the Democratic Party. Not like I'm citing Fox here.
More evidence of low voter turnout with Biden: https://news.yahoo.com/only-4-registered-voters-show-122000488.html
Biden performs better against Trump than Newsom or Harris. Name another democrat even close to having the name recognition to win the general election.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4470956-biden-trump-harris-newsom-poll/amp/
Anyone that won't automatically loss the mid west swing States due to a required demographic there accurately believing the candidate is supporting a genocide against a population they identify with.
Even in the link you posted, Biden is still down 1 point vs Trump. That's not a risk that I think the country should take.
Also to answer your question, either Jon Stewart or Bernie would kick Trump's ass in a general. Y'know, people who inspire people to get out and vote instead of staying home because "both sides are shit anyway, what's the point?"
Are you thinking we need Bernie to replace the old guy?
No, but I think he'd win in a theoretical scenario. Bernie already said he's not going to be running for president.
Also, there was a reason I put Jon Stewart's name first.
Yeah, like all the old people who actually vote would consider Jon Stewart as a serious candidate. “Oh, but he would bring young people out to vote!” Would he? Do young people even know who Jon Stewart is? And I love me some Jon fucking Stewart. And Bernie is perceived as way too far to the left in this country. And I love me some Bernie.
If your serious candidates are Jon Stewart and Bernie, please GTFO.
Yeah, like all the old people who actually vote would consider Jon Stewart as a serious candidate.
I would. In a heartbeat.
Not that you are completely wrong, but don't play so hard into the stereotypes.
Age-related cognitive decline is real and inescapable. All people over 80 have declining mental abilities, less ability to handle stress, etc. Old age is fundamentally a handicap and to suggest it isn't is a delusion.
Being a little slower is so far different from what Trump is that it sounds delusional to even make a deal out if Bidens age and cognitive abilities when there is an actual lunatic with knives running towards us
Well said!
His age is irrelevant. Can he do the fucking job?
He can barely speak or remember his own major life events and colleagues. His team constantly has to step in and correct "what he meant to say" regarding very important international relations.
His age is relevant.
This right here. He didn't have to run again. Right now he needs our support and deserves at least a hardy thanks of appreciation. He came out of retirement to stop trump and the maggats. If I could buy him a beer or a very expensive scotch I would.
Providing the weapons for a genocide is not doing the job.
Ignoring people saying we won't vote for genocide with the strategy of 'Vote Harder!' is stupid and dangerous if you believe the alternative is the end of democracy.
Edit: people here are mad at the people saying 'we won't vote for genocide' but not at the person directly responsible for the mass murder of babies.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
To all those downvoting or responding with "he's all we have", be honest: fucking outright say "I'm willing to have babies slaughtered to prevent Trump." That is a choice you are making. Have the courage of your convictions and say it out loud.
Look at the cost you are paying without flinching.
Providing the weapons for a genocide is not doing the job.
Actually, it kind of is. America has interests in the middle-east and Israel is key to them. Plus, the rich warmongers who own all our politicians want this. So it doesn't matter who is in the White House, the weapons will flow.
Ignoring people saying we won't vote for genocide with the strategy of 'Vote Harder!' is stupid and dangerous of you believe the alternative is the end of democracy.
Ignoring people ignorant of the bigger picture is how we keep the entire house from burning down. Trump will literally do everything most Democrats don't want while Biden only does a few. If you're willing to throw away everything over a few issues, then you've failed to be an educated voter.
How many dead and murdered children do I need to walk over to be an educated voter?
You're literally happy justifying genocide.
Who are you voting for that is going to stop the genocide?
cornel west or whoever wins the green party nom
you have just told me that you are not voting in the next election. I can appreciate your morality and idealism, but if you're realistic for even a half second you'd know you're voting against the greater good.
no, I told you who I'm voting for.
yeah, and as much as it sucks that it's true, you're throwing away your vote. I would love to have a replacement to the two party system and first past the pole but that's not the reality in which we currently exist
if Biden wants votes from people who are going to vote for cornel west or Jill Stein, it's not as though he couldn't adopt their policies
That's true, but who does he lose in the process? Who wins when he loses? Is it better to have incremental change than it is to vote for a fascist backslider? I understand the moral dilemma, but you implicitly enter into another by voting third-party. if you "help" Trump win, don't you think he'll also continue the genocide? Who is more likely to pressure an end to the violence?
yeah, we're kind of left with shit choices but one's a polished turd and the other one is a festering diseased pile liable to spread.
Neither will stop the genocide because neither is going to win. You may as well pick Mickey Mouse and you'll accomplish the same thing. Not to mention, the presidency is a bit of a distraction here. Biden has bypassed Congress with some weird legal loopholes, but the bulk of support for Israel comes from acts from Congress.
If by some miracle West or the Green wins, how will they stop an aid bill for Israel if 2/3 of Congress votes for it? Combined, Democrats and Republicans who support Israel have the numbers to easily overcome a veto. Unless you've got third party candidates who can win over 1/3 of the seats in both chambers of Congress, it doesn't matter if the president is anti genocide.
If someone truly wants to end the Palestinian genocide, they need to win a lot of Congressional seats. Tell me, what does it say that West and the Greens are much more focused on the presidency than on building up Senate and House candidates? Either they're pathetically naive, or they're just lying to your face and trying to get your money. Considering the Green Party has no issues with Stein dining with hyper capitalists, I believe it's the latter.
>You may as well pick Mickey Mouse and you’ll accomplish the same thing.
this is election misinformation: a vote for either of them will count for the candidate who received the vote. a vote for mickey mouse will not.
>Tell me, what does it say that West and the Greens are much more focused on the presidency than on building up Senate and House candidates?
i think it means they didn't hire you as a political consultant. which is great because i f they did it looks like your advice would be "drop out"
as the chief diplomat, the president actually has the executive power decide if or when the aid ever gets delivered.all congress can do is authorize the spending.
> Considering the Green Party has no issues with Stein dining with hyper capitalists, I believe it’s the latter.
i voted for her in 2016, and i'd do it again if i had a time machine. this year, i'm planning to vote cornel, but i could be swayed to vote for stein if she does something rad.
>If someone truly wants to end the Palestinian genocide, they need to win a lot of Congressional seats.
i'm sure there are other ways.
>Neither will stop the genocide because neither is going to win
you can't prove this
If you weren’t an irrational idealist that is a net detriment to American society you would vote Biden and donate money to STAR and RCV initiatives.
calling me irrational and a detriment to society are personal attacks. they don't make me want to vote for someone whose policies i don't like.
I would call someone who litters an irrational detriment to society. Is that a personal attack? Is it not irrational to pollute your own environment? Is it a benefit to society to litter?
You’re doing the wrong thing and it’s ok for me to tell you it’s wrong and why.
saying that the act is irrational or that **someone** who does it is acting irrationally is one thing, but to directly call someone irrational **is** a personal attack.
it's not a fact. it's an opinion. it's an ad hominem that doesn't change the truth of anything that's been said.
Funny how people aren't mad at the person committing genocide for taking an action that will likely hand the election to the person they think will end democracy.
Instead, they're mad at the people saying they won't vote for genocide.
Tell me, would you be mad at me if I was in Michigan, Palestinian, and had family members murdered in the current genocide?
I'm not, I'm just curious how far your selective moral outrage will go. I want to see how selfish/racist you are.
"Who are you voting for that is going to stop the genocide?"
Which part exactly makes you believe they're morally outraged or mad or whatever else you want to call them? Stop making stuff up if you're out of arguments. Just move to a different thread.
The only selfish one here is you. Since you'd rather vote for someone who has no chance of winning just because it helps you sleep better at night.
So you're the selfish one? Biden has no chance of winning.
Explain to me how he wins the electoral college without Michigan. Explain to me how he wins Michigan without the Muslim vote.
Go on.
I'll wait for you to do the fucking math.
Again changing the subject when you've got no arguments. GG. I'm out. No point wasting my time with trolls.
For everyone else reading this: Only Biden and Trump can win this race. If you vote for anyone else other than Biden, you're screwed. But I'm sure all the reasonable people already know that.
I'm not changing the subject. It's an integral part of the subject.
You're only out because you know you don't have an answer.
You're willingly voting for a genocide enabler because you think he is the only one who can stop Trump.
But the math shows that he is unable to win BECAUSE of the genocide support.
I ask again, but I know you're too much of a coward to answer, How does Biden win without Michigan?
How does Biden win Michigan without support from the Muslim population?
EDIT: disagreeing with you with a sincerely held belief doesn't make me a troll. It just means you've lived in a bubble where people don't disagree with you.
The question and answer are irrelevant. Even if he can't win Michigan, he's still the only one with a chance to win. So you either help him win or you let trump win. There's no alternative. It's the truth of the situation, fucked up as it may be.
And just to answer your question anyway. When push comes to shove, Biden is the better choice for everyone that's not a cis white male. That includes Muslim. You really think they'd rather vote for that racist fuck than for Biden? Guess we'll see.
Also, I just cannot believe Trump can be both wildly incompetent and the end of democracy at the same time. Do i want him at the helm? Fuck no, those 4 years aged me like 10, the next 4 might kill me.
But will he be the guy who "ends democracy"? Fucking lol. We're all here, weve all experienced the last decade, we have had front row seats to "the end". Its dying with him or without him.
Trump is just a grifter. Hes a symptom, not the cause.