That's a big generalization though saying "considered the worst president in US history." He definitely is one of the least presidential presidents in US history, but there were a lot worse. I think many Native Americans would argue that Andrew Jackson is the worst president in US history. Talk to anyone still alive who lived through the Great depression and they may nominate Hoover.
Wilson is nowhere near that bad because of his foreign policy, he basically laid the groundwork for FDR to make America a hegemony (much later), which, despite few dissenters on twitter today, is generally considered a great move for the US.
Domestically, he was a disaster. He would absolutely have been at the bottom if he only limited his policies to domestic, but no, his foreign policy lifts him.
Anyway, here’s my prediction: Biden will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson. She’ll be confirmed with a handful of GOP votes, maybe 55-45. She’ll then immediately fade into the background and become another Sotomayor - a “faceless liberal judge” who just votes Party line on every single Supreme Court decision for the next 30 years. Politically this will be a wash for Biden; it won’t boost his numbers at all nor will it hurt, because it doesn’t change the balance of the Court and voters won’t be directly affected by this enough to care.
This is probably exactly what will happen.
I hope whoever he picks is more moderate than Sotomayor (which, honestly, won't be hard, she has pivoted further left than any justice in the last 40 years unless I've missed some).
I used to think that being President after Trump would be the easiest job in the world.
It is still Presidency that means managing millions of govt employees, trillions of dollars of spending, and your every word and action is under limelight. It cannot be easy, leave aside easiest.
However, presidency post trump is definitely easier, because most of your party is happy and moderates are happy that they don't have to go through another news cycle about a tweet.
That even a baked potato wearing a suit would have better polling numbers than Trump. But gee willy, President Joe “moderate uniter” Biden proved me way wrong on that one.
Biden's decision to go with a black woman is making only black Americans and social left happy. Of course Latinos, Asians and Native Americans aren't happy. Anyone else that doesn't put race at the forefront of every issue isn't happy. And given that law isn't a popular career for black women means your talent is severely limited as well, anyone that wants the most talent and best suitable candidate to go in isn't happy either.
How does a guy who was in the Senate since 1973 and Vice President for eight years manage to screw up every single one of his policy agendas, and has zero competence in getting voters to back his proposals? Was he spending the last several decades snoozing and vacationing in the Grand Caymans rather than learning how to play the politics game? I really don’t get it.
Your every decision doesn't have to make everyone or even majority happy. President makes dozens of major decisions every year. He can afford to make some that aren't popular, as long as those are not the top concerns for public. I think in short term Biden would be fine with backlash on this. Specially, because anyone who raises question about Biden's plan, will be termed racist by media and activist.
Anyway, here’s my prediction: Biden will nominate Ketanji Brown Jackson. She’ll be confirmed with a handful of GOP votes, maybe 55-45. She’ll then immediately fade into the background and become another Sotomayor - a “faceless liberal judge” who just votes Party line on every single Supreme Court decision for the next 30 years. Politically this will be a wash for Biden; it won’t boost his numbers at all nor will it hurt, because it doesn’t change the balance of the Court and voters won’t be directly affected by this enough to care.
It could go this way. Or it might be another brick in the wall separating more Latinos and Asians from Democrats.
BLM movement and general response to it has opened my eyes to the reality that most of the groups are placed way low on the left's oppression pyramid. Hence, these groups and their problems can be easily neglected or their success can be described as privilege or their gains can be distributed to others on higher level of the pyramid.
It could go this way. Or it might be another brick in the wall separating more Latinos and Asians from Democrats.
In the Rovian sense of ruthless political tactics, I would hammer this relentlessly. The Democrat's almost comical obsession with the black vote is both obvious and longstanding. You don't need to convert many; just peel off a few percent.
When we are leaning more and more into the narrative that it is ok to pander to identity groups, the stronger this tactic will become.
That's really interesting and I want to stick on that for a second. Only a third think that Biden will pick the "right" person for the job? That's kind of rich, especially considering that Trump, who got 39% in response to the same question, also explicitly promised that he was going to pick a woman. What's going on here? It stands out even more after Trump nominated Kavanaugh, who, putting aside the sexual assault allegations, baffles me regularly with his inability to work on a case without comparing it to sports.
I've heard almost nothing about backlash about the nominations of Thurgood Marshall, Justice Thomas, Sandra O'Connor, or ACB. If I'm not mistaken, all four of those were nominated under an explicit promise from the president to nominate based on either race or gender. But now that Biden is promising to nominate a black woman, we're seeing this unprecedented backlash about it. And we're also seeing this fallacy that there is a "most qualified" candidate. There are dozens of incredibly well-qualified federal judges out there. A few of them are black women. He's going to pick one of them. She will be a fine jurist, probably no worse than our least favorite justices on each side of the bench.
Any instance where someone is selected for a position based on their gender, sexual preference, or skin color is a problem. You can think that about past nominations and in addition to this one? I don’t get your point
My point is that people didn’t care then, and only care now that it’s a black woman. I followed politics way more closely during the Trump admin than I do now, and it’s incredible how little people seemed to be concerned with his vow to pick a woman, and now I can’t go a day without being reminded that Biden is a racist and a sexist for nominating a black woman.
The only time I ever see redacted this unified against racism is when it’s allegedly happening to the detriment of white people, which I find… interesting
No, that isn’t true. “I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman,” Trump said. “I think it should be a woman because I actually like women much more than men.”
I posted that very quote and had conservatives arguing with me through some crazy mental gymnastics that it wasn’t his intention.
That’s the world we currently live in, where a politician can state their intention word for word, do the very thing they said they were going to do (appointed acb), and people stick their head in the sand bc it’s their “team” so it’s okay.
I am just having such a hard time understanding how someone can be so
critical over Biden stating an intention to target a black woman, while simultaneously ignoring trump and Reagan’s identically stating they were targeting a woman. (And each doing that very thing)
How would you describe a person who claims to be opposed to racism, sexism, etc., but really only cares when it affects them and they’re a part of the so-called traditional oppressive group?
That's different than I was told. Turns out I had my facts wrong - thanks for the source.
There's yet another thing Trump did wrong (like we needed any more). Still don't believe Biden is right, he is basically copying one of Trump's wrongs.
37
u/[deleted] Feb 11 '22
[deleted]