Do you think Biden's "lame duck" status can be an asset?
Asked by
Strauss (
23835)
July 22nd, 2024
Do you think it’ll free up his decision process, for example?
For those not familiar with the expression, a lame duck is someone whose term of office has not expired, but who will not be reelected.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
10 Answers
Yes. Because he doesn’t have to give a fuck what others think about him.
I would expect the next 4 months to be filled with progressive actions and presidential policy statements, because he has nothing to prove to anyone.
He may pardon his son Hunter, as well. What is there to lose?
I don’t know that he has been making decisions for some time now. I doubt he will be making any Earth shattering decisions between now and January…if he stays in office that long.
Maybe he should take up target practice with a 50 caliber rifle . . . .
Immunity works for Democrat Presidents too !
Another scurrilous and ad hominem insult to Biden.
I think we should let the man go with some dignity.
Not really, since it’s out that it’s his administration and not him behind the wheel they can’t hide behind him anymore. I agree, let him go with dignity. He did the right thing and drop out. It must have been hard to let that go. But at some point we must concede that death comes for us all.
Yes, in the coming months Biden will give Americans free healthcare and free higher education. He’ll accelerate transition to renewable energy. And he’ll shift wealth and power to the poorest.
He couldn’t do anything in the previous four years, but now that he’s on his way out, he’ll be like Sanders on steroids.
(No)
The good thing for him is he can drop that bullshit pretense of being “strong” and “sharp as a tack” and “100%” that those around him have been selling to supporters and the media. He can be as doddering and senile as he is and we all expect it now.
If he was such a wonderful patriot like his supporters are saying, he would have decided a year ago that he wasn’t going to run for a second term, so new candidates could have been properly vetted and chosen.
Not having to run a reelection campaign seems valuable to me, at least that aspect of it.
I agree with @elbanditoroso He can push for things without fearing it would damage his chances for re-election. Also, at his age and dealing with illness, all the traveling to campaign isn’t necessary, so he can fully concentrate on his work. Personally, I have always thought it a waste to have the President of a Nation go out and hold rallies. That essentially interrupts work that may be needed for months. Actually same for any politician. I think they need to hold maybe one televised interview or small town hall, once a month that is no longer than half hour to an hour. People can then actually choose who they want to see or not see. I think Rallies are for idiots. They never have any real substance and is just a show. Its a brain washing event. Same should go for Senate or Congressmen. In their state. One town hall being televised for 1 hour. Each answering questions from registered dems and republicans and independents. This will prevent Politicians from needing large chunks of money from CEOs and billionaires. And people may actually vote for what the country needs. Not what the circus clowns point too.
Answer this question
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.