• jaxxed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    She will most likely not be a great president, but could be a good one. If Biden wasn’t so poor on the Middle East, he would have been a great one, from a policy perspective.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Biden never was going to be a great president, lacking a a majority in both houses means you burn up too much political capital to get anything done that doesn’t already have broad bipartisan support. And with how divided politics is today compared to any point in history where we had a great president, there is no such thing as bipartisan today.

        • Rakonat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          2 months ago

          … The new deal was passed 10 years before the McCarthy era. FDR was dead before McCarthy even started his red scare.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            I was being over broad. The first red scare was after WW1 and was a prominent feature of Republican politics from that point onwards. If you look into the resistance to the new deal, it was the same red scare nonsense that McCarthy rode as a wave.

            Did the Trump era start in 2016, or did he simply usurp a rising fascist current in American society? I personally think it’s more of the latter than the former. Likewise with McCarthy, but it’s fair that I was corrected.

    • Tire@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m fine with how Afghanistan went. The military would have dragged it out for another 10 years. I’d much rather have a suboptimal quick withdrawal.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Nobody’s arguing it was short-term better for the US. It abandoned to the wolves all of the people who worked with it in Afghanistan, though. And did that abruptly. Betrayals tend to have long-term consequences. Those who think they’ve seen a few betrayals go well without those, just have blind spots.

      • jaxxed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, actually. I agree that Biden handled the Afghanistan situation as well as anyone could. I guess I’d forgotten that with all of the things happening now.

      • Disgracefulone@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Edit:

        Did anyone die? A quick Google search shows yes. That’s horrible. I’ve read several news sources on it but I’m wondering if you’ve found out the facts about that bombing? It’s more digging than I have the time for right now.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Were there a normal option available to vote for, she’d be worse. But she’s better than Trump because Trump is just an acceleration of the ongoing trash show, while she is said show going on as planned - she’s the candidate from the folks who planned it, as in “establishment” and “big financial interest”.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Maybe she’s just waiting for the election to be over before she disbands AIPAC and cuts ties with natenyahu?