Biden should have been a one term president since that’s what he said he was going to do at the beginning of his term. Reneging on that promise made them look desperate.
Calling yourself a “transition president“, and then not announcing your intention to run for reelection until after the inauguration is doing far more than implying.
It’s not unreasonable to think that he meant he wasn’t intending to run again, but it’s a VERY far cry from a promise. I suspect that if Trump weren’t running he would have been far more willing to step down. He’s the whole reason he ran in the first place.
My point really doesn’t have anything to do with the semantics of the word promise. At the end of the day the implication or promise or idea was there that he wasn’t going to run again and then he announced which pretty much tanked the public’s ability to have faith in Kamala before the fact and made it further untenable for her to separate herself from his policies.
My point, in response to the original post, was that it isn’t that he should’ve dropped out earlier it’s that he should’ve never run again at all.
The document says:
No, he never said that, let alone promised it. People implied it.
Calling yourself a “transition president“, and then not announcing your intention to run for reelection until after the inauguration is doing far more than implying.
Can you provide a source of Biden referring to himself as a transition president?
I’ve been searching and nearest I can find is a CBS interview that he did after he dropped out.
Here is a good breakdown of the situation and here is an archive link to the NYTimes article linked in the first article.
It’s not unreasonable to think that he meant he wasn’t intending to run again, but it’s a VERY far cry from a promise. I suspect that if Trump weren’t running he would have been far more willing to step down. He’s the whole reason he ran in the first place.
My point really doesn’t have anything to do with the semantics of the word promise. At the end of the day the implication or promise or idea was there that he wasn’t going to run again and then he announced which pretty much tanked the public’s ability to have faith in Kamala before the fact and made it further untenable for her to separate herself from his policies.
My point, in response to the original post, was that it isn’t that he should’ve dropped out earlier it’s that he should’ve never run again at all.
He said he would be a bridge candidate lmao
Lying or gaslighting people about this is an awful look
No no… it was because of her laugh.
-Some enlightened cultist democrats
Sometimes I like to claim to the Blue No Matter Who folks that her laugh is the sole reason I didn’t vote for her.
For you see, her laugh causes sufficient wave interference to trigger an integer overflow in voting interest, as demonstrated by the Loose Square Law:
VI = Sign(L % 2^32 - 2^31) * (L % 2^32) / 2^32
Where VI is voting interest as a percentage and L is the sound of a laugh in decibels.
As Kamala’s laugh exceeded the 2^31 dB threshold, it was advisable to not vote for her to save the planet’s structural integrity.
real question: what makes people think that the “6 7 center” people can make an accurate assessment of why they are bad
the skills needed to do the thing are the same skills needed to evaluate the thing