Skip to main content


#uspol This is so cartoonishly evil it is funny in a way. Both freeing kids in cage and sending $2,000 checks were promises he publicly made but didn't honor yet, while oil drilling permits probably were promises he privately made and honored first.

How can there be trust?

Biden days in office: 11

New oil drilling permits granted: 31

$2,000 checks sent: 0

Student loans ($10,000 each) forgiven: 0

Kids in cages reunited with parents: 0
I think it's also that Biden didn't want to do good things. He doesn't want to take risks, and sees not pandering to the GOP as a risk.
Fair enough, just don't promise things you're going to do on day 1!
Yeah - definitely. He, like Trudeau, is a 90s politician, he lies freely and quickly. He's one of those people who says "I'll do the good thing" and then doesn't. Rather than a 2000s politician who says "i'll do what I can" and failing, or saying "I like evil".
Thank you for the detailed answer. I hear you about the real world complications, but Biden was recorded saying that the checks would be sent out immediately if both Democratic candidates won in their special elections in Georgia, see C-Span transcripted footage: https://www.c-span.org/video/?507692-1/president-elect-biden-campaigns-democratic-senate-candidates-georgia

I do have a personal negative bias with regard to Biden and empty promises aren't helping in that regard. Not sure you can deliver something? Don't make detailed promises about it in public, this is a low bar for trust that he is failing to pass anyway.
What Hillary did or not is pretty irrelevant since there were many factors contributing to her political defeat, including being a woman and coming after Obama.

I'm glad about the student loan interests freeze, but I do not buy your "day 1" as a bullshit concept. Politicians talk to people publicly, and their words must mean something, or else democracy as a whole is a bullshit concept since they are elected based on what they say they will do.

I know that lying is an effective political strategy, it still doesn't justify it. We've had 4 years of lying as an effective political strategy, I'm entitled to expect better from Biden.
But Mitch doesn't matter?
All of this is great and still doesn't justify the empty promise about the checks. The promise was made on January 4th, so right during the difficult transition the Biden administration was undergoing. Even in the best of circumstances he couldn't have held that promise, so extenuating circumstances are pretty much irrelevant.

I get your point, this instance isn't enough to judge Biden or his administration on what they had to do so far, but I still contend that lying through empty promises in public speeches is bad. Circling back to the trust issue, if I can't believe this specific promise he broke, which other promise of his can I believe?

I firmly believe that actions matter more than words, so I'd rather he shut up (especially about unity) and we'll talk about his administration's actions.
He said, and I quote, "[...] BECAUSE [Warnock and Ossof] ELECTION WILL PUT AN END TO THE BLOCK IN WASHINGTON ON THAT $2000 STIMULUS CHECK. THAT MONEY WILL GO OUT THE DOOR IMMEDIATELY TO PEOPLE IN REAL TROUBLE."

From his speech (with transcript): https://www.c-span.org/video/?507692-1/president-elect-biden-campaigns-democratic-senate-candidates-georgia

Now it's looking like it won't even be $2,000 after all. I'm not sure even you can move the goal posts that far that fast.

I do not need empty promises to vote for someone, and I will call them out on them, no matter what else they do. Empty promises are wrong, full stop.
Wow, I take that back, you were able to move the goal posts that far that fast. I don't want to play this game anymore.
When did lawyers come into this conversation?
The 2nd amendment literally says "well regulated militia", it isn't implied, but it is currently glossed over by 2A militants. I do understand the difference between the letter and the spirit of the law, but while it is important between congresspeople, judges and lawyers, it is completely irrelevant in the context of a political speech. Very few people hearing the speech is a lawyer, so there's absolutely no reason to assume it is meant to be understood as legalese.

Otherwise, the implications are even worse for Biden and political speeches in general.
Politicians aren't using legalese. If they were they wouldn't even by promising cheques.

But yeah, I just was confused by your very confusing beliefs, and am also done.
I'm not talking about Bernie Sanders nor about people who find politicians who don't promise the moon uninspiring and lacking vision. I've not been able to vote in the US so far.

I've completely lost the plot of what you're saying. I heard that you have been impressed by Biden and it's great if you can find solace in him, but I personally can't.
I don't think the political culture in France is that different, French politicians also over-promise and under-deliver, and I hold them in contempt for this as well, no matter how politically close I am to them.
What do you think about the Biden's administration choice to endorse Guaido in Venezuela?