Talk:Joe Biden

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon politics USA.svg

This United States politics related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)


Silver brainstar needs a vote. I for one do not consider this article good enough. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Alright, will undo my other upgrades then, put in votes. Corsair (talk) 19:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Since this page documents rapidly evolving current events, I think silver is premature at this time. Beware also of random IPs adding irrelevant crap. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 23:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I still despise the bloated wall of text that is the cabinet nominees section. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 03:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Centrist stupidity?[edit]

Joe Biden thinks there's a lot more liberal tendencies in there than Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, who are more of a centrist.

  • Biden has attempted to raise the U.S. minimum wage from $7 to $15, although Republicans oppose it.
  • Bernie Sanders is now chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
  • The current government's Minister of Labor is also part of the DSA.
  • Biden sometimes makes a slip of the tongue, which may be a bit conservative. But gender minority, race-related policies reveal a stronger propensity for center-left social liberalism than Barack Obama did.

In addition to the above mentioned cases, the Biden administration is liberal in many ways. Biden has a stronger left-liberal tendency than previous Democratic presidents who have been on the centrist line since the 80s.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:32, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Of course, Biden is not without a centrist side. Therefore, I think the 'Centrism' category is more appropriate than the 'Centrist stupidity' category.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:34, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

If you still think Joe Biden is Centrist stupidity, let me give you another example. Moon Jae-in, a South Korean liberal politicians from promising to put the 10,000 won(=$8.75) the minimum wage as the presidential election in 2017 was president. But it has yet to keep its promise. In addition, there is no 'tip' culture in South Korea. (For your information, the minimum wage in South Korea was 6,030 won(=$5.27).) In addition, Moon Jae-in of LGBT rights policy is consistently social conservative. Byun Hee-Soo was silent and opposed to serving in the transgender military even though Moon was kicked out of the military for gender transformation. Moon is even criticized for cleverly suppressing South Korea's largest labor union.[1] --Umaru16 (talk) 09:43, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

In South Korea, a democratic socialist left-wing organization similar to the DSA of the United States has a Labor Party, and in South Korea, these left-wing forces have no power at all. The South Korean moderate liberal government has no cooperation with the center-left Justice Party, which is similar to Jim Kenny, Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg in the U.S. On the other hand, the liberal government of the United States is actively aligned with left-wing socialists. (U.S. fiscal conservatives incite South Korea's liberal government as if it were implementing a very radical left-wing economic policy, but intervening in the market is not a left-winger. This is proof that the right wing of the United States are very stupid. I wrote it down in the South Korea page, but South Korea has far less human rights and social welfare than the U.S. In addition, 'social conservatism' is much worse in South Korea than in the United States.)--Umaru16 (talk) 09:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Joe Biden may be a centrist politician, but his administration is in solidarity with the left-wing DSA. Is he really a Centrist stupidity? I do not agree.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:45, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

You're thinking about this too hard. Leave it at centrist stupidity and/or liberal moonbattery and call it a day. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Then I'll use both categories. Biden's recent withdrawal from Afghanistan is also not a 'centrist' policy. Rather, it's a 'populist' policy like Trump and Sanders. --Umaru16 (talk) 23:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

i get that biden is more liberal than anything else, but most of what he does wrong has little to do with liberalism, even in the american sense. i propose striking the "liberal moonbattery" category from the article and just leaving him with centrist stupidity. it's not even consistent with the policies the article criticizes him on. G Man (talk) 08:47, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

the point is: biden might be a liberal, but he's definitely not a moonbat. therefore, i don't think "liberal moonbattery" really fits here. G Man (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
I think Joe Biden is more of a social liberal now. I don't see Joe Biden as a third route like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Even if Joe Biden tries to actively expand his finances, there are too many people who interfere. This has nothing to do with Joe Biden's political position. --Umaru16 (talk) 08:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
In fact, there was an article like this last year. (America Is Becoming a Social Democracy: The Biden administration is accomplishing what was once thought historically impossible. - Foreign Policy) --Umaru16 (talk) 08:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
The Third Way, including New Democrats, has some elements of 'fiscal conservative', as seen by Tony Blair of the UK, Matteo Renzi of Italy, and Bill Clinton of the United States. It doesn't seem like Joe Biden is actively supporting the element of 'fiscal conservative'. --Umaru16 (talk) 08:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
There were quite a few people on South Korea's Wiki who described Biden and the Democratic Party of the United States as social democracy. The reason was that South Koreans are far more left economically and socially than Moon Jae In, which is called "social liberalism." I never think Biden is a social democratic. But what's certain is that Joe Biden is never a "centrist" by South Korean standards. Of course, it should be taken into account that I live in a very, very conservative country. --Umaru16 (talk) 09:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
In Namuwiki, South Korea's largest wiki, modern liberalism of the U.S. Democratic Party was regarded as "Social democracy" category from late 2020, and this classification was maintained for nearly six months, and Jiwoo used to be restored immediately. And by those categories, major Democratic politicians such as Obama and Biden were classified. In the Talk session, my acquaintance expressed the view that modern American liberalism should not be regarded as social democracy, but concluded that modern liberalism of the U.S. Democratic Party should be viewed as a combination of social liberalism and progressivism for compromise.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
On the other hand, South Korean "liberal" are NOT progressive. Even conservatives who are not liberal at all in the context of European politics in South Korea describe themselves as "liberal." Of course, in the general sense, liberalism means DPK. South Korea's Justice Party does not like Bernie Sanders, but claims to be a "social democratic" rather than a "liberal." It just means that they oppose the misogyny of the conservative party People Power Party and the fake social liberal party DPK. The Justice Party's economic policy is so, so very very very very moderate that it cannot be regarded as social democracy, and English-speaking media describe them as "liberal." The main figures of the Justice Party almost hate the Democratic Party of South Korea, but they like the Democratic Party of the United States very much. This shows how far-right the soil of South Korean politics is. --Umaru16 (talk) 09:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
The reason why I didn't agree with the idea that Republicans are far-right on international standards in the Lincoln Project article last time is that many countries in Asia, even in developed countries, are more conservative than Americans imagine. The United States is not a conservative country. I don't think the United States is socially conservative, and I think the welfare of the United States has the basic things to have as an advanced country except for the health insurance system.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
What I'm suggesting is to use only the 'Centrism' category and the 'Government incompetence' category among many categories. Biden's policies as president are very different from those of the days when Obama or Clinton was president. I object to classifying him into a category called 'Centrist stupidity'.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Holy crap dude--Spoony (talk) 09:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
To be honest, I expected Americans to respond, "What kind of Bullshit is this?" The problem is that South Korea actually recognizes the U.S. Democratic Party like that. It's like a shit... The problem is that in South Korea, there are really many people who think that way of the U.S. Democratic Party.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:37, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
There are so many idiots on the South Korean wiki site. On the Wiki site, my acquaintances and I tried to write down the view that the U.S. Democratic Party has a "conservative" view, but some users protested, saying, "Conservative Demomcrats' 'consernvatvie' means fiscal conservative. is not conservative because it is culturally liberal. Fiscial conservatism means economic liberalism." So I couldn't add a conservative faction to the Democratic Party of Korea on that South Korean-language wiki site. But even funnier, the democratic socialist faction within the Democratic Party of America is mentioned in great detail. The some user seemed to be a supporter of the Justice Party, but it was really so annoying and looked like a Shit. (Since I am LGBT living in South Korea, I strongly support the Justice Party.)--Umaru16 (talk) 10:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Japan has better welfare than the United States. Therefore, unlike South Koreans, Japanese people do not think the U.S. Democratic Party is a social democratic party, but rather conservative. However, it means conservative in the economic sense. Even they are likely to see the U.S. Democratic Party as very left-wing socially.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
There will be no need to consider South Koreans' perceptions in the "English" wiki dealing with American politics. Personally, I don't think Joe Biden is "Centrist stupidity," but I agree that he's not "moonbattery".--Umaru16 (talk) 09:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I changed my view[edit]

I agree that he is not Moonbet. I don't agree with the "Centrist stupidity" category, but if public opinion believes that the category "Centrist stupidity" should be maintained, I will no longer object to maintaining the category.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Therefore, you don't have to pay attention to what I said above. However, it is clear that in fact, not a few people in South Korea have that perception of American politics.--Umaru16 (talk) 09:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Speech on the Capitol invasion[edit]

JB used the term 'big lie' - which of the several usages/associations was being used? Anna Livia (talk) 18:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

In American terms that usually refers to the belief that Donald Trump "really" won the 2020 presidential election, while Biden was installed in the White House through fraud.-Flandres (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
In the UK (and possibly elsewhere in Europe) it has a different association. An example of where 'two logical local usages' can cause confusion. Anna Livia (talk) 20:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Questionable Nominees[edit]

Jim Clyburn is definitely one of Biden's biggest allies in the House, and played a huge role in Biden's campaign turnaround, but referring to him as a "civil rights icon" is a stretch. Clyburn is not known to have actively participated in the movement and doesn't have a major record of Civil Rights Era advocacy comparable to some of his other counterparts within the Congressional Black Caucus. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Requesting thread archival (why?) -- Techpriest (talk)

Biden is NOT a centrist.[edit]

[2] [3]

P.S. the sources I am using are DEFINITELY reliable. USA Today even has a slight left bias with high factual reporting, and so does National Interest in spite of it's rightish bias. --Andrew5 (talk) 22:36, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Not a centrist indeed, paid by big oil to approve drilling and fracking measures. (talk) 22:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Those are opinion columns. A.k.a. a "hot take". Anyhow he's not a centrist. He's moderate right-wing. If you look at who wrote the first piece, it's Katrina Trinko, a regular writer for conservative outlets like National Review[4] and The Daily Signal[5] and The Heritage Foundation[6]. Some of her work are partisan culture war hack jobs, with articles like "With ‘Pregnant People’ Tweet, Government Promotes Transgender Agenda",[7] "An Example of How Transgender Rights Affect Women’s Safety"[8]. Trinko's garbage opinions is not a reliable source lol. Second dude? Cal Thomas.[9] He's not as an overt hack like Trinko but I read his article. It's not very persuasive, particularly the ending part where he talks about how "centrism" is just "hiding" a "radical liberal agenda." Dude, his problem is that his scope is limited entirely within United States politics. He only goes into surface-level ideas about Biden's policies, such as merely stating about granting 11 million illegal immigrants is probably enough for make him liberal? It does not. I have not heard standing praise by progressives as his record on immigration is arguably mixed,[10] continuing several Trump-era policies cracking down on the immigrants, and this mixed record (which characterizes the rest of the presidency) is somehow left unaddressed by Thomas. Hey, paisanos, please avoid just repeating what you see on Media Bias Fact Check and do critically examine the source, which includes checking the date, checking the authors, and also browsing the rest of the website; furthermore, even your favorite site Wikipedia has said it is not a reliable fact checker. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 01:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Biden is center right tbh from where I'm coming from. Historically the man is pretty much the cornerstone of the Dems and I don't think that will change. Centrist stupidity probably still applies (look at the man's exceptionally spotty record from his early days in congress and you'll see what I mean), even if Biden's foot-in-mouth syndrome is a historic artifact. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Eh, it depends on which side you're looking at it. I've always considered myself a centrist, but I am certainly to the right of Biden. Biden's agenda seems progressive.
The New York Times does put the Republicans as a far-right party, even further to the right then the Finns Party of Finland, but the Democrats are also quite left. In between the Labour Party of Britain and Socialist Party of France.The Center tends to be Portugal Communist Party.
Biden might have been a centrist for 35 years as a Senator, but that's not relevant now. What matters is that he has cozied up to Democrats in his presidency.]
Per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sourcesWikipedia, the Atlantic Times is reliable, the New York Post is unreliableWikipedia, CNN is reliable, NY Times is reliable. --Andrew5 (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Biden is center-left by any measurable definition based in logic. If you're viewing Bernie/AOC as mainstream left and not extremists, then through this lense Noam Chomsky may look like a moderate. Also, the whole spitting hairs about "believe women" vs. "believe all women" article segment was pedantic and unnecessary. There was absolutely no issue from progressives about believing all women until, of course, it became inconvenient for their political leadership. And comparing it to the obviously bogus "All Lives Matter" pseudo-racist marketing from the right is completely disingenuous. — Unsigned, by: 2601:cc:0:4a20:1dec:ea01:a97:60e1 / talk / contribs