I don't disagree with much of what you wrote, but trust in US government and media is at very low levels, whereas trust in the EU is at high levels. That's really all I need to know about a stupid citizenry. — NOS4A2

I wouldn't say trust in the EU is at high levels. That's why right-wing populism is currently sweeping the EU. But I wouldn't say the EU citizenry is much better than the US, though Europeans are definitely less ignorant.

The difference is that the US government gets up to shit that's several orders of magnitude worse.

Given that Europe is the crucible of the worst wars in history, the breeding ground of communism, fascism, and nazism, the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire into the Middle East, I’m curious as to what might be several orders of magnitude worse than what Europe has been up to. Perhaps worse is the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan, but I cannot think of much else.

If you're going to play this game, you should probably find something that does not pre-date the concept of a European state.

Sure, specify a time frame and give an example.

You need me to give you an example of America's misdeeds in the modern age? Please.

Yeah, because there are few misdeeds that Europe was not involved in.

Now that would be rich - the suzerain trying to evade responsibility by pointing at the involvement of her client states.

If there is the involvement of other states, why would you not mention their misdeeds as well?

Because of the "orders of magnitude" part of my argument.

The part where you have yet to give an example.

If you need me to give you examples, you're proving my point. Listing America's misdeeds is pedantry at this point, and I'm not going to waste my time in doing so. Especially since you already seem so eager to start shifting the blame.

I just wanted one example, actually, and for the reasons I’ve already mentioned. It’s common to think of the US as the great Satan, but when it comes from some panty-wasted fief in Europe I’m reminded of the hellish conditions hoisted upon the Earth by many countries there. But if you don’t want to do it, I’ll leave the issue alone.

No one is interested in hearing a hundred-year-old tu quoque to distract from America's many misdeeds in the present.

Sure, you name the timeframe and the example. I’m just curious.

But inside the White House, Biden’s growing limitations were becoming apparent long before his meltdown in last week’s debate, with the senior team’s management of the president growing more strictly controlled as his term has gone on. During meetings with aides who are putting together formal briefings they’ll deliver to Biden, some senior officials have at times gone to great lengths to curate the information being presented in an effort to avoid provoking a negative reaction.

“It’s like, ‘You can’t include that, that will set him off,’ or ‘Put that in, he likes that,’” said one senior administration official. “It’s a Rorschach test, not a briefing. Because he is not a pleasant person to be around when he’s being briefed. It’s very difficult, and people are scared shitless of him.”

The official said, “He doesn’t take advice from anyone other than those few top aides, and it becomes a perfect storm because he just gets more and more isolated from their efforts to control it.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/02/biden-campaign-debate-inner-circle-00166160

Sounds like the sort of dynamic that often leads to autocracies' great blunders. Perhaps it's not as extreme as the "yes-man" problem described vis-á-vis Putin's inner circle, but there seems to be an apt analogy in Biden's decision to run for a second term being his "let's go invade Ukraine," moment. Now there is nothing left but to keep doubling down and everyone with any influence to stop it doesn't want to risk losing their influence by actually trying to stop it.

There was a similar dynamic reported in Trump's cabinet, but there at least many cabinet members did eventually jump ship and begin publicly blasting their old boss (fat lot of good it did lol). But obviously the provocations there were even greater.

Odd events.

Hunter Biden has joined White House meetings as he stays close to the president post-debate

While he is regularly at the White House residence and events, it is unusual for the president's son to be in and around meetings that his father is having with his team.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/hunter-biden-white-house-meetings-president-debate-rcna159975

According to the story Hunter Biden has been helping the elder Biden with his duties, for instance his most recent speech fear-mongering about the Supreme Court decision.

With all this rhetoric about convicted felons, it sounds like a convicted felon and drug addict is advising the president of the United States of America. These sort of ironies make politics fascinating to watch, even hilarious, if the stakes weren’t so high.

Here's Pelosi throwing Biden under the bus:

https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/pelosi-biden-s-mental-fitness-is-legitimate-question-recommends-interviews-with-serious-journalists-214089797740

I'm much more confident now that he'll be replaced before the election.

At this point literally everyone in the party wants him out because they think he'll lose them the House and Senate and will probably speak up in the coming days, the donors are revolting, and the media is unanimously calling for Biden to step down on a daily basis. I don't see him coming back from this but who knows, he's incredibly stubborn.

So much for democracy. Why do editorial boards believe they can speak for the voters?

It’s a lose-lose situation now for the democrats. Even if Biden stays, which I think he will, everyone has come out against him. That damage is already locked in. Whatever effect that has, who knows. I don’t think it’ll have a huge effect.

But if he drops out, it’s another losing scenario: Kamal Harris is the person who will likely get the delegates. She’s about as popular as colonoscopies.

They have no one to blame but themselves. If they happen to pull it off, it’ll be only because Trump is that bad — which he is.

They have no one to blame but themselves. — Mikie

Really you can blame Jim Clyburn for that. He stepped in to save Biden's campaign in the South Carolina primary because he feared Bernie winning the nomination and then insisted on a black woman diversity pick for Biden's running mate, giving us Harris. He essentially gave us the ticket we see today.

That being said it's probably better for the Dems to go with Harris at this point and have her pick an actually talented running mate. Biden's campaign is about as dead as he is but at least with Harris you can see some potential room for improvement and a restart.

If they happen to pull it off, it’ll be only because Trump is that bad — which he is. — Mikie

Indeed. A generic candidate who is neither Trump nor Biden would win in a landslide against either of these people.

Too bad the Democrats couldn't put up a candidate that isn't as unpopular as Trump. Shouldn't be a low bar to pass but yeah let's just run the 80 year old man who the majority of the country didn't want to run again.

Pot speaks to kettle. It's a democracy and people want some other candidate than Biden, so what's the issue with not having a second term. Act mature for your age and agree with everyone else that once was enough, at least you'll get a pat on the back from both parties and the public.

It strikes me as sheer egotism at this point.

It’s a lose-lose situation now for the democrats. — Mikie

It should be a walk in the park to stand up against the fascist MAGA movements, authoritarian republicans and Trump, but it's a special level of incompetence that the Democrats weren't able to do this with the mountain of shit that has been piled up against Trump.

Maybe now they will simply put an age limit on their future candidates? And maybe be better at preparing younger party members for future candidate material. Like, get them started in their 30s, really build up their reputation in their 40s and let them run for presidency in their 50s. With enough work they would have 10-20 candidates to put forward and really nail home not only a candidate people like, but also have a number of backups that are also liked. Against the republicans, it would become easy.

But I guess, since Gen Z doesn't seem to care about politics and just want some magical solution to everything, there won't be any young people available to be prepared for future presidency. We're not doomed because we have senile old people running the show, but that we have no young people actually caring for politics. Maybe when the fascist boots step on their throats they might get the memo to actually do something for real and not just continue their slacktivism thinking that accomplishes anything.

50 is old. Presidents should be 50 at the most. I'm 45 and I read a lot and make music so I can't say my brain isn't regularly used and I can tell my retention rate for information is a fraction of what it used to be. I can barely memorise new pieces and forget them in a few months after I do but will play your anything I learned when I was a teenager.

To be honest, there hasn't been a young world leader that has ever made a good impression on me. They appear naive, easily manipulated, sometimes overtly groomed, and they seem to have little real wisdom or understanding of the gravity of the position they are in and the consequences of their actions.

Politics should be conducted by dusty, boring, old people - people from whom there is little to gain from corruption, and people who have children and grandchildren whose futures they care about.

50 is old. Presidents should be 50 at the most. I'm 45 and I read a lot and make music so I can't say my brain isn't regularly used and I can tell my retention rate for information is a fraction of what it used to be. I can barely memorise new pieces and forget them in a few months after I do but will play your anything I learned when I was a teenager. — Benkei

50 isn't old. 50 is a good age in which the maturity of ideas settle down. And since 40 year old's today act like they're still children, with immature handling of philosophical concepts and ideology, they have to get ten more years of maturing before they have the calm to act on their convictions and ideas.

20-30 is the age in which people explore who they want to be as an adult. 30-40 they explore the validity of such aspirations. 40-50 they manifest the true aspirations, solidified as their true identity. 50+ is when a person has manifested who they really are, a stability matured by years of exploration in which they find wisdom rather than just knowledge.

A presidency requires wisdom and it's something lacking these days.

Of course, all this requires a sane psychology and proper introspection throughout life. Most people can live to their dying days without ever thinking an original thought or questioning themselves properly. But for a president, a leader, someone who's supposed to work for the people, it should be a requirement.

I find democracies today to be pretty lackluster in their defense against those taking advantage of it. Just because democracy demands a representative of the people to be the person who wins an election, shouldn't mean that any dipshit should be able to. I rather think that a representative in a democracy should have demands of competence like any other job in society.

A president do not stand above the staff of representatives for the people, they should be in service of it. They should be the ones taking the raw emotions, wills and wants from the people and fine-tuning it into working policy, law and national practice. They should be in service of the people.

That's not what's going on in the US. The US president is a pseudo-king. It's a plastic kingdom similar to Disneyland. The US does not have a good structure of politics, there's no actual parliament. The congress is just a big funding party for lobbyists rather than a place to evaluate strategies for the nation and international politics.

Democracy is still in need of philosophical progress, it needs further work. The term has become some plaque and adjective to describe a "good nation", but since none of the "good guys" in our world seem to know in what way to actually describe how democracy is producing "good nations", we end up with sham democracies and representatives of the people who can just con everyone into believing these representative are kings and religiously elevated deities. Until people see them as they are and goes for the next plastic king.

Democracy today is in a hyperreal state of what democracy could be. And we lack the framework to produce actual leaders because we haven't thought through what is actually required to end up with stable, good leaders who are competent at their job.

The entertainment industry that is democracy today must end and be replaced by democracy that has evolved past this shallow plastic shell of "a good nation".

One of the more hilarious aspects about the tantrums one finds in American politics is that they are largely self-inflicted. The schemozzle about Biden's absent-mindedness, for instance, is the direct result of them lying to themselves. When a wasteful and fraud investigation didn't turn up Kremlin influence in the presidency, and implicated the opposing campaign, they blamed their victim and not their own lies. The recent Supreme Court rulings would not have happened had they not weaponized the justice system to go after their political opponents. The classified documents case might have occurred before the election had they not bungled it, tampered with evidence, or tried use it to influence the election.

Of course, there is always someone else to blame. Right at the moment when the delusion ought to be replaced with honest self-reflection, a new one takes its place, and the process begins all over again. No doubt, if/when Trump's felony conviction gets overturned for being a travesty of justice, they'll blame the ones who overturned it, and not the ones who brought and judged such a shit case. With this they can always remain in the delusion.