this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
37 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10705 readers
234 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m saying that he made the situation and outcomes better, and also tried to make it better than that, but failed at some of what actually should have been done.

OK, so Biden made things better across the board. he could have made some things even more better, but wasn't able to. and he at least didn't make anything worse.

is that an accurate summary of what you're claiming?

because if so, we need to get back to those details you claimed I don't care about. the ones you've never actually responded to on their substance:

  • did mandating the CBP One app for all asylum-seekers make the US immigration system worse, or better?
    • do you believe Amnesty International is wrong when they say making CBP One mandatory violated international law?
  • did Biden sending 1500 troops to the US-Mexico border make the situation there worse, or better?
    • when Trump sends troops to the US-Mexico border, does that make the situation there worse, or better?
    • if you believe there's a difference between the outcome when Trump does it and when Biden does it - why?

I can pretty much feel the talking-point response to that coming

are you familiar with the etymology of "talking point"?

a pre-established message or formula used in the field of political communication, sales and commercial or advertising communication. The message is coordinated a priori to remain more or less invariable regardless of which stakeholder brings the message in the media.

so when you call my replies "talking points", are you aware of the connotation that implies? that you're basically accusing me of not responding authentically as myself, with my own opinions, but instead getting direction about what to say from someone else, and I'm just repeating it.

if that's something you actually want to accuse me of, you should be honest and say it more explicitly.

if you're not trying to accuse me of that, calling my replies "talking points" is kind of an asshole thing to do.

You seem very interested in telling me what I am saying, instead of just listening to what I’m saying.

we're entering "every accusation is a confession" territory...

because if you actually read what I said, notice I phrased it as "you seem to be arguing". that was intentional. I'm listening to what you're saying, and trying to tell you "here's what your argument is coming across as" because I do actually care whether I'm understanding you correctly or not.

meanwhile, instances in this thread where you've been trying to tell me what I'm saying:

Did he make things worse on purpose? Fuck no, he made them better. Is it some bad-faith bullshit that people keep attacking him pretending that he did?

...

you’re spinning up some kind of determined effort to make him look bad on this issue

...

If you want to spin it up into backwards-land and cherry pick some things to make it look like that’s all that happened, he fucked a bunch of stuff up on purpose, all these human rights organizations hate Biden overall instead of on those individual decisions

...

picking individual details and then using the specific ones you picked as a reason to conclude things about the whole of what his intent was

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 1 day ago

OK, so Biden made things better across the board. he could have made some things even more better, but wasn't able to. and he at least didn't make anything worse.

is that an accurate summary of what you're claiming?

Mostly. I wouldn't agree with "he didn't make anything worse," because US immigration post-2001 is a terrifying hell run by horrible people, and it would be hard for anyone to lay hands on it in any way without making something worse in the process. But yes, aside from that, it's accurate.

because if so, we need to get back to those details you claimed I don't care about. the ones you've never actually responded to on their substance:

Because I'm not interested. I already laid out what I thought about this: Looking at the whole of his impact on immigration is a way better way to analyze his overall impact on immigration than extensive Lemmy bickering, and I think you're focusing in on details as a way to distract from the idea of looking at the overall.

because if you actually read what I said, notice I phrased it as "you seem to be arguing". that was intentional. I'm listening to what you're saying, and trying to tell you "here's what your argument is coming across as" because I do actually care whether I'm understanding you correctly or not.

Okay, fair enough. That previous paragraph is what I'm saying.