Joe Biden is out - God bless him

[Mommybunny]

Put the country before himself - yes, finally, but he’s done it.

Please God let my country be ok.

Me too. I don’t think anyone should write her off.

There is some discussion about whether Joe Biden can be removed from the ballot in some states. They have left it extremely late and The Heratige Foundation might be issuing a legal challenge.
It would be ok if he was removed from office due to senilility but Joe wouldn’t do this and wants to serve out his term.

Firstly he couldn't say anything negative. One world leader can't go saying anything negative about another, especially a close ally. It's not his place to do that to an elected leader. Just like other world leaders at the time had to keep quiet about what they really thought about Johnson and his suitability to lead.

Secondly I'm sure many of us know that someone like Biden will have moments of lucidity and clear conversation. Even since the disastrous debate with Trump we have heard him be much more coherent. So he and Starmer may well have had a decent conversation.

I think the worst aspect of the social media revolution is that people no longer feel embarrassed about saying things that are clearly stupid

Obviously PM Starmer couldn't say "Yeah, the US President is definitely senile". This should be recognised by everyone, whether they like Starmer or not.

Yet the type of blind partisanship that produces politicians like Trump means people feel fine to say things that a moment's thought would show are complete rubbish.

Agreed, saying Biden was senile would have risked a pretty significant diplomatic incident. Plus we have no idea what was said in private. The sense seems to still be that in private Biden still very much has good days and bad, I don't think he's necessarily senile he's just old and slow!

If Trump wins the election then PM Starmer will have to be nice to him. I don't want to see a joint press conference where Keir has to flatter the orange buffoon!

But if the result was to keep Trump more in line with European security interests and the defence of Ukrainian freedom then it would be the right thing to do. David Lammy already has contacts within Trump's team and is apparently quite well liked by them, which maybe you wouldn't expect!

Except JD Vance seems to think he's a bit of an idiot.

Starmer did not have to say anything. Keeping out of it would have been the wiser move. He knew Biden days were numbered.

Not always but yes that does help. She is also a black woman. You can’t underestimate how that is a barrier still in the 21st Century. If she was lacking in intelligence she wouldn’t have made it this far.

Don't know where you get your impression from. Most folks recognise Trump as being thin-skinned and a long time grudge-holder. Lammy wrote an article in TIME in 2018, it included:

Within the piece, he referred to Trump, the then-President of the United States, as “a woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathizing sociopath.” Lammy went on to argue that Trump “is also a profound threat to the international order that has been the foundation of Western progress for so long.”

Starmer has given unconditional and open-ended backing for Ukraine, Trump will terminate any future funding on day one and start carving up Ukraine within the first week.

NATO members who were chided by Trump for not spending in line with their commitments were glad to see the back of him and may see now the US leave as focus shifts to Asia. The cities of Berlin and Paris posted messages of glee when Biden won, the President of Ireland expressed pride in the result.

Other leaders were more measured and statesman-like, but IF he is elected, there will be consequences for those who assumed they'd seen the last of him.

Yes we are to blame too - which is why Iran holds us up as another great enemy despite our very much reduced influence on the world stage. And America being a non-interventionist comes with huge risks and downsides to the rest of the world too. Loss of American support in Ukraine will cost Europe dear. But in terms of international relationships it is easier to maintain good relationships when you don’t interfere.

He was asked repeatedly by journalists, he couldn’t exactly say nothing.

I don’t think Trump will do a good job internationally. I just think a Trump who doesn’t interfere on the world stage is less worse than one who does.

Giving away swathes of Ukraine, which is what he plans to do, is pretty significant interfering in my view. It essentially lays the groundwork for Europe-wide war.

I'd have respected Keir a lot more if he'd been honest rather than treat the public like idiots. It was obvious Biden wasn't all there, to put it mildly.

This is where our shit journalism gets us.

'Journalists' who know Starmer cannot be honest without damaging the UK's repuation internationally and our relationship with the US - so repeatedly ask him the question over and over knowing he must be diplomatic and then they could go at him for it.

Because the alternative would be to do their jobs properly and report the news, not create it - which is obviously more effort and more difficult.

It came from Nicholas Watt who had spoken to some members of the Trump team.

They said David Cameron talked down to them whereas David Lammy listened properly to what they had to say. Sounds quite plausible to me. Trump's team probably think Donald is an arsehole too.

Nothing in what you wrote contradicts what I said. Trump is unpredictable and if Starmer and co tell him they've heard he has the biggest dick in the world they might well be able to get something out of him.

Can someone explain to me how Trump can give away swathes of the Ukraine, when did the USA buy them?

It is possible to be diplomatic and honest about Biden's mental faculties, especially after the disastrous debate with Trump.

Most especially when pressure ratcheted up on Biden to drop out - donors flexing financial muscle always works well. Especially after Biden became defiant. This was not a man putting the United States first.

But Keir would have known the media would have continuing to ask him that line of questioning on Biden. It's a major story. Honesty would have been the better route for him long term and I've no doubt the people would have supported him more if the media then tried to distort it.

Unfortunately for Keir, the media will now be waiting for other comments from now on where its possible to call his judgement into question.

You cannot viably have a situation where you've no idea if the US President is going to have a good or a bad day. Especially as things change rapidly in politics at that level with some very serious issues that require immediate urgent attention/decisions.

People need to have confidence in their leaders' ability to deal with any problem and to also have confidence in their ability to judge situations.

As for the UK's reputation, hasn't our reputation not been highly regarded for quite some time now?

Still, interesting to note the immediate defensive posturing in relation to Keir's comment aging as well as curdled milk! It's clear it hasn't aged well.

Hopefully, Keir's team game plans other situations better than this one in future.

I can’t work out if you’re just being obtuse.

Europe isn’t yet in any sort of position to replace the military aid provided by the US and won’t be for some time if ever. If Trump unilaterally withdraws aid it’s incredibly bad news for Ukraine, as we began to see when the aid was previously held up in congress.

And that’s all before we get to Trump undermining Article 5 at significant risk to the Eastern flank.

It's been said on this thread by at least 11 people before you.

Undoubtably, yes, but for all the talk about Trump destroying women's rights, it's interesting to note on who's watch Roe vs Wade was overturned

It's also interesting that the "retirement" of the leader of the free world was announced by tweet at 1.30 on a Sunday afternoon, with no national address and no coherent plan for what happens next, which makes me wonder what the story is behind how the decision really came to be made

Yeah, I'm not sure what Starmer could reasonably be expected to say. He's talking about a diplomatic meeting with the most powerful leader on earth and the leader of the free world. Is he going to say to the public and world at large that he was senile and the meeting was a waste of time?

You do realise if Putin's army steps into any European country that is part of NATO then we react and go to war. There is nothing we can do apart from send what we can to Ukraine to help them fight out Russian soldiers.

As soon as Trump takes away aid his bestie Putin will take over Ukraine.

The thing is that's not actually true. Article 5 doesn't mean automatic war, it's a commitment to come together for discussion and to provide assistance that is deemed necessary to respond to a situation. That's why Trump spouting shit is so dangerous, there is no obligation to go to war or to support another NATO state militarily, it's just what the rhetoric has always implied. By saying outright that he won't come to the aid of others (which he has done) he undermines the security that Article 5 has always provided.

I do however 100% agree that the best outcome is to give Ukraine everything that it needs to win.