Did Putin Accidentally Reboot Biden's Presidency?
Category: News & Politics
Via: john-russell • 2 years ago • 110 commentsBy: Ed Kilgore (Intelligencer)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Joe Biden doesn't seem so sleepy in addressing Russia's aggression in Ukraine. Photo: Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
From the objective point of view of public-opinion research, Joe Biden approaches his first official State of the Union address on Tuesday night in a slough of despond. An ABC-Washington Post survey released over the weekend placed his job approval ratio at a wretched 37-55 percent, with 44 percent strongly disapproving. This is the sort of popularity level achieved by Donald Trump at his lowest ebbs, usually after some disgraceful behavior. As the Post write-up succinctly put it, the public "largely sees the economy worsening under [Biden's] watch, disapproves of his leadership on key issues and currently prefers that Republicans control Congress after the November elections."
But there is an important proviso to that depressing data for the 46th president: "The survey was mostly completed before the full [Russian] invasion [of Ukraine] began and the United States and others responded with sanctions." And while there isn't much precedent for an international crisis in which American troops are not involved significantly changing a president's popularity, Putin's war does give Biden a chance to change perceptions of his supposedly weak leadership, particularly if he takes full advantage of a State of the Union address likely to be widely watched and discussed in the days ahead.
Without question, Biden's poor job-approval numbers (his current polling average is 40.7 percent at both RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight) reflect dim assessments of both his international and his domestic stewardship, as FiveThirtyEight's Nathanial Rakich explains:
In five polls conducted this month, between 52 percent and 58 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Biden's handling of foreign policy; only 35-44 percent said they approved …
Views of how Biden is handling the Ukraine-Russia crisis weren't that different. According to a Feb. 18-21 poll from The Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, Americans disapproved of Biden's handling of "the U.S. relationship with Russia" by 56 percent to 43 percent. Meanwhile, a Feb. 1-17 Gallup poll found that Americans disapproved of his handling of "the situation with Russia" by 55 percent to 36 percent. And in a Feb. 10-14 Quinnipiac University poll, Americans disapproved of his handling of "tensions between Russia and Ukraine" by 54 percent to 34 percent.
Perceptions of Biden's handling of world affairs took a big hit after the messy U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and they haven't recovered. But if — and this is a big if — the combination of Ukrainian resistance, U.S./European assistance, and Western sanctions on Russia continues to frustrate Vladimir Putin's imperialist designs, and if — an even bigger if — Biden emerges as Ukraine's best friend and Putin's biggest nightmare, then all bets could be off, at least for a while. As Rakich notes, the latest public-opinion temperature reading, from Morning Consult, shows a possible new trajectory for Biden's popularity:
[T]he only poll asking about Ukraine conducted entirely since Russia's invasion so far — told a different tale. In it, registered voters gave Biden a positive net approval rating on his handling of foreign policy in Ukraine and Eastern Europe: 48 percent to 43 percent. This could reflect what will happen to Biden's approval ratings on Ukraine (and perhaps overall) once the public hears more about the crisis and has new information on which to base their opinions — such as Biden's televised announcement on Thursday that he would impose harsh economic sanctions on Russia and not send U.S. troops to Ukraine.
This could be the needle Biden has to thread, since Americans overwhelmingly want Ukrainian independence to survive, but without U.S. troop involvement. If that appears to be happening, even temporarily, Biden will almost certainly get some of the credit, particularly from the Democrats whose support for him has been lagging lately, and from the independents, who turned sour on his presidency some time ago. It's also possible that the ill-disguised and sometimes openly expressed MAGA admiration for Putin could undermine the recent revival of fortunes for Republicans, who at best seem divided and irresolute over what is happening in Ukraine.
There is one distant precedent for this sort of development. In late 1979, Jimmy Carter was an unpopular president who seemed to be stumbling fecklessly across a series of domestic and international challenges. In October of that year, Carter's job approval rating (per Gallup) was at an abysmal 29 percent. Then, in November, revolutionary students in Tehran took hostages at the U.S. embassy, and in December the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Carter, who was facing what almost everyone expected to be a successful primary challenge to his renomination from liberal lion Ted Kennedy, suspended all campaign activities and channeled popular outrage at the events in distant Iran. He also imposed a grain embargo on the Soviets (later augmented by a U.S. boycott of the Summer Olympics Games in Moscow). His "Rose Garden Strategy" of exemplifying national unity and executive leadership worked wonders: His job-approval rating leaped to 58 percent by the end of January 1980, and he routed Kennedy in the early primaries, all but ensuring his renomination.
Ultimately, Carter's handling of these twin international crises (along with wretched economic conditions) helped undo him in his general-election contest with Ronald Reagan. But initially, his self-presentation as a resolute and focused president patriotically dealing with a dangerous world succeeded.
It's possible something of the same dynamics could benefit Joe Biden. In the long run, the war (with its impact on petroleum markets and trade and investment patterns throughout the world) may exacerbate the economic problems that are already bedeviling his administration. But in the short-term, the crisis may reboot his presidency. His self-presentation in the days just ahead, and especially in the State of the Union address, may tell the tale. In discussing the events in Ukraine, he can draw on his vast foreign-policy and national-defense experience, forged in the newly relevant Cold War and immediately post-Cold War environment. If he can reintroduce himself to a pessimistic and distracted public sick of COVID-19 and fearful of inflation as a bloodied but unbowed leader exhibiting the kind of principles his predecessor (still the de facto leader of the opposition) so notably lacks, Biden could look strong, not sleepy. That would represent still another miscalculation by Putin, who nows seems to be the stumbling, erratic president in the news.
Tags
Who is online
430 visitors
Well hell yes they favor not getting physically involved which we aren't so the overall opinion of his handling of Ukraine/Russia would be good. Still doesn't cloud the overall opinion and shitshow he has been in the other important areas.
Sending American troops was never an option. Sending military and humanitarian supplies and equipment is imperative. Stiffer sanctions and restoring US energy independence is a must
Then why deploy the 82d Airborne and 3ID to Europe and move the 173rd from Italy?
You mean like we had before Jan 20, 2021 right?
Y'all pretend that whatshisname made us energy independent.
Because NATO countries requested defensive help including invoking Article 4.
So involving US military IS an option.
He did. We exported energy. Then Biden closed pipelines and other sources. So now the US has to import energy. Prices will soon rise again
You pretend like the human fuck up machine didn't diminish our ability to pump oil and gas the second he took office. Or that he didn't shut down the Keystone Pipeline.
Rising gas prices are a direct result of the human fuck up machines actions.
Beats me, since they won't be in combat. A tripwire perhaps?
As to your second question...yes.
it was the oxygen thief you voted for who cancelled a key permit for the Keystone Pipeline
And it was the oxygen thief you voted for who shut down oil and gas lease sales.
But lets not let facts interfere with your unfounded rants.
Do you not understand the difference between a non-NATO Ukraine and the 8 NATO countries (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia) that invoked Article 4 under treaty requirements?
Do you not understand the involvement of US Forces is an option or the movement of them from the US to Europe wouldn't have happened.
Of course, but we're all aware that US military action has never been limited to NATO.
Military action is obviously an option. Granted it's unlikely and IMO highly ill-advised, but there isn't any reason it couldn't happen.
Let's not but lets use the updated actual information which I have posted numerous times.
Here are the actual facts that Biden has OK'd more leases than Trump did in the first year.
Yes, he did which had no effect on the volume of oil being imported from Canada, in fact, we are importing record numbers from Canada. (for those that have claimed that the XLP would make us energy independent, Canada is not part of the US.) Additionally, the expansion of existing pipelines will carry more oil than if XL was built.
This article will give an idea of what is happening with oil production/investment and distribution.
Oil production on Native American lands now exceeds 3% of US production with huge untapped reserves.
hmmmm....
Fulfilling treaty obligations isn't much of an option. It's pretty much the opposite of an option.
Bullshit. See 1.2.8
Staying with what was originally reported at the time. Not the walked back versions. Reality is, the only thing that changed was the narrative given for the problems Biden caused.
What I posted was, as I stated the updated information, accept it or not it is what is happening if you can refute it, please post the appropriate links.
Nothing was walked back, it is fact, simple as that.
Whatshisname did not make us energy independent. He did nothing of the sort.
[Deleted]
The Keystone pipeline has nothing to do with the US - any oil collected would have been shipped elsewhere, nothing to benefit the US, NOTHING
Appropriate links were provided. Just because it doesn't fit your walked back version is not a problem for me to fix.
You really should learn how to do research.
Not totally, but it was on it's way.
Outdated non accurate links. That is a fact and as I stated before nothing was walked back. If you are unable to accept the facts that's on you.
If my facts are wrong you are free to post links that refute them, or you can keep spinning and dodging.
See, here's the thing. There is no need to pretend because it is true.
But you know she will anyway.
properly dated and accurate links. It's your narrative that isn't accurate.
Ok. Lets play with that. You can spin it all you want, it still supports the fact that it's all on Biden and the clusterfuck administration he's running.
Yet you can't post links disputing what I posted...Pretty sad.
And he accuses you of making 'unfounded rants'. . .
Not oil collected - isn't that tar sands?
EXACTLY! You provided updated and factual information. Not outdated nonsense and unfounded rants.
You helped prove my point. Why would I dispute it?
"You helped prove my point. Why would I dispute it?"
Where did he do that?
He didn't!
He's disproven all of yours.
imagine if Zelensky had followed Biden’s plan and left the country.
That's the difference between the two. Selenskyy manned up and is staying in Ukraine to lead from the front and be a rallying point for his people. Biden would poop his pants and go running screaming like a little girl.
As far as Biden rebooting goes, IMHO, he is even word than before. He is not leading the world as he should but following them in sanctions and won't even take the bold step of returning us to energy independence and a net exporter of oil and gas and by sanctioning and stopping Russia's sale of oil and gas.
LETS GO BRANDON!
And you honestly think that if this had happened on tmp's watch that he wouldn't be cowering in the White House Bunker?
I believe we would be doing much more to help the Ukrainians than we are now. Biden, like most lefties and progressive is a panty weight and afraid of real confrontation. I also believe that Ukraine has a democratically elected government and deserves to determine it own future and Russia is 110 percent wrong for invading. We should di all we can to defend and protect it as we did in Korea and Kuwait and as we tried to do in Vietnam but were held back from doing the job properly by the left.
I believe it would be "inspecting" the Whitehouse bunker.......
You didn't answer my question. Just went off on a rant about lefty panty waists. You have a real high opinion of lefties, don't you? Not all of us are panty waists
The thing is, trmp wouldn't have done a goddamned thing if Putin invaded Ukraine on his watch and you know it
And you know he wouldn't have done anything how? Oh yeah you were told to say that by the leftist elite.
And I have a very negative opinion of lefties, liberals and progressives.
Some have an awfully twisted view of Captain bone spurs.
What, specifically?
I'm not interested in sending my kid.
If you wanna go, there is nothing stopping you from going. They'll give you a gun if you'll use it.
Seriously, if you care enough about this cause that you're willing to risk your life for it, then you have both my support and my respect. Godspeed.
I'm not there. It's not important enough to me.
If four years of Trump taught us anything, it is that there is no telling what he's likely to do or say.
Remember this: "Maybe we should start injecting people with disinfectant." I rest my case.
Putin was never likely to invade with the American trigger in the hands of somebody as unpredictable as Trump.
It would have been very easy to imagine a scenario where the Ukrainians say "OK....we'll investigate the shit out of every Biden on earth if you'll send a couple of tank battalions over here... and oh.... also bomb St. Petersburg."....followed by Donnie talking about how Ukraine was a "tremendous country" with "tremendous people" and a "yuuuge partner" with the US and "trust me, I know Ukraine better than anybody else".
Putin appears to be on a "salami tactic", eating up non-Nato states slice by slice. That stops working when he runs into US troops, so he needs a great level of predictability from US leadership.
Trump never said anything bad about or to Putin during his entire administration, and took no actions against Putin or Russia unless forced to. There is no reason to think that would change under current circumstances.
They negotiated a cease-fire in the first few months of his term. Why would he be expected to say something "bad", or take action against a country complying with a cease-fire?
Not if you're committed to hating Trump no matter what, no. For people willing to be more thoughtful, other possibilities exist.
It is a good thing you were not around in the 1940's. You would not have gone to fight in Europe to defeat the Nazis. Afterall , the war in Europe was not our fight. You would have allowed the communist north take over the entire peninsula because Korea was not our fight. You would allow Saddam Hussein rape the the country and people of Kuwait because it was not our fight. I will bet if saw a woman getting beaten and raped you would do nothing because it is not your fight.
For me it is important to assist the smaller and underdog countries from being destroyed and and oppressed. The cause of freedom and justice is our fight. At this time Ukraine is our fight. It is too bad you and others do not feel the same and are willing to let innocent die.
So you are Ok with Putin killing innocent women and children. It does not bother you that the Ukrainians freedom is being stolen from them.
If assisting a free people to keep their freedom just what is the military for. Even Let's Go Brandon said sanctions are ineffective. The Ukrainians need help now not in thirty days.
And one of the first things Biden did was stop the sanctions implemented by Trump, end America's energy independence a pays billions of dollars for Russian oil to make up for part of our loss. Now with Russia invading Ukraine, Biden still refuses to bring back our oil production and end all Russian oil purchases.
It was literally not our fight until December 7, 1941.
You left out Viet Nam. Why did you leave out Viet Nam?
Tell me which of those conflicts involved direct combat with a nuclear power capable of destroying all life on earth. You don't think we might want to be a bit careful? Or do we just charge headlong into WWIII because you're feeling chivalrous?
Awww. Look at you on your little holier-than-thou high horse.
Then put your laptop down and take your ass over there. They will hand you an AK-47 and teach you how to tell Russians to "go fuck yourself" in Ukrainian. Nobody. Is. Stopping. You.
Or do you only care enough about it to send other people's kids to get shot at?
Germany nor the Nazis attacked the US directly on Dec. 7 1941 or any other day.
I might but I am almost 70 years old and in poor health. They are even letting their own men watch those conditions go.
I guess these words from JFK are meaning less to you now.
Well, it certainly happened during the US/Vietnam war with both China and Russia. China to a much great extent and both had nuclear weapons at that time.
Their ally did. And then they declared war on us on December 11. Repeat.....they......declared war on......us.
You're awfully brave with other people's blood.
A speech given before we sent tens of thousands of American kids to die in various shitholes over the following 6 decades? No. Not really.
Tell me again how Viet Nam worked out. Tell me again what we accomplished in a 20 year occupation of Afghanistan.
Then explain to me how Ukraine 2022 is different than Afghanistan 1979, where we didn't send troops.
No their first attack came sometime in 1940 I believe, you remember the Ruben James being sunk by a U-boat in the north atlantic?
The first was the USS Kearney, DD432 on 17 October 1941, next On 31 October, a German submarine, U-552 sank a U.S. destroyer USS Reuben James, DD245 600 miles west of Ireland, killing 115 of the crew. There were several others that took torpedoes from U-boats as well as several U-boats that were sunk by US naval forces..
We were actively at war with Germany long before Pearl Harbor, Peral Harbor served to make it official though we only declared war against Japan that had attacked us... As a response to our declaration against the Japanese, GERMANY declared war AGAINST US four days later, and the next day we, in a formality, officially declared war against Germany...
So your statement is factually false
Different country, different people, different enemy. Gees you can't be that blind.
Ah yes the Germans sank our ships that were
A. In a war zone
B. Escorting a convoy that was going to a combatant
C would not have hesitated to attack the U-boat if detected
Yes it was called an UN-Declared War by everyone at the time, including the President... The war zone as described by the Germans was the middle of the Atlantic east to England.. There were discussions and debates in Congress about a declaration of war over it, it's where the American Firsters came into prominence... The US Navy was charged with escorting those ships half way across the ocean, with orders not to fire unless fired upon, The Germans got so frustrated with that, several of their U-boat captains said to hell with it and fired on our ships disrupting their attacks... After that they sailed with orders to consider all submarines operating in the convoy tracks as hostile...
Yeah we were in a shooting war with the Nazi Kreigsmarine long before Pearl Harbor and they shot first.... So your claim...
Is factually false....
Biggest problem we had in Vietnam was that it was the bureaucrat politicians in DC running the war and not the military.
That presumes we had any business being there in the first place.
I see clearly enough that you have no problem at all spending other people's lives.
Some of them may die, but that's a price you're willing to pay? How nice.
There was no UN in 1940 or 1939.
You might want to look up what an UN-Delcared war actually is my friend, and it has nothing to do with the UN... (un-declared is one word, can also be written as undeclared)
Aren't real familiar with history are you?
That is a risk you take when you volunteer for military service.
The price of freedom is not cheap. Fighting for the rights and freedom of all is valued. Coming to the aide of a smaller people against a larger foe is a rich and noble cause.
I asked before but never got an answer. Would you watch as a woman was gang raped and beaten by bigger and stronger men or would you intervene
Probably more so than you are.
If you are trying to insult me I must first value your opinion. Oh well you tried to
Since no one else wants to answer, of course most people would and I actually have in the past... But your analogy fails massively when comparing it to seeing two nations fighting a war.... What's going on now is the people looking at the woman getting raped are handing her machine guns to help her in her fight against the gang...
[Deleted]
Not at all, well at least not as much as you are trying to insult the intelligence of everyone else here... Like everyone else you cannot admit to being wrong, so any factual information that proves you wrong you classify as an insult...
which means you are no better or worse than anyone else around here... SO, don't flatter yourself...
I don't recall anybody asking me one way or the other when they sent me there. They said you are going and you went and that was it.
American kids are not responsible for the freedom of every country in the world.
There are other ways to come to their aid besides sending our troops.
You didn't ask. You "bet", and you were a bit of a dick about it. You would have lost whatever you wagered.
I know.
And why? So we could stop some mythological "domino" from falling. Was it worth risking your life? Was it worth 50k dead American kids? All those mothers who sent off sons and got flags in return?
The people making those decisions were still stuck in WWII. And in many ways we haven't evolved.
Those Americans you speak of are not kids. They are adult men and women whose volunteered for the military and one of the jobs of the military is to preserve freedom wherever it is threatened. Having your attitude after seeing the atrocities committed by the Russian allies such as attacking civilian residential buildings, nuclear power plants and hospitals, I am ashamed to call those that have your attitude my country men. I always believed Americans were stronger and braver than that.
Many of whom aren't old enough to buy beer for themselves if they're not on active duty.
I think you'll find the job of the US military is to protect the United States and its allies (which Ukraine is not). That is sometimes expanded to include "American interests".
The sad fact is that Putin's actions are actually helping American interests.
Ok....so now we're responsible for stopping atrocities. Odd how you don't seem to give a shit about the dozens of other places around the world where war crimes and atrocities are being committed. Will we need to invade Syria? Yemen? Myanmar? Ethiopia?
Do we send troops into Mexico to fight drug cartels? Or do we only worry about 1st world countries full of people who look like us? Where is the threshold here?
I notice you make no reference to "smarter".
You want to kick off WWIII with potential nuclear consequences just so you can joust windmills from your warm comfy armchair. Thankfully, most Americans are more intelligent than that.
Absolute 100% Bullshit...
The US military's job is NOT to preserve freedom worldwide... It is to protect the United States and it's citizens... When they are threatened...
It is not the United World Army...
Where the hell you get that idea?
From various wars we have become involved in over the years.
Nah. They didn't submit to his demand for dirt on Joe in exchange for military aid.
That is what a lot of cowards think. That they are smarter and more intelligent than everyone else. They are not they are just afraid.
Dude...I'm 55 years old. Nobody is sending me into battle any more than they're sending your silly old ass.
You and I are not even going to get an opportunity to be cowards because there isn't anything for us to be afraid of.
Let me help you here..... at no point does "courage" involve "sending somebody else to fight your battle while you sit on your ass in your comfy chair far away from any danger."
If you were brave, you'd be over there driving a truck or doing paperwork in a hospital or whatever it is Ukranians in poor health are doing to help the cause.
Not everyone. Just people who think it's courageous to spend other people's blood so they can "feel good" about 'Murica.
Sometime sending others to fight is necessary, like now. At the very least we should do is send Green Berets in to do something they were trained for and teach the Ukrainian civilians that want to defend their country to do so properly and allow those Ukrainian solders that are teaching ng them now to go to the battlefront
Your weinie president won't even put sanctions on Russian oil and reinstate the trump programs that made us not only energy self-sufficient but a exporter of energy.
And people wonder why I dislike liberals and progressives so.
.
Currently, there are a number of ex US Special Forces, British SAS, Georgia hardened combat soldiers among others. They are not current members of the US/British/Georgia systems.
As far as I know, Biden is everyone's president whether you like it or not. You realize that if Bidens put sanctions that the price of gas in the US will increase, that is something that has to be taken into consideration when making decisions that affect most of America.
What programs should Biden bring back that not only made us energy self-sufficient but an exporter of energy?
In case you are not aware of it we are the largest producer of oil in the world. In 2021 the US was a net exporter of oil.
Of course, you're entitled to your opinion but it's best to have your facts correct or at least have some facts before bloviating.
Well I am under no allusions that leftist, liberal and progressives care, think or want for America to be great an a leader in the world. They will be happy when America be comes as mediocre and worthless as the other countries. America is the best and greatest country in the world despite the lefts attempts to bring us down. We are great now but fave been greater in the past. With any luck the 2022 and 2024 election will clear out our government of progressive losers and have those the believe in America's greatness and it's greater future.
More partisan bloviating without any facts which seem to be your MO.
Carry on.
Well I'll be damned if there isn't some more conflicting information............
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-president-biden-ente%e2%80%8b%e2%80%8brs-first-state-of-the-union-with-second-lowest-approval-on-record/ar-AAUtpUS?li=BBnb7Kz
Thanks for posting some very interesting results from that poll.
I wonder how many will bother to read it?