8 ms·

I wouldn't say upset. I like this move and it should have been done long ago. However, knowing that he waited until now to play this card shows that he doesn't

I wouldn't say upset. I like this move and it should have been done long ago. However, knowing that he waited until now to play this card shows that he doesn't care in the slightest for those rotting in prison, he simply wanted to buy votes. All politicians might do it, but it still seems to me a perfectly valid reason to hate nearly all politicians.

user3939382 4y ago
That’s my frustration with all the political moves in this timing category. Translation: I know what the people need and want but I’m not going to do it because I serve corporations, except once every two years when I need to appear to care.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  Some of Biden's first executive actions were environmental and the US oil industry has been highly critical of him. That doesn't fit your narrative of only serving corporations except near elections.
  - user3939382 4y ago
    I could argue canceling Keystone XL was a gift to the saudis disguised as care about the environment. It’s not like delaying these permits does anything to curb oil demand or net production. I’m extremely cynical when it comes to almost any of these people in DC, there’s always an agenda, always an ulterior motive, and the People are rarely served and last priority. You have Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders types who appear to actually care and believe what they say but they’re ineffective even for those who agree with their positions.
    - tchaffee 4y ago
      > It’s not like delaying these permits does anything to curb oil demand or net production. Sure, one action in isolation does nothing. But you cherry picked one thing he did and took it out of the context of all the other things he did. Both early things and more recent executive actions. Tell the entire story and that early action looks entirely different. > People are rarely served and last priority. The US has one of the highest living standards in the world. I'm not saying there's no room for improvement. But lots of good laws are passed without an agenda other than the goals of the law itself. There's no need for extreme cynicism. What we need is less cynicism and more people exercising their right to vote. > they’re ineffective even for those who agree with their positions. No one who impacts the national discourse in such a visible and lasting way can be said to be ineffective. Sanders, along with the help of others, has shifted the Democratic party from right central to almost central. That's highly effective.
      - user3939382 4y ago
        I mean this with all due respect but you sound very naive IMHO. The Democratic party is as corporatist and right as it has ever been. Voting for either major party will do nothing to solve the problem as has been proven by a study from Princeton on this, which is summed up wonderfully in these graphs: https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/PrincetonPaper.png https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Princ... Basically your vote almost doesn’t matter at all.
        tchaffee 4y ago
        > Basically your vote almost doesn’t matter at all. That's an easily disprovable claim based on recent history. Roe v. Wade would not have been turned over if Hillary had been appointing SC Justices instead of Trump appointing them. You're far too cynical.
        cudgy 4y ago
        This is too simplistic. Perhaps there would be other poor decisions made by the Hillary judges that mitigates the Roe v Wade decision.
        tchaffee 4y ago
        > Perhaps there would be other poor decisions made by the Hillary judges that mitigates the Roe v Wade decision. Sure. Bad stuff might happen no matter what choices you make. You've described cynicism in a nutshell. That adds nothing to this conversation. Progressive leaning judges do not have a history of taking away basic human rights. The reason people lost a basic human right that was protected for decades is because of a shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court. That shift happened due to who was elected as president. Which proves that elections and who you vote for does matter.
        cudgy 4y ago
        Fine. Ignore the obvious point that picking a single matter that judges consider as a sole focus of efficacy contributes nothing to the conversation.
makeitdouble 4y ago
> he simply wanted to buy votes Isn't it the very basis or our systems ? There's very strong chances a lot of us share little with an old rich powerful white man, expecting decisions to all come out of beliefs and care would be difficult.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pfhayes 4y ago
Nobody is being released from prison. The White House said that there’s currently nobody in federal prison solely for “simple possession”, which is what is being pardoned
- squigs25 4y ago
  This. No one is getting released from prison because of this decision. It has been worded in such a way that makes it sound like it will have far more impact, which is of course intentional and political.
whoooooo123 4y ago
Biden has been in politics for 52 years. Has he ever, at any point in his long political career, shown any concern whatsoever for the plight of non-violent minor drug offenders until five minutes ago when it became politically expedient for him? This is a genuine question, I'd love to be proved wrong.
- airtonix 4y ago
- tchaffee 4y ago
  How can you be proved wrong about a genuine question? You're making a claim, not asking a question. In which case, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. We aren't going to do your research for you.
- fknorangesite 4y ago
  > Has he ever, at any point in his long political career, shown any concern whatsoever for the plight of non-violent minor drug offenders until five minutes ago February 2021: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_policy_of_the_Joe_Biden_administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_policy_of_the_Joe_Bid...
  - whoooooo123 4y ago
    I stand corrected.

user3939382 4y ago

That’s my frustration with all the political moves in this timing category. Translation: I know what the people need and want but I’m not going to do it because I serve corporations, except once every two years when I need to appear to care.

tchaffee 4y ago
Some of Biden's first executive actions were environmental and the US oil industry has been highly critical of him. That doesn't fit your narrative of only serving corporations except near elections.
- user3939382 4y ago
  I could argue canceling Keystone XL was a gift to the saudis disguised as care about the environment. It’s not like delaying these permits does anything to curb oil demand or net production. I’m extremely cynical when it comes to almost any of these people in DC, there’s always an agenda, always an ulterior motive, and the People are rarely served and last priority. You have Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders types who appear to actually care and believe what they say but they’re ineffective even for those who agree with their positions.
  - tchaffee 4y ago
    > It’s not like delaying these permits does anything to curb oil demand or net production. Sure, one action in isolation does nothing. But you cherry picked one thing he did and took it out of the context of all the other things he did. Both early things and more recent executive actions. Tell the entire story and that early action looks entirely different. > People are rarely served and last priority. The US has one of the highest living standards in the world. I'm not saying there's no room for improvement. But lots of good laws are passed without an agenda other than the goals of the law itself. There's no need for extreme cynicism. What we need is less cynicism and more people exercising their right to vote. > they’re ineffective even for those who agree with their positions. No one who impacts the national discourse in such a visible and lasting way can be said to be ineffective. Sanders, along with the help of others, has shifted the Democratic party from right central to almost central. That's highly effective.
    - user3939382 4y ago
      I mean this with all due respect but you sound very naive IMHO. The Democratic party is as corporatist and right as it has ever been. Voting for either major party will do nothing to solve the problem as has been proven by a study from Princeton on this, which is summed up wonderfully in these graphs: https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/PrincetonPaper.png https://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Princ... Basically your vote almost doesn’t matter at all.
      - tchaffee 4y ago
        > Basically your vote almost doesn’t matter at all. That's an easily disprovable claim based on recent history. Roe v. Wade would not have been turned over if Hillary had been appointing SC Justices instead of Trump appointing them. You're far too cynical.
        cudgy 4y ago
        This is too simplistic. Perhaps there would be other poor decisions made by the Hillary judges that mitigates the Roe v Wade decision.
        tchaffee 4y ago
        > Perhaps there would be other poor decisions made by the Hillary judges that mitigates the Roe v Wade decision. Sure. Bad stuff might happen no matter what choices you make. You've described cynicism in a nutshell. That adds nothing to this conversation. Progressive leaning judges do not have a history of taking away basic human rights. The reason people lost a basic human right that was protected for decades is because of a shift in the makeup of the Supreme Court. That shift happened due to who was elected as president. Which proves that elections and who you vote for does matter.
        cudgy 4y ago
        Fine. Ignore the obvious point that picking a single matter that judges consider as a sole focus of efficacy contributes nothing to the conversation.

makeitdouble 4y ago

> he simply wanted to buy votes Isn't it the very basis or our systems ? There's very strong chances a lot of us share little with an old rich powerful white man, expecting decisions to all come out of beliefs and care would be difficult.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pfhayes 4y ago

Nobody is being released from prison. The White House said that there’s currently nobody in federal prison solely for “simple possession”, which is what is being pardoned

squigs25 4y ago
This. No one is getting released from prison because of this decision. It has been worded in such a way that makes it sound like it will have far more impact, which is of course intentional and political.

whoooooo123 4y ago

Biden has been in politics for 52 years. Has he ever, at any point in his long political career, shown any concern whatsoever for the plight of non-violent minor drug offenders until five minutes ago when it became politically expedient for him? This is a genuine question, I'd love to be proved wrong.

airtonix 4y ago
tchaffee 4y ago
How can you be proved wrong about a genuine question? You're making a claim, not asking a question. In which case, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. We aren't going to do your research for you.
fknorangesite 4y ago
> Has he ever, at any point in his long political career, shown any concern whatsoever for the plight of non-violent minor drug offenders until five minutes ago February 2021: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_policy_of_the_Joe_Biden_administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_policy_of_the_Joe_Bid...
- whoooooo123 4y ago
  I stand corrected.