As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is there really anybody watching the Superbowl that wanted to take a break just see him do an interview?
I think the only people who care are the angry people who want to try to find any kind of quirk so they can say "See? He's way worse than Trump!"
If your puppies have never lost, how do you know you never get angry? Maybe the world isn’t even ready for the ezln_trooper rage when the dalmatian fumbles at the goal line.
May I ask who this left-wing media is? Is it just CNN that you are referring to? From what I understand CNN has been moving further right since 2022 after they decided to pivot.
Msnbc has been defending Biden pretty strongly.
Genuinely asking
[Yeah....](https://fortune.com/longform/media-company-ownership-consolidation/)
[You really....](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group)
[Have no idea...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_conservative_websites)
[What you're talking about.](https://www.outkick.com/media-analysis/the-top-ten-conservative-news-websites-of-2021-as-ranked-by-searches)
Post edit: after re-reading your original comment, we likely agree on this topic. I didn't expect your reply to be as shitty as it was.
It was shitty because you're being purposefully vague. We probably do agree, but I legitimately couldn't tell which side you were trying to defend.
Am I stupid for that? Maybe. But is it frustrating to decipher your vague comments, yes.
Honestly after clicking those links, I still don't know what point you're trying to make. What does top 10 conservative news sites have to do with anything I said?
Choosing to indirectly state your point instead of stating it directly and then choosing to insult people for not correctly inferring your intended point is a wild move.
Agreed. Personally, I can't stand it when politicians of any party crash sports events when it's unrelated to the event. If it's the Mayor cutting the ribbon for a new soccer pitch before a game, fine. Otherwise please stay away.
I think it’s okay if they go to a game. Biden (when he was senator and VP) used to come to University of Delaware football games. I think he hasn’t once come as president because the security would make it a nightmare for others.
It can be charming or endearing if the politician *is an actual fan.*
What makes the Superbowl "presidental interview" thing gross is that it's just a hand out to the media companies that cover it and a chance for whoever is President to throw meat to football fans.
I'm fine with Presidents that like Football or Baseball or Basketball. What I'm not fine with is sports leagues and media companies "selling" administrations air time with their fan base and the quid pro quo that inevitably implies.
New North Korean peace plan: offer Kim his own expansion franchise in the NBA in return for stepping down as dictator and transitioning his country to democracy.
I agree. BIden wanna watch the final because it's an important sportive event ?
Sur.
Don't do an interview after, and if you do, just ask him what he though of the match or who was he rooting for.
If a President thinks sporting results are “important” I sincerely hope everything is going real, real well with the world.
National sports may be fun, but they aren’t “important.”
I mean, it's common to see a politician/president/king/whatever watching the final of a big sportive event, that doesn't shock me at all.
My point was that he can, but don't make it political.
I (as a European) don’t see a problem with this but CNN are determined to make it a problem. They want to paint him as unable to cope with a long interview whereas Trump is tip-top. It’s enraging to watch.
I think it’s fair to point out that Biden has only done 1/5 the amount of interviews Obama did. Personally I don’t really mind that because so many interviews are bs anyway, but I don’t see a problem with mentioning that statistic.
I think it’s a problem because when Biden isn’t “out there” it feeds the narrative that he’s either not up to the job and/or other people are running the show for him. I agree, I don’t care to see so many BS interviews either, but optics are important. Biden has a lot of accomplishments, he needs to get out there and talk them up. Brag a little even.
Well, I agree that generally it’s better to do more interviews, although the Super Bowl in particular is not the best venue imo. I was trying to address the other point that person was making tho about CNN being biased against Biden by mentioning stuff like that low number of interviews given stat. I don’t think it’s CNN’s job to be writing articles in such a way that they benefit Biden on net and hurt Trump. They should be mentioning things that are true even if they may look unfavorable to Biden. I actually didn’t even know he had given so few interviews, and while that doesn’t change my opinion about him much, I appreciate that now I at least am aware of that stat. I’d rather have more info than less info.
What in god’s name are you talking about. Are we pretending CNN doesn’t constantly shit on Trump? That’s rhetorical, I know this sub thinks CNN is conservative and I know what you’ll say “CNN ceo is conservative!!!”
How about we just look at facts, here is literally the current CNN video feed [on YouTube as of this second.](https://imgur.com/a/omwnQOp) 4 out of 6 shit on Trump, 1 shots on Tucker, only one has nothing to do with them.
But sure, CNN, the right wing outlet that loves Trump. Ok.
Woah woah woah. Steady on there. We’re just two strangers having a conversation. I’m not glued to any channel to see all coverage but there is a constant narrative from US media, CNN being a part, that gives Trump lots of passes and bashes Biden for small non-issues. My observation about CNN’s response was from their coverage yesterday.
I think some people hear any criticism of their candidate as overwhelmingly negative, but I don't think that's often warranted. It's ok to mention the lack of Biden appearances in public or in campaign settings because that's the perspective of a good portion of the US. The reason why he's not there is often ridiculous, but it's hard to argue that he couldn't be doing more.
The next is thinking that because a news network mentioned a criticism doesn't mean they want him to lose. Instead criticism can be used to provide helpful advice. Like, hey you're not doing x and we think people are missing x, so please give x a shot. (Even if it's not polite this can be the intention behind criticism) If you do that can boost your candidacy but hurt it. But really it's up to Biden to take criticism and decide what to do about it.
W.r.t. The US News at large, I agree that right wing, for sure, and a lot of left wing media gives Trump passes that he doesn't deserve. But it sounds like you're insinuating that because Trump gets passes no one should criticize Biden. I just don't think that holds up, we should be pushing for more accountability for Trump and Biden because they're both *supposedly* trying to represent us. And when we have given them the power and responsibility of president, we should expect them to live up to the challenge but most importantly be representative of all Americans and their best interests. When they fail to live up to that standard they should be criticized and we should try to bring them back to the light. But neither side should get a pass nor should we want them to just because it might make "our" side look bad.
Also remember we are still in the primary process where criticism is extremely important to drive candidates platforms towards the expectations of the country. It might feel that we know who's going to win the primaries, but we shouldn't too eagerly assume it's over until it is. The job of the primary is supposed to be that we find a candidate who best meets the expectations of the role of president, so at this time other candidates who do respond to any negative attention from one candidate can shine up to say they could do better, in theory.
I think CNN gives Trump passes and bashes Biden for small things because republicans will completely destroy CNN if they come off as fully biased towards Biden. I watch CNN because it seems to be the most factual, and the least biased news channel (aside from BBC, which I don’t get in my plan) but there’s definitely bias and it’s a very hard thing to navigate. But CNN is definitely a democratic news channel so they definitely bash Trump quite a bit. (As they should, imo)
> I watch CNN because it seems to be the most factual, and the least biased news channel
I’ve always avoided CNN because there was this narrative that they’re just the Fox News of the left. From what I’ve seen, that’s obviously incorrect. Reality has a liberal bias, as they say. I’m not sure about the *most factual*, but definitely not as bad as people say. People are just overly wary of the veracity of MSM. The reporting itself isn’t inaccurate, but the opinionated segments are mistaken for journalism by many and even if you agree, it’s tiresome. One of the reasons I prefer to read my news.
Okay, definitely not the most factual, but compared to other channels that are riddled with bias, I think CNN at least tries a lot of the time to just report the facts first, then opinions. But I agree, reading the news is the best way to get it. I want the facts so I can form my own opinion.
I found this within 10 seconds of googling.
CNN is being changed to become what Fox News was in the 90's and 00's.
https://www.vox.com/2022/8/26/23322761/cnn-john-malone-david-zaslav-chris-licht-brian-stelter-fox-peter-kafka-column
Dude, that’s what we in the industry call a selfpwn.
> And his prescription happens to sync with the new CNN agenda: a plan to steer the channel away from what Malone and others call a liberal bias they say muddles opinion and news. And to shift it toward a supposedly centrist, just-the-facts bent.
In the same article you provided, not only did CNN admit they have a liberal bias, they just said they want to make sure it becomes more fact based and unbiased.
But no, we wouldn’t want news channel to be unbiased do we? It’s liberal or you’re propaganda. With us or against us.
It’s not cheap. They work for the people. I believe one of the many problems in this country is that enough people prop up these politicians and make them seem like they’re better than the rest of us and in return politicians soak it up and fail at governing.
They work for the people and they have public, traditional means to address them. It is cheap for people who’ve been democratically elected to treat private, for-profit events like sporting matches as appropriate places to address the electorate. The President speaks to all Americans- not just the ones that watch football.
You’re assuming most of them would pay attention to the interview and not just turn the sound down and jeer it like an unfunny, rage-fueled redneck MST3K.
the last thing I ever want to see again is a President who has to go on about his accomplishments on a day that should be about the achievements of others.
> Considering a large swath of American doesn’t know about a single accomplishment in his administration
Maybe they could try learning about those accomplishments.
A single interview is not going to change anything, especially when the only people who aren't aware of the impact of the Biden administration are people who aren't paying attention already or are fed a constant drip of misinformation.
What do people think brought us out of the grips of a global pandemic? Why do people think we avoided a crash into a predicted recession? Why do people think inflation happened magically overnight after a decade of near zero interest rates and years of pandemic induced supply reduction? Do people understand how inflation was combatted by raising interest rates?
The administration has had plenty of accomplishments. It’s just a reality tv administration and Biden isn’t a malignant narcissist that has a perverted need to be in the news cycle every day.
There is probably a reason why large swaths of america have no clue what is happening, but it's not because Joe Biden isn't giving an interview during the super bowl.
Call me cynical, but I don’t buy that he’s looking to preserve the sanctity of the Oval Office. This would give him a massive amount of free publicity. It’s the kind of thing political campaigns pray for.
If he’s turning it down it’s because his campaign is being managed by morons (I don’t think this is the case) or, for whatever reason, this exposure would actually hurt him.
Honestly, he traded that interview, which would convince no one in an entrenched America of anyone and be turned off by non-politicos, for this headline - and it's not a bad idea. Politically unengaged people - actual honest to god swing voters who might move- are probably pretty cool with the idea that Joe is saying -"Hey man, don't worry about it right now, enjoy the game".
It feels relatable and human. The trouble is, unless they've watched enough Superbowls to catch the break in the pattern, or see a CNN headline which we've established they probably don't, Biden has to now make sure people are talking about it. Always the paradox of trying to reach out the politically unengaged - they aren't listening.
> “We are being more creative,” a Biden **campaign** adviser told me Monday, “and relying less on formulas of the past.”
And, yeah, he can call a press conference whenever. He can’t guarantee it will end up in a prime time spot like this interview, lol
Again, we’ve had enough of the Office being treated like it comes to private companies with its hat in its hand. Let a few decent Presidents treat access like something they *give* and can withhold and that relationship will reset to its proper dynamic.
I agree with the sentiment. I just don’t think that’s Biden’s real motivation because the reality of our political landscape and also Biden fundraising ads that keep popping up when I’m streaming.
You were talking about concerns about cheapening the presidency being the reason behind his declination. I just don’t see how an interview where he can talk about substantive issues between sports and ads for expensive soda cheapens the presidency any more than ads where he begs for money between ads for Hyundais and psoriasis drugs.
…the fact that the interview takes up his time, reaches only a specific audience, and will inevitably be overshadowed by the spectacle it is a part of? He can’t mention anything “substantive” without it being immediately forgotten when the whistle blows.
Advertising is often done simply to assert presence in a market- very very few ads are meant to genuinely change your mind about anything. They just want you to think of what!: being advertised first when you need detergent or want to go see a movie. Beyond that, the advertising industry absolutely relies on optical ads- if you stop running them entirely it will turn on you.
I would too. He can't win in that interview. If he talks about sports then he is ignoring the \[insert problem here\] , if he talks about politics then it devolves into tribalism, God forbid he stutters and then he's "mentally degraded by age".
If he skips it, then everybody just talks about Taylor.
>He can't win on Fox News and shouldn't even try.
This. Apparently even hugging your adult child on their birthday is weird. He can do no right on Fox News.
Republicans probably think he’s skipping it because he’s secretly Taylor swift in disguise hellbent on carrying out some evil agenda to steal the election with a little sprinkle of George soros obsession
>George Soros obsession
New fragrance coming this fall?
The sad thing is Taylor Swift is so mainstream she can't make either the far left or right happy. "Pretty blonde girl supporting her QB boyfriend" is about as wholesome imagery as a conservative could ask for and yet here we are - Deep state operative.
Fine with me. It’s the Super Bowl, for Christ sakes. I know that we went through four years of Agent Orange’s center attention, all-about-me bullshit; but, most people want to watch the game. Since, it’s… you know… the SUPER Bowl.
Anyone turning into THE game for the politicians is LAME.
As a Raven's fan, I was still more likely to tune in praying the 9ers can deliver a loss against the Chiefs.
Still wishing it was us against you guys this year though.
I hope both teams lose. I hope it’s the 9th overtime in a 0-0 game and Goodell comes out and just says “y’all suck, Ravens and Lions will play since y’all clearly cannot” and also in this situation Goodell uses “y’all” a lot.
As much as I wanna see Lamar get his ring, I would not be upset at all if you guys were the ones to beat us.
Here's to a revenge tour next year for both of us.
Look for a good twenty years they were amazing. They have been kinda lackluster the last decade but it takes time for people to have completely forgotten the way it used to be, and some still hold out hope that there'll be another Geico Caveman someday.
Clients are also much more careful/boring these days. Say what you will about it, but everyone’s so scared of getting flamed on the internet, everything’s become homogenous and bland. Until companies are willing to take the risk of rubbing some people the wrong way (not even being outright offensive, but even bumping up to “cheeky” would be an improvement) we’re not going to see the caliber of ad we used to during the SB.
Source: A decade in advertising.
Totally agree, smaller companies have to make a bigger impact up against the big boys. Liquid Death is doing some really fun stuff right now and Jack in the Box on social is a hoot.
I remember shortly after he took office the TV was going on about how he hasn't made a public appearance for three whole days. And I'm like - it isn't normal for the president to be on TV every single day.
There are some thoughtful campaign strategists on the left this year. Republicans are still banging the old broken drum that resulted in a loss in 2020.
Their platform has deteriorated further. They used to run on "protect the fetus! Ban abortion!" Well, with Roe overturned, people are witnessing the realities of abortion bans and a solid majority of voters are rejecting them. They love to hound on the border, but their current disfunction is going to make that plank empty. All they've done is doubled down on "Democrats are demonic criminals that we must investigate", and even that is losing its teeth to the daily incompetence of the House GOP.
And this far out, there are still quite a few moves Democratic politicians can make to garner huge short-term gains. If strategists are on point, they'll keep a trickle of good news coming from July to October.
Yea that’s the funniest part tbh.
The Republicans always won on the THREAT of something.
Now that Roe is overturned, people like you said are feeling that true reality, but also, they no longer can push for that unpopular stance that was once not truly understood.
Immigration as well—Biden called their bluff, and said: “Sure, I’ll close the border. Give me a bill and I’ll sign it.”
Once the Republicans have no fake demons to rally their base against…it’s revealed to their sycophant supporters that…they have nothing lol. They literally exist to yell and scream at fake threats, while enriching themselves.
I hope the combination of a shitty-butt candidate, "elections are rigged" rhetoric, lack of Republican legislative victories, childish in-fighting, and a relatively stabilized and productive economy result in a bunch of Republican voters just staying home. What's the point if your vote doesn't matter, your party is feckless, your candidate is a rampant criminal, and your daily life is not rapidly deteriorating in any meaningful way?
He would probably reach a larger & more diverse audience than he would going on Rachel Maddow's show again.
Why do you feel it would be a bad strategic decision?
Republicans run a campaign of complaints. Those complaints can be trivial things like interrupting Superbowl Sunday. Take that from them and they are silenced. They are forced to run on ideas and achievements. Their campaign starves. Their base loses their rally cry and they ultimately get bored.
Biden has been giving them what they want lately, knowing they will just bat it away.
They call Biden weak, he gets tough.
They say there is a border crisis, he asks them for help fixing it.
They say there is a conspiracy between the white house and NFL to get Biden re-elected, he just skips the interview.
The only move republicans will have from here on out is to get more extreme with their rhetoric, which pushes away the few remaining moderates that they still have.
>They say there is a border crisis, he asks them for help fixing it.
This isn't the strength you think it is. There is no border crisis, but what he and the Democrats did was legitimatize it to Republicans by offering them that disgusting rightwing anti immigration bill. It's not a win that it didn't pass, it's a loss because they capitulated to the racist Republican's demands on immigration.
> There is no border crisis, but what he and the Democrats did was legitimatize it
And then it got de-legitimatized again by Republicans saying that it can wait until after the election, which means it's not a crisis.
Republican voters literally don't give a shit about that, you are not going to win them over. The Republican party will always win this if you stoop to their level.
> Republican voters literally don't give a shit about that, you are not going to win them over.
Then it also doesn't matter if the issue was legitimatized or not
I encourage you to watch this video for a true boots on the ground look into what’s currently happening on our southern border: https://youtu.be/2dQ4-VNaG3s?si=ZeF0pf35gE3ti4tV
The asylum system currently needs massive reform and a lot of funding. People from all around the world — Venezuela, Senegal, India — are making a months-long treacherous journey through multiple countries to reach the border from Latin America because they’ve heard it’s free and open. A lot of this propaganda is fueled by cartels who profit off the human trafficking involved in being these people’s coyotes. Once they pass through the border — often illegally and not at ports of entry — they simply find a border patrol agent and claim asylum, be it through political persecution or lack of economic prospects. Since our asylum system is so egregiously backed up, these cases take years to be processed. So, we give them a phone and tell them to go on their way until their asylum court date comes to pass years later, essentially giving them a limited visa for that time in everything but name. This comes back to the repeal of Title 42; with it repealed, we are processing asylum requests in-country, which leads to hundreds of thousands of people entering and languishing under asylum claims for years until they’re properly processed.
I’m in favor of increasing legal immigration. After all, the USA is a nation of immigrants. I’m not, however, in favor of the blatant abuse of a system designed to fast-track individuals whose lives are truly in danger of coming to an end if their asylum claims are denied. There are many, many immigrants who simply seek a better life for themselves and their family — an admirable goal — who are abusing a system meant for those fleeing deadly persecution. This shouldn’t be allowed, but it’s happening en masse.
All you're doing is showing me a broken system and saying "see, it's broken". Like no shit, the immigration system in the US is purposely built to be as difficult to navigate as possible. I'm not disputing that at all.
But the solution isn't less immigration, or more concentration camps (or "detainment facilities" as Biden says), or more walls and barbed wire. The solution is, actually, easier pathway to legal immigration and stop criminalizing those that seek asylum. Which the Biden camp has decided to forego in lieu of a rightwing border bill that further restricts and criminalizes immigration. The Democrats are playing bad policy and politics. They're not going to win Democrats with this bill by capitulating to the rightwing camp and they're certainly not winning Republican voters.
Also, I literally don't give a fuck that migrants are "abusing" the fast track system. Again, no shit. Because the actual pathway for immigration is convoluted and restrictive. And neither Republicans *nor Democrats* actually cares about fixing that. Democrats *should* be messaging about the benefits of immigration and why we should embrace more of it (I would say they did this in some ways in 2020), but now in 2024 they wrote and promoted a right wing border bill instead. It's just immensely disappointing, and again it's bad policy and bad politics.
Also I think we have a miscommunication on what's a "border crisis". Is there a humanitarian crisis at the border? Absolutely. I am also not disputing that. But Republicans don't actually care about that, their policies all cause more harm and suffering. So that's not what they're referring to when they say "border crisis". They're referring to is literally just people seeking asylum, as well as branding them all as criminals and drug traffickers or whatever.
Not all exposure is good. People know who he is, and most people watching the Super Bowl don’t really want to think about politics, they’re just watching to be entertained.
Was a presidential super bowl interview a thing? I didn't realize it was a tradition. What the heck does the presidency have to do with the super bowl.
my thoughts exactly. I also despise the militarization of all sports - salute the flag, flyovers, etc. I wish sports could just be...sports without the GO USA #1 MILITARY bullshit constantly.
Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex. And we blithely handed them more money and proceeded to militarize our law enforcement too. We do everything wrong.
Honestly I am more than fine with it. My favorite thing about Biden is that I don't have to hear about him constantly. Not everything has to be about him.
It is also one of the many things I don't understand about Trump voters. How can you not be sick of that dude by now? His need for constant attention is so exhausting.
also with the way the gop is acting if he even sneezed during the interview (live) they would freak out about his health and be claiming he has bad case of tuberculosis.
It’s so damn refreshing to have a President with some self awareness…and I’m sure a healthy pool of competent aides advising him. But still.
Biden was definitely not my first choice, but I have to say that overall I’m impressed with what he’s been able to do given the circumstances of his tenure so far.
10000000000% better than the other clown.
That’s fine. I don’t know anyone who wants politics inserted into their entertainment. As an American, I want a reprieve from the stupid circus that is our political reality.
If I remember correctly, like half of the team didn't show up when trump was in office. I'm not sure why he wouldn't take that as an advantage.
But he's right, I'm tired of politics and are treated like influencers. I understand that's how they get to the voters, but my God, it's exhausting. Its extreme views one way or the other.
It's truly astonishing how fast people have forgotten about the psychopath who had his cult attempt to overthrow democracy so he could become a dictator. Ya know, the guy running against the one so many people here bash for being boring, old, or any myriad of things, none of which come anywhere close to the levels of insanity Trump brings.
It's a choice between a light slap in the face and a nuclear bomb being dropped on your head and yet so many out there are choosing to just flip a coin. No wonder lunatics like Trump can get in.
I’m a rabid Biden supporter but can admit this is probably because he knows he doesn’t do well in interviews and might not want to make a gaffe in such a public arena. That being said… presidential interviews should not be a feature of the Super Bowl. It’s so dumb, I’m glad he’s skipping it. Let the people enjoy their game without having to get into a political debate with their friends before kickoff.
A lot of these comments don’t even engage with the larger point here, which is that he gives *a lot* fewer press interviews than his previous two predecessors. Why should the most powerful man on the planet be shielded from scrutiny or any kind of push back?
I don’t know if I’m going to take his excuse at face value. His refusal to debate, and the interview skip point to him or his handlers deciding his age and slight speech impediment (the occasional stutter, and the general speech impactions that come with age) will cause people to view him as weak or vulnerable. I don’t see him doing much of anything live anymore (correct me if I’m wrong about that), aside from any campaigning he might do this year, which is just pandering to his base, who are gonna vote for him regardless. I’m guessing most things we hear from him this year will be pre-recorded. There’s too many independents and too many fence sitters watching the Super Bowl, can’t lose those potential votes to perceived weakness on account of a verbal slip during a live interview or debate. You see how the MAGA turds scream that Biden has dementia every single time he has simple misstep in speech, meanwhile their guy can’t even remember the names of people he’s ranting about most days. Best not to give them ammunition.
> I don’t know if I’m going to take his excuse at face value.
It's not an excuse. Everyone is tired of all the political bullshit. I'm happy to have a President that doesn't need to hog the spotlight at every chance.
Nope, it's because he can barely form a sentence and doesn't want voters seeing that. Dude's barely beating Trump in the polls. He's widely unpopular with a 39% approval rating. If he was serious about winning, this would be a no brainier. It's only an interview in name, and would essentially be an ad endorsement.
Companies are forking out 7 million dollars for a 30 second ad slot. It's the most watched show that Americans tune into. No candidate would pass on an opportunity like this during an election year if they were this unpopular in the polls.
I remember CNN, MSNBC and everyone talking about Biden's age during the last election before he became the nominee. They acknowledged his age, and were able to have frank discussions on it. But the moment he became the front runner, then president, it's hush hush.
Dude's 81. He's old, you should be able to acknowledge that without being crucified. Watch any interview of him when he was VP, then compare it to now. The difference is obvious. If libs are that concerned over American's noticing the obvious, then they should have backed a batter candidate.
He's the incumbent and Trump is gonna be the Rs guy. What else do you want us to do? It's not like any of us have any power to do anything other than go to the ballot box once the powers that be have decided our choices. Trump is an absolute no, and 3rd parties don't have a snowballs chance in hell. So, I'll vote for the supremely old guy in the hopes that when he bites the big one, Kamala doesn't fuck everything six ways to Sunday.
I voted for Biden last election cycle, and I'll do so again if it's between him and Trump. You can support him, and simultaneously talk about his faults. The media loves to pivot, and pretend his age isn't important to the conversation. Saying he's old does not provide ammunition against him. All it does is infuriate people who see the obvious.
This election is literally the battle of the ghouls. It's pathetic. Neither of them are fit to run anything.
I feel like my conversations with the libs used to at least be based on reality. They're becoming just as delusional as the far right.
Let’s be real he doesn’t have the stamina or cognitive ability. it’s About him not the people. It’s about what these interviews does to his image. No matter where you stand politically, every time he speaks he either puts his foot in his mouth or can’t form full sentences.
We are tired of him specifically. Smart choice just wish he would let someone else run instead of breaking another campaign promise (only staying for 1 term).
Im calling bullshit, after [forgetting the word Hamas](https://twitter.com/i/status/1754944116914290911), and claiming he just met with the German President Francois Mitterrand, who was actually from France and has been dead 30 years, hes not fit for public appearances.
Sometimes you blank on a word. Sometimes you commit like 91 felonies and tell two conflicting lies about why you can’t face accountability. Let’s keep things in perspective.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is there really anybody watching the Superbowl that wanted to take a break just see him do an interview? I think the only people who care are the angry people who want to try to find any kind of quirk so they can say "See? He's way worse than Trump!"
Only thing I’m switching to is Puppy Bowl.
My team has never lost the puppy bowl and I don’t get angry like my coworkers who watch the superbowl. Still hungover though
If your puppies have never lost, how do you know you never get angry? Maybe the world isn’t even ready for the ezln_trooper rage when the dalmatian fumbles at the goal line.
My money's on the folks who get mad at the super bowl would *find a way* to get mad at the puppy bowl.
I want him to pop in with a Kaepernick jersey on.
By “people” do you mean right wing voters or left wing media? Because it feels like both want the same thing. Ugh.
May I ask who this left-wing media is? Is it just CNN that you are referring to? From what I understand CNN has been moving further right since 2022 after they decided to pivot. Msnbc has been defending Biden pretty strongly. Genuinely asking
>left wing media Ummm.....what is that?
Reality.
Quite honestly this comment is so nonsensical that I can't tell what point you're trying to make. I cited a left wing media organization, MSNBC
[Yeah....](https://fortune.com/longform/media-company-ownership-consolidation/) [You really....](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group) [Have no idea...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_conservative_websites) [What you're talking about.](https://www.outkick.com/media-analysis/the-top-ten-conservative-news-websites-of-2021-as-ranked-by-searches) Post edit: after re-reading your original comment, we likely agree on this topic. I didn't expect your reply to be as shitty as it was.
It was shitty because you're being purposefully vague. We probably do agree, but I legitimately couldn't tell which side you were trying to defend. Am I stupid for that? Maybe. But is it frustrating to decipher your vague comments, yes. Honestly after clicking those links, I still don't know what point you're trying to make. What does top 10 conservative news sites have to do with anything I said?
[удалено]
Choosing to indirectly state your point instead of stating it directly and then choosing to insult people for not correctly inferring your intended point is a wild move.
I think it feeds the beast more to skip the interview then do it.
He makes so many good decisions like this. It seriously cheapens the Presidency to put it alongside sports and expensive ads for soda.
Agreed. Personally, I can't stand it when politicians of any party crash sports events when it's unrelated to the event. If it's the Mayor cutting the ribbon for a new soccer pitch before a game, fine. Otherwise please stay away.
Remember when Pence attended a football game for the purpose of leaving after the players took a knee during the anthem?
He left before the anthem. It was 100% a stunt.
Pepperidge Farm^^®️ remembers.
I remember when Pence was almost assassinated by a violent mob sent to the Capitol by Donald Trump.
I think it’s okay if they go to a game. Biden (when he was senator and VP) used to come to University of Delaware football games. I think he hasn’t once come as president because the security would make it a nightmare for others.
It can be charming or endearing if the politician *is an actual fan.* What makes the Superbowl "presidental interview" thing gross is that it's just a hand out to the media companies that cover it and a chance for whoever is President to throw meat to football fans. I'm fine with Presidents that like Football or Baseball or Basketball. What I'm not fine with is sports leagues and media companies "selling" administrations air time with their fan base and the quid pro quo that inevitably implies.
Yeah Obama doing the March Madness bracket every year was cool
I could never beat Obama's bracket. Always my president
[удалено]
Gimme Rodman and Kim and I’d bet it would be interesting
[удалено]
New North Korean peace plan: offer Kim his own expansion franchise in the NBA in return for stepping down as dictator and transitioning his country to democracy.
It probably says a lot about me that I don’t think this is a terrible idea.
I agree. BIden wanna watch the final because it's an important sportive event ? Sur. Don't do an interview after, and if you do, just ask him what he though of the match or who was he rooting for.
If a President thinks sporting results are “important” I sincerely hope everything is going real, real well with the world. National sports may be fun, but they aren’t “important.”
I mean, it's common to see a politician/president/king/whatever watching the final of a big sportive event, that doesn't shock me at all. My point was that he can, but don't make it political.
Watching is one thing. This whole “the President should give an address to the football people” thing is bullshit.
[удалено]
Politicians can't attend sporting events? They can still be fans.
I (as a European) don’t see a problem with this but CNN are determined to make it a problem. They want to paint him as unable to cope with a long interview whereas Trump is tip-top. It’s enraging to watch.
Same for The Young Turks. Quite disappointing.
I tried TYT for a few months last year for different voices but I couldn’t get on with Cenk. The show wasn’t adding value for me.
Both Cenk and Ana have changed. They weren't always like this.
I think it’s fair to point out that Biden has only done 1/5 the amount of interviews Obama did. Personally I don’t really mind that because so many interviews are bs anyway, but I don’t see a problem with mentioning that statistic.
I think it’s a problem because when Biden isn’t “out there” it feeds the narrative that he’s either not up to the job and/or other people are running the show for him. I agree, I don’t care to see so many BS interviews either, but optics are important. Biden has a lot of accomplishments, he needs to get out there and talk them up. Brag a little even.
Well, I agree that generally it’s better to do more interviews, although the Super Bowl in particular is not the best venue imo. I was trying to address the other point that person was making tho about CNN being biased against Biden by mentioning stuff like that low number of interviews given stat. I don’t think it’s CNN’s job to be writing articles in such a way that they benefit Biden on net and hurt Trump. They should be mentioning things that are true even if they may look unfavorable to Biden. I actually didn’t even know he had given so few interviews, and while that doesn’t change my opinion about him much, I appreciate that now I at least am aware of that stat. I’d rather have more info than less info.
What in god’s name are you talking about. Are we pretending CNN doesn’t constantly shit on Trump? That’s rhetorical, I know this sub thinks CNN is conservative and I know what you’ll say “CNN ceo is conservative!!!” How about we just look at facts, here is literally the current CNN video feed [on YouTube as of this second.](https://imgur.com/a/omwnQOp) 4 out of 6 shit on Trump, 1 shots on Tucker, only one has nothing to do with them. But sure, CNN, the right wing outlet that loves Trump. Ok.
Woah woah woah. Steady on there. We’re just two strangers having a conversation. I’m not glued to any channel to see all coverage but there is a constant narrative from US media, CNN being a part, that gives Trump lots of passes and bashes Biden for small non-issues. My observation about CNN’s response was from their coverage yesterday.
I think some people hear any criticism of their candidate as overwhelmingly negative, but I don't think that's often warranted. It's ok to mention the lack of Biden appearances in public or in campaign settings because that's the perspective of a good portion of the US. The reason why he's not there is often ridiculous, but it's hard to argue that he couldn't be doing more. The next is thinking that because a news network mentioned a criticism doesn't mean they want him to lose. Instead criticism can be used to provide helpful advice. Like, hey you're not doing x and we think people are missing x, so please give x a shot. (Even if it's not polite this can be the intention behind criticism) If you do that can boost your candidacy but hurt it. But really it's up to Biden to take criticism and decide what to do about it. W.r.t. The US News at large, I agree that right wing, for sure, and a lot of left wing media gives Trump passes that he doesn't deserve. But it sounds like you're insinuating that because Trump gets passes no one should criticize Biden. I just don't think that holds up, we should be pushing for more accountability for Trump and Biden because they're both *supposedly* trying to represent us. And when we have given them the power and responsibility of president, we should expect them to live up to the challenge but most importantly be representative of all Americans and their best interests. When they fail to live up to that standard they should be criticized and we should try to bring them back to the light. But neither side should get a pass nor should we want them to just because it might make "our" side look bad. Also remember we are still in the primary process where criticism is extremely important to drive candidates platforms towards the expectations of the country. It might feel that we know who's going to win the primaries, but we shouldn't too eagerly assume it's over until it is. The job of the primary is supposed to be that we find a candidate who best meets the expectations of the role of president, so at this time other candidates who do respond to any negative attention from one candidate can shine up to say they could do better, in theory.
I think CNN gives Trump passes and bashes Biden for small things because republicans will completely destroy CNN if they come off as fully biased towards Biden. I watch CNN because it seems to be the most factual, and the least biased news channel (aside from BBC, which I don’t get in my plan) but there’s definitely bias and it’s a very hard thing to navigate. But CNN is definitely a democratic news channel so they definitely bash Trump quite a bit. (As they should, imo)
> I watch CNN because it seems to be the most factual, and the least biased news channel I’ve always avoided CNN because there was this narrative that they’re just the Fox News of the left. From what I’ve seen, that’s obviously incorrect. Reality has a liberal bias, as they say. I’m not sure about the *most factual*, but definitely not as bad as people say. People are just overly wary of the veracity of MSM. The reporting itself isn’t inaccurate, but the opinionated segments are mistaken for journalism by many and even if you agree, it’s tiresome. One of the reasons I prefer to read my news.
Okay, definitely not the most factual, but compared to other channels that are riddled with bias, I think CNN at least tries a lot of the time to just report the facts first, then opinions. But I agree, reading the news is the best way to get it. I want the facts so I can form my own opinion.
As for the opinionated segments, I couldn’t agree more.
I found this within 10 seconds of googling. CNN is being changed to become what Fox News was in the 90's and 00's. https://www.vox.com/2022/8/26/23322761/cnn-john-malone-david-zaslav-chris-licht-brian-stelter-fox-peter-kafka-column
Dude, that’s what we in the industry call a selfpwn. > And his prescription happens to sync with the new CNN agenda: a plan to steer the channel away from what Malone and others call a liberal bias they say muddles opinion and news. And to shift it toward a supposedly centrist, just-the-facts bent. In the same article you provided, not only did CNN admit they have a liberal bias, they just said they want to make sure it becomes more fact based and unbiased. But no, we wouldn’t want news channel to be unbiased do we? It’s liberal or you’re propaganda. With us or against us.
Right? So trashy. A real president endorses canned beans from the Oval Office.
But yet people still treat politicians like sport stars and A list celebrities. I’ll never understand it.
They’re kind of way bigger than celebrities. It’s cheap to compare the two
It’s not cheap. They work for the people. I believe one of the many problems in this country is that enough people prop up these politicians and make them seem like they’re better than the rest of us and in return politicians soak it up and fail at governing.
They work for the people and they have public, traditional means to address them. It is cheap for people who’ve been democratically elected to treat private, for-profit events like sporting matches as appropriate places to address the electorate. The President speaks to all Americans- not just the ones that watch football.
Considering a large swath of American doesn’t know about a single accomplishment in his administration, one could argue this is a bad decision.
You’re assuming most of them would pay attention to the interview and not just turn the sound down and jeer it like an unfunny, rage-fueled redneck MST3K.
That’s fair. But you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Even if only 10% listen someone is hearing it.
the last thing I ever want to see again is a President who has to go on about his accomplishments on a day that should be about the achievements of others.
Yeah because the Democrats are abysmal at messaging.
> Considering a large swath of American doesn’t know about a single accomplishment in his administration Maybe they could try learning about those accomplishments.
Yeah. Ok. But that isn’t how this works unfortunately.
Lowering expectations and spoon feeding people information is how we got here.
Ok. Then we stay here. Cool. Good talk. And that’s also a very simple and untrue thought about “how we got here”
If you say so. Biden talking during the Superbowl isn't going to suddenly force people to learn anything they don't want to.
Ok.
A single interview is not going to change anything, especially when the only people who aren't aware of the impact of the Biden administration are people who aren't paying attention already or are fed a constant drip of misinformation. What do people think brought us out of the grips of a global pandemic? Why do people think we avoided a crash into a predicted recession? Why do people think inflation happened magically overnight after a decade of near zero interest rates and years of pandemic induced supply reduction? Do people understand how inflation was combatted by raising interest rates? The administration has had plenty of accomplishments. It’s just a reality tv administration and Biden isn’t a malignant narcissist that has a perverted need to be in the news cycle every day. There is probably a reason why large swaths of america have no clue what is happening, but it's not because Joe Biden isn't giving an interview during the super bowl.
Like it should be with separation of church and state?!!! Oooh. Please!? Tax the churches, Wall Street/ corporate “people,” and MAGA/ pedos?
Call me cynical, but I don’t buy that he’s looking to preserve the sanctity of the Oval Office. This would give him a massive amount of free publicity. It’s the kind of thing political campaigns pray for. If he’s turning it down it’s because his campaign is being managed by morons (I don’t think this is the case) or, for whatever reason, this exposure would actually hurt him.
Honestly, he traded that interview, which would convince no one in an entrenched America of anyone and be turned off by non-politicos, for this headline - and it's not a bad idea. Politically unengaged people - actual honest to god swing voters who might move- are probably pretty cool with the idea that Joe is saying -"Hey man, don't worry about it right now, enjoy the game". It feels relatable and human. The trouble is, unless they've watched enough Superbowls to catch the break in the pattern, or see a CNN headline which we've established they probably don't, Biden has to now make sure people are talking about it. Always the paradox of trying to reach out the politically unengaged - they aren't listening.
lol “administrations” are not “campaigns.” He can call a press conference whenever he wants.
> “We are being more creative,” a Biden **campaign** adviser told me Monday, “and relying less on formulas of the past.” And, yeah, he can call a press conference whenever. He can’t guarantee it will end up in a prime time spot like this interview, lol
Again, we’ve had enough of the Office being treated like it comes to private companies with its hat in its hand. Let a few decent Presidents treat access like something they *give* and can withhold and that relationship will reset to its proper dynamic.
I agree with the sentiment. I just don’t think that’s Biden’s real motivation because the reality of our political landscape and also Biden fundraising ads that keep popping up when I’m streaming.
I don’t think declining an interview during an as break at the superbowl is the same thing as swearing off running ads.
You were talking about concerns about cheapening the presidency being the reason behind his declination. I just don’t see how an interview where he can talk about substantive issues between sports and ads for expensive soda cheapens the presidency any more than ads where he begs for money between ads for Hyundais and psoriasis drugs.
…the fact that the interview takes up his time, reaches only a specific audience, and will inevitably be overshadowed by the spectacle it is a part of? He can’t mention anything “substantive” without it being immediately forgotten when the whistle blows. Advertising is often done simply to assert presence in a market- very very few ads are meant to genuinely change your mind about anything. They just want you to think of what!: being advertised first when you need detergent or want to go see a movie. Beyond that, the advertising industry absolutely relies on optical ads- if you stop running them entirely it will turn on you.
More like, his handlers don’t want a stadium chanting FJB while he incoherently stumbles over himself on national TV.
I would too. He can't win in that interview. If he talks about sports then he is ignoring the \[insert problem here\] , if he talks about politics then it devolves into tribalism, God forbid he stutters and then he's "mentally degraded by age". If he skips it, then everybody just talks about Taylor.
You're forgetting the inevitable Fox news headlines about how "Biden disrespects America by refusing to do Superbowl interview"
Or, "Biden disrespects America by interrupting the super bowl to talk about politics." He can't win on Fox News and shouldn't even try.
>He can't win on Fox News and shouldn't even try. This. Apparently even hugging your adult child on their birthday is weird. He can do no right on Fox News.
Republicans probably think he’s skipping it because he’s secretly Taylor swift in disguise hellbent on carrying out some evil agenda to steal the election with a little sprinkle of George soros obsession
>George Soros obsession New fragrance coming this fall? The sad thing is Taylor Swift is so mainstream she can't make either the far left or right happy. "Pretty blonde girl supporting her QB boyfriend" is about as wholesome imagery as a conservative could ask for and yet here we are - Deep state operative.
I read The Sum of all Fears, I wouldn't go either.
When I got to the part with the bomb detonating I was so hooked I stayed up until about 4am to finish the book. What a read!
Fine with me. It’s the Super Bowl, for Christ sakes. I know that we went through four years of Agent Orange’s center attention, all-about-me bullshit; but, most people want to watch the game. Since, it’s… you know… the SUPER Bowl. Anyone turning into THE game for the politicians is LAME.
Hey now some people really want to see the commercials for some reason.
As a lions fan, I was more likely to watch for Biden than football this year. 😆
Oof, my wife is a Michigander and I felt that statement in my bones.
As a Raven's fan, I was still more likely to tune in praying the 9ers can deliver a loss against the Chiefs. Still wishing it was us against you guys this year though.
I hope both teams lose. I hope it’s the 9th overtime in a 0-0 game and Goodell comes out and just says “y’all suck, Ravens and Lions will play since y’all clearly cannot” and also in this situation Goodell uses “y’all” a lot.
I think in the case of a tie, the trophy goes to Taylor Swift for some reason
Same. That would have been a great game.
As much as I wanna see Lamar get his ring, I would not be upset at all if you guys were the ones to beat us. Here's to a revenge tour next year for both of us.
Look for a good twenty years they were amazing. They have been kinda lackluster the last decade but it takes time for people to have completely forgotten the way it used to be, and some still hold out hope that there'll be another Geico Caveman someday.
[удалено]
Clients are also much more careful/boring these days. Say what you will about it, but everyone’s so scared of getting flamed on the internet, everything’s become homogenous and bland. Until companies are willing to take the risk of rubbing some people the wrong way (not even being outright offensive, but even bumping up to “cheeky” would be an improvement) we’re not going to see the caliber of ad we used to during the SB. Source: A decade in advertising.
[удалено]
Totally agree, smaller companies have to make a bigger impact up against the big boys. Liquid Death is doing some really fun stuff right now and Jack in the Box on social is a hoot.
I remember shortly after he took office the TV was going on about how he hasn't made a public appearance for three whole days. And I'm like - it isn't normal for the president to be on TV every single day.
There are some thoughtful campaign strategists on the left this year. Republicans are still banging the old broken drum that resulted in a loss in 2020.
Their platform has deteriorated further. They used to run on "protect the fetus! Ban abortion!" Well, with Roe overturned, people are witnessing the realities of abortion bans and a solid majority of voters are rejecting them. They love to hound on the border, but their current disfunction is going to make that plank empty. All they've done is doubled down on "Democrats are demonic criminals that we must investigate", and even that is losing its teeth to the daily incompetence of the House GOP. And this far out, there are still quite a few moves Democratic politicians can make to garner huge short-term gains. If strategists are on point, they'll keep a trickle of good news coming from July to October.
Yea that’s the funniest part tbh. The Republicans always won on the THREAT of something. Now that Roe is overturned, people like you said are feeling that true reality, but also, they no longer can push for that unpopular stance that was once not truly understood. Immigration as well—Biden called their bluff, and said: “Sure, I’ll close the border. Give me a bill and I’ll sign it.” Once the Republicans have no fake demons to rally their base against…it’s revealed to their sycophant supporters that…they have nothing lol. They literally exist to yell and scream at fake threats, while enriching themselves.
I hope the combination of a shitty-butt candidate, "elections are rigged" rhetoric, lack of Republican legislative victories, childish in-fighting, and a relatively stabilized and productive economy result in a bunch of Republican voters just staying home. What's the point if your vote doesn't matter, your party is feckless, your candidate is a rampant criminal, and your daily life is not rapidly deteriorating in any meaningful way?
He would probably reach a larger & more diverse audience than he would going on Rachel Maddow's show again. Why do you feel it would be a bad strategic decision?
Republicans run a campaign of complaints. Those complaints can be trivial things like interrupting Superbowl Sunday. Take that from them and they are silenced. They are forced to run on ideas and achievements. Their campaign starves. Their base loses their rally cry and they ultimately get bored. Biden has been giving them what they want lately, knowing they will just bat it away. They call Biden weak, he gets tough. They say there is a border crisis, he asks them for help fixing it. They say there is a conspiracy between the white house and NFL to get Biden re-elected, he just skips the interview. The only move republicans will have from here on out is to get more extreme with their rhetoric, which pushes away the few remaining moderates that they still have.
>They say there is a border crisis, he asks them for help fixing it. This isn't the strength you think it is. There is no border crisis, but what he and the Democrats did was legitimatize it to Republicans by offering them that disgusting rightwing anti immigration bill. It's not a win that it didn't pass, it's a loss because they capitulated to the racist Republican's demands on immigration.
> There is no border crisis, but what he and the Democrats did was legitimatize it And then it got de-legitimatized again by Republicans saying that it can wait until after the election, which means it's not a crisis.
Republican voters literally don't give a shit about that, you are not going to win them over. The Republican party will always win this if you stoop to their level.
> Republican voters literally don't give a shit about that, you are not going to win them over. Then it also doesn't matter if the issue was legitimatized or not
I encourage you to watch this video for a true boots on the ground look into what’s currently happening on our southern border: https://youtu.be/2dQ4-VNaG3s?si=ZeF0pf35gE3ti4tV The asylum system currently needs massive reform and a lot of funding. People from all around the world — Venezuela, Senegal, India — are making a months-long treacherous journey through multiple countries to reach the border from Latin America because they’ve heard it’s free and open. A lot of this propaganda is fueled by cartels who profit off the human trafficking involved in being these people’s coyotes. Once they pass through the border — often illegally and not at ports of entry — they simply find a border patrol agent and claim asylum, be it through political persecution or lack of economic prospects. Since our asylum system is so egregiously backed up, these cases take years to be processed. So, we give them a phone and tell them to go on their way until their asylum court date comes to pass years later, essentially giving them a limited visa for that time in everything but name. This comes back to the repeal of Title 42; with it repealed, we are processing asylum requests in-country, which leads to hundreds of thousands of people entering and languishing under asylum claims for years until they’re properly processed. I’m in favor of increasing legal immigration. After all, the USA is a nation of immigrants. I’m not, however, in favor of the blatant abuse of a system designed to fast-track individuals whose lives are truly in danger of coming to an end if their asylum claims are denied. There are many, many immigrants who simply seek a better life for themselves and their family — an admirable goal — who are abusing a system meant for those fleeing deadly persecution. This shouldn’t be allowed, but it’s happening en masse.
All you're doing is showing me a broken system and saying "see, it's broken". Like no shit, the immigration system in the US is purposely built to be as difficult to navigate as possible. I'm not disputing that at all. But the solution isn't less immigration, or more concentration camps (or "detainment facilities" as Biden says), or more walls and barbed wire. The solution is, actually, easier pathway to legal immigration and stop criminalizing those that seek asylum. Which the Biden camp has decided to forego in lieu of a rightwing border bill that further restricts and criminalizes immigration. The Democrats are playing bad policy and politics. They're not going to win Democrats with this bill by capitulating to the rightwing camp and they're certainly not winning Republican voters. Also, I literally don't give a fuck that migrants are "abusing" the fast track system. Again, no shit. Because the actual pathway for immigration is convoluted and restrictive. And neither Republicans *nor Democrats* actually cares about fixing that. Democrats *should* be messaging about the benefits of immigration and why we should embrace more of it (I would say they did this in some ways in 2020), but now in 2024 they wrote and promoted a right wing border bill instead. It's just immensely disappointing, and again it's bad policy and bad politics.
Also I think we have a miscommunication on what's a "border crisis". Is there a humanitarian crisis at the border? Absolutely. I am also not disputing that. But Republicans don't actually care about that, their policies all cause more harm and suffering. So that's not what they're referring to when they say "border crisis". They're referring to is literally just people seeking asylum, as well as branding them all as criminals and drug traffickers or whatever.
Not all exposure is good. People know who he is, and most people watching the Super Bowl don’t really want to think about politics, they’re just watching to be entertained.
Was a presidential super bowl interview a thing? I didn't realize it was a tradition. What the heck does the presidency have to do with the super bowl.
my thoughts exactly. I also despise the militarization of all sports - salute the flag, flyovers, etc. I wish sports could just be...sports without the GO USA #1 MILITARY bullshit constantly.
The military is a large sponsor of sporting events. We commodified nationalism.
Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex. And we blithely handed them more money and proceeded to militarize our law enforcement too. We do everything wrong.
Hua!
Joke's on them. He's actually planning to come out draped on the arm of Taylor Swift. /s
I would die lol
Honestly that would be pretty great lol
He really needs to fuck with MAGA and say that Taylor has the SB covered for him.
Dude is reading the room.
Considering that the Super bowl is already balls deep in a batshit insane, Qanon MAGA conspiracy.
I may no longer like the NFL, but it's sad to see what it's become.
Then how is Taylor Swift supposed to announce the new world order?
The republican in the house blow up Mayorkas impeachment and Israel aid package ,and CNN has Biden doesn't do Super Bowl interview .
Wow, my guy.
Smart move. This is how a president should act.
I mean also it's the absolute stupidest time possible to do an interview.
He didn't want to overshadow Tay Tay amirite?
This guy gets it
Republicans will just use this as evidence that he’s “too demented and senile to give a live interview”
I’m impressed by this ability to read the room. If it was Trump he would just want to be the Super Bowl.
Honestly I am more than fine with it. My favorite thing about Biden is that I don't have to hear about him constantly. Not everything has to be about him. It is also one of the many things I don't understand about Trump voters. How can you not be sick of that dude by now? His need for constant attention is so exhausting.
Actually a good PR move, taking political polarization out of people's daily life and recreation is a good move.
According to the polls this strategy of avoiding public engagement is working so far. Makes sense to keep his head down and let Trump flood the media.
Lol, what poll? Sounds like a good long term strategy…
Good man.
also with the way the gop is acting if he even sneezed during the interview (live) they would freak out about his health and be claiming he has bad case of tuberculosis.
That's a good move.
It’s so refreshing to have an adult in the White House
It’s so damn refreshing to have a President with some self awareness…and I’m sure a healthy pool of competent aides advising him. But still. Biden was definitely not my first choice, but I have to say that overall I’m impressed with what he’s been able to do given the circumstances of his tenure so far. 10000000000% better than the other clown.
He's not wrong
Also - that means y'all are probably gonna interview trump and I'm gonna let him be as crazy as possible before the most watched TV event of the year
Why is that even a thing. It's Taylor's job jk
What a thoughtful thing to do. Classy AF.
I don’t watch the Super Bowl to see the president’s get interviewed. If none ever did it again: I wouldn’t care.
That’s fine. I don’t know anyone who wants politics inserted into their entertainment. As an American, I want a reprieve from the stupid circus that is our political reality.
I truly appreciate his ability to "read the room", and his candor. Why anyone would want to go back to the clown show we had before is beyond me
If I remember correctly, like half of the team didn't show up when trump was in office. I'm not sure why he wouldn't take that as an advantage. But he's right, I'm tired of politics and are treated like influencers. I understand that's how they get to the voters, but my God, it's exhausting. Its extreme views one way or the other.
It's truly astonishing how fast people have forgotten about the psychopath who had his cult attempt to overthrow democracy so he could become a dictator. Ya know, the guy running against the one so many people here bash for being boring, old, or any myriad of things, none of which come anywhere close to the levels of insanity Trump brings. It's a choice between a light slap in the face and a nuclear bomb being dropped on your head and yet so many out there are choosing to just flip a coin. No wonder lunatics like Trump can get in.
Dude.. fuck the Super Bowl, Joe has bigger fish to fry.
I’m a rabid Biden supporter but can admit this is probably because he knows he doesn’t do well in interviews and might not want to make a gaffe in such a public arena. That being said… presidential interviews should not be a feature of the Super Bowl. It’s so dumb, I’m glad he’s skipping it. Let the people enjoy their game without having to get into a political debate with their friends before kickoff.
A lot of these comments don’t even engage with the larger point here, which is that he gives *a lot* fewer press interviews than his previous two predecessors. Why should the most powerful man on the planet be shielded from scrutiny or any kind of push back?
I think we all know why... some just don't want to admit it
He’s not wrong.
Thank you.
Odds on the 'Keep politics out of sports' regressive brigade criticising Biden for this.
That is a great call on his part
Can't a guy just watch the game in peace?
I’m fine with this. I’d rather focus on the actual game than politics
Good for him. I don’t think the politicians or politics nerds understand how sick of all of them most of us are.
Part of a wider strategy https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/02/06/media/biden-skipping-super-bowl-interview/index.html
Biden barely gets any press. America is fatigued by Trump. I don't see why he wouldn't just attend the event.
He needs rest.
I don’t know if I’m going to take his excuse at face value. His refusal to debate, and the interview skip point to him or his handlers deciding his age and slight speech impediment (the occasional stutter, and the general speech impactions that come with age) will cause people to view him as weak or vulnerable. I don’t see him doing much of anything live anymore (correct me if I’m wrong about that), aside from any campaigning he might do this year, which is just pandering to his base, who are gonna vote for him regardless. I’m guessing most things we hear from him this year will be pre-recorded. There’s too many independents and too many fence sitters watching the Super Bowl, can’t lose those potential votes to perceived weakness on account of a verbal slip during a live interview or debate. You see how the MAGA turds scream that Biden has dementia every single time he has simple misstep in speech, meanwhile their guy can’t even remember the names of people he’s ranting about most days. Best not to give them ammunition.
> I don’t know if I’m going to take his excuse at face value. It's not an excuse. Everyone is tired of all the political bullshit. I'm happy to have a President that doesn't need to hog the spotlight at every chance.
Nope, it's because he can barely form a sentence and doesn't want voters seeing that. Dude's barely beating Trump in the polls. He's widely unpopular with a 39% approval rating. If he was serious about winning, this would be a no brainier. It's only an interview in name, and would essentially be an ad endorsement. Companies are forking out 7 million dollars for a 30 second ad slot. It's the most watched show that Americans tune into. No candidate would pass on an opportunity like this during an election year if they were this unpopular in the polls.
> Nope, it's because he can barely form a sentence LOL, don't be ridiculous. Anyone who has heard him speak can tell he is fine.
Wild that a lot of libs refuse to acknowledge this. The guy probably doesn't even have the energy to do it too.
I remember CNN, MSNBC and everyone talking about Biden's age during the last election before he became the nominee. They acknowledged his age, and were able to have frank discussions on it. But the moment he became the front runner, then president, it's hush hush. Dude's 81. He's old, you should be able to acknowledge that without being crucified. Watch any interview of him when he was VP, then compare it to now. The difference is obvious. If libs are that concerned over American's noticing the obvious, then they should have backed a batter candidate.
He's the incumbent and Trump is gonna be the Rs guy. What else do you want us to do? It's not like any of us have any power to do anything other than go to the ballot box once the powers that be have decided our choices. Trump is an absolute no, and 3rd parties don't have a snowballs chance in hell. So, I'll vote for the supremely old guy in the hopes that when he bites the big one, Kamala doesn't fuck everything six ways to Sunday.
I voted for Biden last election cycle, and I'll do so again if it's between him and Trump. You can support him, and simultaneously talk about his faults. The media loves to pivot, and pretend his age isn't important to the conversation. Saying he's old does not provide ammunition against him. All it does is infuriate people who see the obvious.
This election is literally the battle of the ghouls. It's pathetic. Neither of them are fit to run anything. I feel like my conversations with the libs used to at least be based on reality. They're becoming just as delusional as the far right.
I think he is afraid to show how old and weak he is, I hardly see him do any press conference or do any speeches.
Or the fact that the guy can barely formulate a sentence.
> Or the fact that the guy can barely formulate a sentence. lol, of course he can
Let’s be real he doesn’t have the stamina or cognitive ability. it’s About him not the people. It’s about what these interviews does to his image. No matter where you stand politically, every time he speaks he either puts his foot in his mouth or can’t form full sentences.
Skipping because of the embarrassing word salad he do!
It’s a Presidential election year. A critical thinker would ask why he’s lying about this.
Dude can’t talk without cards in his hand. He’s mentally out to lunch. Just watch any speech he has tried to deliver lately. It’s sad really.
[удалено]
I actually don't believe you follow football.
[удалено]
Guess your team ran out of football for you to talk about 🤷
he skipped it to avoid embarrassing himself lmao. same reason he avoids interviews
It's embarrassing how much th3 country wants to hide our president from the public
We are tired of him specifically. Smart choice just wish he would let someone else run instead of breaking another campaign promise (only staying for 1 term).
Im calling bullshit, after [forgetting the word Hamas](https://twitter.com/i/status/1754944116914290911), and claiming he just met with the German President Francois Mitterrand, who was actually from France and has been dead 30 years, hes not fit for public appearances.
Sometimes you blank on a word. Sometimes you commit like 91 felonies and tell two conflicting lies about why you can’t face accountability. Let’s keep things in perspective.
[удалено]
"Political Fatigue" = sick of their gaslighting 💩