A group of undecided Latino voters said they would vote for President Joe Biden after watching his Thursday night debate with former President Donald Trump.

A clip posted on X shows the group being interviewed by a journalist. One man said he would vote for Biden because “Trump sounded like a crazy liar,” according to Matt A. Barreto, professor of Political Science and Chicana/o & Central American Studies at UCLA.

The man being interviewed said Trump “said the same thing time after time” and was not answering questions or “saying how he would fix things,” according to a Newsweek translation.

He went on to admit that “Biden was indeed a bit slow in talking,” saying the president “has a stutter” but believes Biden explained "what he has done and what he is still doing while president.

“After being undecided for a little while, I think today, I switched to Biden,” he added.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-16 points

Really? He shuffled on and was so incoherent I was shocked. I turned it off after ten minutes as it was embarrassing to watch. They need someone better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Absolutely absurd.

He’s been doing a great job for 4 years, standing next to dumps, who can’t string two sentences together, and being asked palatable questions that basically mean nothing, I think he did pretty well for an 81-year-old.

Also, biden’s a great president, they don’t need anyone better.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

He’s 81, not 88.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Cool, thanks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m not commenting on the four years, I’m not American, but on what I saw. It was not a pretty sight. “pretty well…” isn’t a great measure, is it? Not many are saying he came out looking well

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Are you going off the two five-second clips that are being repeated everywhere or the entire debate?

For an event that means so little substantively, “pretty well” is a good metric.

If you walk through a manure mister and look pretty well at the end of it, you’re good.

Also, he has regular public performances before and after that event, if you watch any of those, he’s fine.

4 years of effective administration is more significant testament to biden’s ability to lead than standing on stage next to an idiot for 90 minutes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

First ten minutes were the worst, after that Biden started to make at least some reasonable points.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

People also seem to be completely brushing off him having a cold like it was just some campaign lie. To me that’s exactly what he looked like: completely out of it from being sick. I get like that when I’m ill and I’m not even half his age. Given his campaign events and state of the union have not been the same it seems pretty clear to me that it wasn’t simply him being old unless I’m missing something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Fair. Initial impressions can be damning.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Did you see the other fucker up there? Did you hear him at all? Did we watch the same debate?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

A little bit, he sounded less insane than usual; don’t be surprised if he’s voted in again, with this seen as one of the pivotal reasons why.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 331K

    Comments