I agree with David French. Leading in times of conflict is complex and difficult but #Biden is doing it well, domestically and internationally. And he has limited power in both places—he doesn’t control Congress and he doesn’t control other sovereign nations.
No paywall so you can decide for yourself.
@jackiegardina wow no.
Sounds like French focuses on the way Biden is responding to these events but missing that Biden was at the least not proactive in heading them off, and at the worst actually set the stage for them.
It paints Biden as being a good defensive player, which itself I would dispute but never mind, while overlooking his failures on the offense.
Each of these events to which Biden is playing the reactive role is an example of his NOT leading, letting others set the stage, and fumbling to keep up, poorly.
So no, I would say the exact things that French is pointing out here really go against the guy, not for him.
@jackiegardina I do think American presidents have tremendous ability to influence world events, with everything from military might through economic and trade policies.
The resources of the US government are pretty substantial and significant on the world stage.
Is the president 100% to blame for everything that happened in the world? No, definitely not, but the president does have a lot of influence, and we should hold such powerful people accountable for the way they do and do not use the influence they have.
@volkris I don’t believe any one president can prevent world events from happening, especially ones that are steeped in complex and decades long conflict. And to put this at the feet of the US President and not the terrorist organization and country involved in the conflict is taking American exceptionalism to an extreme. American Presidents aren’t puppeteers, steering the world. Perhaps immediately after WWII we held that sway, but not now.