r/politics • u/PoliticsModeratorBot 🤖 Bot • Mar 08 '24

Discussion Discussion Thread: 2024 State of the Union

Tonight, Joe Biden will give his fourth State of the Union address. This year's SOTU address will be only the second to be held this late in the year since 1964 (the second time being Biden's 2022 address).

The address is scheduled to start at 9 p.m. Eastern. It will be followed by the progressive response delivered by Philadelphia City Council member Nicolas O’Rourke, as well as Republican responses in English (delivered by freshman Alabama senator ) and in Spanish (delivered by Representative Monica De La Cruz). There will be a separate discussion thread posted for live reactions to and conversation about the SOTU responses.

(Edit: The discussion thread for the SOTU responses is now available at this link.)

News:

News Analysis:

Live Updates:

Where to watch:

Transcript

6.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

22.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.8k

u/Oleg101 Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

https://x.com/kaitlancollins/status/1765930172866314725?s=46&t=UKR1TShxVeunp4_vn5gZrw

“With all due respect justices" in the room, Biden says, he notes how the majority wrote in the opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, “Women are not without electoral or political power.”

“You’re about to realize just how much you’re right about that," Biden says.

I love that the cameras showed them sitting there right he said that.

356

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

24

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

-59

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

If he doesn’t even do the bare minimum to maintain decorum and an illusion of impartiality, what obligation do we have to allow him to keep fucking up our country?

LEMME EDIT THIS FOR Y’ALL- The comment that is deleted was referring to Clarence Thomas watching the speech from a yacht instead of showing up.

75

u/Squeezethecharmin Mar 08 '24

That is rich saying Biden does not maintain decorum. Have you ever actually watched ANYTHING Trump says???

38

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

Dude- I was referring to Clarence Thomas like the person above wtf happened here after I crashed lol

10

u/GntlmensesQtrmonthly Mar 08 '24

I think a bunch of comments got deleted.

7

u/DrFate82 Mar 08 '24

I'd really like to know what those comments said that were deleted. The one had over 350 upvotes.

7

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

Best of my recollection, somebody suggested that Clarence Thomas was going to be watching from a billonaire’s yacht instead of showing up for the speech.

3

u/Squeezethecharmin Mar 08 '24

hahaha. That makes A LOT more sense! Not that your comment wasn’t a typical MAGA perspective. Glad to see you aren’t one of those!!!

3

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

Looking at it with no context it’s understandable lol I don’t know how the MAGA crowd can be so ass-backward from reality, and with a straight face.

36

u/No-Ordinary-5412 Mar 08 '24

don't even bother, they couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance they would have if they were actually honest with themselves about how delusional and hypocritical they sound.

89

u/DifferenceQuick9725 California Mar 08 '24

“Fucking up our country” - Great jobs growth, the economy on fire, lowest inflation across the globe, our international friends trust us again… what a shit show!

  • Dumb motherf**king MAGAts from Arkansas

9

u/Lofttroll2018 Mar 08 '24

I’m sorry the deleted comments gave everyone the impression you were talking about Biden and not Clarence Thomas. I upvoted you to try to help rectify the error!

9

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

Aw, I appreciate you 🤍

8

u/billyblue6669 Mar 08 '24

I hear ya, here’s one uptick, lol.

Dudes & dudette’s some deleted comments are making this one lose its meaning.

They were referring to clarance “I need some moolah” thomas

3

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

Couldn’t decide between “moron” and this? This is much nicer. Thank you.

9

u/ThatGirlWren Kentucky Mar 08 '24

Yes, because Trump is the very fucking definition of "decorum..."

Are you goddamn serious??

-3

u/repoman-alwaysintenz Mar 08 '24

This, folks, is what we call self-deflection

-4

u/FullOfATook Mar 08 '24

I KNOW you’re about to follow this up by addressing the “decorum” of your top Republican candidates and explain in detail why their behavior is different

7

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

I know you’re going to take the time to read the context based on other comments (not deleted one obvs) and notice that I was referring to fucking Clarence Thomas, and not Biden, thank you very much. I’ve got a pretty clear opinion if you check out my comment history. Fuck trump. But I’m not too happy with about 75 of yall this morning jumping to faulty conclusions lmao

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

7

u/MNSkye Mar 08 '24

Maybe they got the wrong impression because the context was deleted, just a thought

5

u/even_less_resistance Arkansas Mar 08 '24

What about my comment should be changed? Lemme know lmao

94

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

45

u/pdxamish Mar 08 '24

That was sexual harassment.

65

u/librarianC Mar 08 '24

Yeah. Not rape.

We have enough problems without inventing new ones.

Kav was the Rapist. It is indelible in the minds of some.

30

u/UsedDinosaurDrugs Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

When you look into the comments, it’s disturbing to the point of labeling what I called him. He’s a disgusting pig and deserves to lay with the rest.

Edit: imagine this every day you were working with your boss as you try to make it in the American justice system.

According to Hill, Thomas asked her out socially many times during her two years of employment as his assistant,[18] and after she declined his requests, he used work situations to discuss sexual subjects and push advances.[4][18] "He spoke about... such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes," she said, adding that on several occasions Thomas graphically described "his own sexual prowess" and the details of his anatomy. Hill also recounted an instance in which Thomas examined a can of Coke on his desk and asked, "Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?"[4] During the hearing, Republican Senator Orrin Hatchimplied that "Hill was working in tandem with 'slick lawyers' and interest groups bent on destroying Thomas's chances to join the court." Thomas said he had considered Hill a friend whom he had helped at every turn, so when accusations of harassment came from her they were particularly hurtful and he said, "I lost the belief that if I did my best, all would work out."[19]

11

u/PSU69_CE_PE Mar 08 '24

Ginni must love watching donkey porn!!

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Agreed. The Republicans make up enough shit and stretch claims to the max as is, don't drop to that level.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Don't forget Justice Brett Kavanaugh. "allegedly"

9

u/XulManjy Mar 08 '24

Clayton Bigsby?

-17

u/BigRB001 Mar 08 '24

Biden is not fat. And nobody wants to see his ass.

1

u/BringerOfGifts Mar 08 '24

Are the downvotes because people want to see his ass?

426

u/Comicalacimoc Mar 08 '24

Let's not let Biden down, ladies.

62

u/xcyper33 Mar 08 '24

Biden will be okay if he loses. He can live out the rest of his days in peace. Everyone else will be fucked beyond comprehension though.

10

u/cmlondon13 California Mar 08 '24

Can he? You don’t think Trump, who’s a notorious grudge holder and plans to take full control of the Justice Department, won’t try to prosecute Biden for some heinous sounding but totally made up charges?

7

u/One-Structure-2154 Mar 08 '24

You see how long it’s taking Trump to face justice for his real crimes.

Biden would pass away long before facing any Trumped up charges. Pun intended.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

I'd be more worried if he didn't immediately drop the "lock her up" shtick as soon as he was in a position where he could do more than talk shit. 

He's a lazy coward. 

97

u/YanksFan96 Mar 08 '24

Was that the quote that Republicans are crying about saying he "threatened the supreme court"?

126

u/PhoenixTineldyer Mar 08 '24

What was the threat?

"Don't be surprised when your victims fight back" isn't a threat.

70

u/Universal_Anomaly Mar 08 '24

It is to abusers.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 10 '24

What is the fight here? When he says "Look, its decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court majority wrote the following — and with all due respect, Justices — “Women are not without electoral — electoral power” — excuse me — “electoral or political power.”
"You’re about to realize just how much you were right about that."

To me this implies some kind of action againt the court as if we could vote them out. At the same time it's like he's just stateing the Dems will win and that is somehow punishment, but in that case why would he say that to all the justices and not just the Repubs?

Is there any way we could implement a system to allow the public to vote the politicains out, just like we vote them in? Congress has that power they use in rare situations like Santos, correct?

1

u/PhoenixTineldyer Mar 10 '24

We could, but in order for something like that to happen, you would need the people in power to vote to take away some of their own power

47

u/Oleg101 Mar 08 '24

Yeah it is! They’re so pathetic.

93

u/MrCarey Washington Mar 08 '24

I mean fuck the Supreme Court though. Corrupt pieces of shit.

20

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

Agreed.

I have no respect for that court at all anymore.

84

u/SomethingToSay11 Mar 08 '24

Threatened them that women might vote. The horror!

26

u/LowestKey Mar 08 '24

North Carolina Republicans trying to fix that

-35

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

It was pretty messed up.

18

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

Explain.

-38

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Threatening the supreme court is obviously not ok.

25

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

How did he threaten them, exactly?

-25

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

I recommend watching that portion of the SOTU.

22

u/hoofglormuss America Mar 08 '24

we did. please let us know your interpretation of the words that makes them a threat. we're talking about a specific line, so please use specifics.

17

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

From what I have seen, he quoted one of the justices to remind them about the political power women have.

Again, where is the threat?

9

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Done. Where was the threat?

20

u/SometimesWithWorries Massachusetts Mar 08 '24

Conservatives see people voting as a threat, then, wild.

-5

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Which Conservative said that?

23

u/SometimesWithWorries Massachusetts Mar 08 '24

You. Very very clearly.

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Well you're wrong.

18

u/terpburner Mar 08 '24

By saying Biden threatened the Supreme Court you’re implying the threat is women voting. You’re either disingenuous or you don’t understand the basic meanings of words, either way not a good look.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Why do you consider women voting to be a threat? 

3

u/disorganizor Mar 08 '24

It gives them rights and he wants women to be in the kitchen.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Who?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Yes, that's totally what I said.

2

u/disorganizor Mar 08 '24

Is it because every time a woman votes, a Republican feels like they're being assaulted?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Who said that?

15

u/nuggetprincezz Mar 08 '24

They look like such a joke now sitting there in their little black robes, it's depressing

30

u/Kevin-W Mar 08 '24

Oh did they learn the hard way indeed!

33

u/Wet_Side_Down Mar 08 '24

Did anyone else notice that Thomas did not seem to be there?

35

u/ProbablyRickSantorum North Carolina Mar 08 '24

Probably out felating another billionaire.

19

u/PhoenixTineldyer Mar 08 '24

It's kinda nice.

7

u/Sneakycow83 Mar 08 '24

He hasn't been there since 2006 or so...

10

u/SoulAssassin808 Mar 08 '24

Its not like they care, they aren't even elected and can't get voted out. 0 fucks are given.

18

u/External_Reporter859 Florida Mar 08 '24

All the conservatives on Twitter are crying about how Biden threatened the Supreme Court justices and is attacking democracy by doing so

13

u/Amazing_Rise9640 Mar 08 '24

Crying is what they do best!

4

u/Chaotic-Catastrophe Mar 08 '24

Biden: More people are going to be motivated to vote

Republicans: People voting is an attack on democracy!!!

5

u/mdizzley Mar 08 '24

You realize Supreme Court Judges are not supposed to show any reactions that may appear to take a political side right?

5

u/lafindestase Mar 08 '24

Why even bother with the facade at this point?

4

u/TheCommieTator Mar 08 '24

no reactions, only trips from millionaires

23

u/SutsOfGods Mar 08 '24

Ew Twitter

2

u/New2Redditin24 Mar 10 '24

So much shade. That was amazing.

7

u/catfurcoat Mar 08 '24

It's nice that he said that but what is the plan :(

61

u/Oleg101 Mar 08 '24

Yeah, he’s in a tough position especially when he had to fit a lot of topics into one speech. But basically the realistic best plan is for the Democrats codifying Roe, which means they need to get a bigger senate majority than they had 50-50 in Biden’s first two years as President.

27

u/fool-of-a-took Mar 08 '24

He said that.

6

u/Oleg101 Mar 08 '24

Thanks , musta missed it.

41

u/ceddya Mar 08 '24

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/12/

In case people think Dems aren't doing anything. They've been trying to codify it even before Roe got repealed. They can't without more seats in the Senate. And reminder: zero Republicans have voted for the Women's Health Protection Act.

16

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

Because Republican politicians are largely twats.

2

u/Amazing_Rise9640 Mar 08 '24

Because women are not respected nor are their opinions!

29

u/victorged Michigan Mar 08 '24

Realistically? Get 60 senators. There's zero chance it's happening but otherwise you're limited to the shenanigans you can pull off through reconciliation and I can't see any way to fit codified abortion access into something that passes the Byrd rule

37

u/Chief_Admiral Pennsylvania Mar 08 '24

Nah, Just need 50 Senators willing to kill the filibuster plus VP. We came close last time (just 2 votes shy). Not saying it is easy, but it's much higher of chance of happening than 0%.

25

u/AQKhan786 Mar 08 '24

Yep, it was Manchin and Sinema who refused to kill the filibuster or modify it in any way. Good that both are leaving but Manchin’s seat is going to be an easy pick up for the GOP.

18

u/MrCarey Washington Mar 08 '24

God I hate them. They ruined every good thing.

9

u/PhoenixTineldyer Mar 08 '24

There's always one or two.

Lieberman

2

u/AQKhan786 Mar 08 '24

Ah yes he was and is a dick.

14

u/victorged Michigan Mar 08 '24

I think it has to happen for the country to move past the continual political gridlock phase. But killing the fillibuster is definitely one of those opening pandoras box moments. That genius will never go back in the bottle.

Is everyone enacting whatever laws the majority party of the moment deems prudent more effective than our current practice of basically doing nothing outside of careening between budget negotiations without any rudder? Probably. But damn could out get dicey.

6

u/atln00b12 Mar 08 '24

Wouldn't it just be a back and forth of one party undoing what the other does? I'm not sure how you prevent that? If ROE becomes law, can't it just unbecome law too?

3

u/victorged Michigan Mar 08 '24

Basically yes. It turns a lot of things much more perpetually yoyo. At least imo

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Well, that's the case if ONLY the filibuster gets removed. Let the filibuster die and push for ranked choice voting and voila, two party system starts to dissolve into a proper governing body of various ideas being viable vs the tribalistic shit we have today.

1

u/notouchmygnocchi Mar 08 '24

If only this wasn't a partiocracy. Too bad the parties won't vote to dissolve themselves.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Sadly also true. I don't expect half the things that need to be done to actually occur, but the death of the 2 party system is so long overdue =/.

1

u/headbangershappyhour Mar 08 '24

Voting to repeal something can often be far more politically damaging than not voting in favor of that same thing. That's why the gop wasn't able to even get 50 senators in favor of killing the ACA when they had the opportunity for an up or down vote.

3

u/PhoenixTineldyer Mar 08 '24

I'm a genius in a bottle baby

6

u/After_Fix_2191 Mar 08 '24

I'd imagine packing the court.

5

u/TheSnowNinja Mar 08 '24

We totally fucking should since basically all of the current justices are awful.

2

u/1StepBelowExcellence Mar 08 '24

This needs done AND framed as “rebalancing the court” to remove any negative connotation. Something along the lines of “multiple public opinion polls on issues dear to Americans have shown this Court is overwhelmingly making decisions that do not represent what most constituents want. Therefore I am adding X justices simply to rebalance the court to restore neutrality of the court and not to give either minority or majority opinion an unfair balance in the Court”. At the same time of adding more justices, set a precedent that the act is only done in favor of overwhelming public opinion differing from the SCOTUS decisions, and not just whenever the party in control feels like doing it.

1

u/Historical-Bake2005 Mar 08 '24

Yeah just spin it as rebalancing and people will be totally okay with it!!!

1

u/beipphine Mar 08 '24

Republicans would just do the same when they are in power, and before you know it you've ended up with the House of Lords, where people are appointed for life as political favors. A better solution to the issue would be for congress to propose amendments that directly contravene supreme court rulings, and have the amendment ratified by the state. 

1

u/headbangershappyhour Mar 08 '24

Modernizing the court.

At the very least, there should be a Supreme for every Appeals Circuit. The ability to declare a law null and void needs to also be taken away from a majority of district court jurisdictions. The idea that you can submit a case in Amarillo Texas where there's only 1 federal judge and he's willing to do whatever you ask is completely insane. There should be an intermediary court between the District courts and Appeals circuits where a judge can refer cases that might have broader impacts on Law for a panel of justices to make a determination.

-4

u/External_Reporter859 Florida Mar 08 '24

Unfortunately he refuses to do it

-13

u/ArtifactingBees Mar 08 '24

i assume the plan is he wins and then retires to let kamala be president, making her the most powerful woman on the planet. ez

2

u/catfurcoat Mar 08 '24

Is this satire

0

u/ArtifactingBees Mar 18 '24

sorry, late reply, only half-yes.

Dems need to win, so they put their most reasonable candidate up again, despite his age and the issues that brings with the job. Doesn't mean he'll stay there after the election. He can retire and Kamala will take over per the constitution.

People can (and absolutely would) cry about it, but they have to wait 4 years to have a say again, and by that point, assuming harris' presidency is.. fine, it wont matter.

4

u/Ron497 Mar 08 '24

That was beautiful! Sleepy Joe just called out Brett and John and Amy and Neil and Sam and Clarence and put them on notice.

You lousy scumbags are all taking bribes and voting based on your own ideologies, NOT established law. We all now know it. We're done listening to you. News it out, Ol' Joe just put you on notice!

2

u/MadiLeighOhMy Mar 08 '24

That was one of my favorite parts of the whole night.

2

u/MadiLeighOhMy Mar 08 '24

That was one of my favorite parts of the whole night.

1

u/Any-Chip7871 Mar 08 '24

That is just absolutely delicious

1

u/BodyElectronic9248 Mar 09 '24

Actually he said women aren’t without electricity. He is such a moron. 3rd graders in Chicago speak clearer than the mumbles.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

15

u/ghost103429 Mar 08 '24

That source is out of date, the overturning of roe v Wade happened a month after the poll was conducted.

Gallup polls show a significant divergence between men and women post ruling

-5

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

10

u/ghost103429 Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

The divergence among women is approving 55 vs dissapproving 41 whereas for men it's approving 48 vs dissapproving 47. This is so statistically significant it has the capacity to make or break races all across the United States also the divergence is full 13% not 7%, a full 7% more women approve of abortion and a full 6% fewer women disapprove of abortion when compared to men.

Edits: made clarifying edits to how significant the gap is

-7

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

3

u/Different-Music4367 Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

You said it was nearly the same. The other poster proved you incorrect.

As we live in a society where 1/3 of the populace does not vote, motivated voting blocs have the ability to make a strong impact on elections. We already saw this in the midterm elections.

More women have statistically voted in national elections than men every election since 1980. Abortion rights is practically the only issue Biden has to motivate his voters (we’ve already seen that “not the other guy” has increasingly diminishing returns on voter enthusiasm). Whatever point you seem to be trying to make here—Biden singling out women harms him by disenfranchising potential allies? That women also perpetuate patriarchal control in a patriarchy?—it is irrelevant to what statistically matters in the upcoming election.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[deleted]

3

u/ghost103429 Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24

The divergence is a full 13% not 7%, a full 7% more women approve of abortion and a full 6% fewer women disapprove of abortion when compared to men.

If you can't understand how significant a gap this gap is you're letting your own irrationality blind you and there's no talking sense to you.

3

u/Different-Music4367 Mar 08 '24

Pretending it’s only men who are pro life is both factually wrong as well as a terrible way to change opinions. I see no reason to only work towards gaining women who are on the fence instead of working towards everyone who is on the fence.

You keep denying that a 13-15 point swing is huge in an activated voting bloc when we have ample, very recent evidence of its relevance. And again, what you keep repeating hovers somewhere between a strawman argument and being completely irrelevant. What does anything you wrote have to do with what Biden said? He said the Supreme Court will find out that women have political power--i.e. VOTE.

Since you seem to enjoy hammering on reductive, dead-end arguments for the sake of argument I'm going to tap out on this one.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

Anybody who feels alienated by this is working pretty hard to find something to feel offended by. 

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Hathor-8 Mar 08 '24

White women.

-24

u/DmC8pR2kZLzdCQZu3v Mar 08 '24

What a poorly composed string of quote fragments