The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign is within the scope of WikiProject Joe Biden, a project dedicated to creating and improving content related to
Joe Biden. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.Joe BidenWikipedia:WikiProject Joe BidenTemplate:WikiProject Joe BidenJoe Biden articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to
current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the
project page or contribute to the
discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events articles
This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the
Main Page in the "
In the news" section. You can visit the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from
reliable news sources to include recent events.
Notice date: 21 July. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with
Template:ITN talk if appropriate.
Changing the title of the "Gun Violence" paragraph under the Platform section to "Gun control/Firearms"
Similar paragraphs on the articles of other american politicians almost always read "Gun Control" or "Firearms", regardless on their opinions on the matter. Since whether or not the term "Gun Violence" is objective is debatable, I believe the aforementioned terms are more neutral and descriptive, especially the latter.
JezzaWPU (
talk)
17:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC) —
JezzaWPU (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
It does not appear that the section addresses any measures that would be anti-violence without being specifically gun-control oriented (e.g. counseling or other intervention for the violence-prone).
BD2412T21:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with the proposal for a title change. There's much more to the subject of gun control than the specific concept of gun violence itself, though I think perhaps changing the title to "Gun Control" may suffice, as Mr Biden's activity around the matter deals less particularly with firearms at large.
Tyrekecorrea (
talk)
14:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Add Section or Create New Page: List of Notable Persons Calling for Biden to Drop Out
I know we're not even 24 hours after the firt Presidential Debate for the 2024 election, but observing the deluge of primary sources, I am arguing we have reached a threshold to either add a section on thi page, on the Endorsments of Joe Biden 2024 Campaign page, or a whole new page that is modeled similar to the Endorsments page of notable individuals that are calling for Joe Biden to drop out. There's no other list compiled like this that I've been able to find on the internet. Anoter reason is that the reaction and calls for a sitting president to drop out from national media figures, democratic operatives, and even said president's own campaign suggorates is historic.
Jccali1214 (
talk)
17:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)reply
That isn't comparable to the absurdity of what we're talking about here, it is people who have always been in opposition. Note That Trump has a
2016,
2020, and
2024 version of that sentiment.
Zaathras (
talk)
01:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
No, it isn't. People who oppose the current Democratic nominee on general principle vs. "people who whined about 1 debate night."
Zaathras (
talk)
01:07, 6 July 2024 (UTC)reply
There's apparently a number of Democratic congressman circulating a petition among their congressional colleagues asking for Biden to withdraw. If that turns out to be a reality, we probably should mention that in this article.
152.130.15.103 (
talk)
01:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
It's relevant if it happens. It may be months or even years before the chaos currently ongoing in the Democratic Party is fully documented, but we should be aware of it.
152.130.15.109 (
talk)
19:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for sharing @
Killuminator!. Fascinating to see parellel thoughts happening. With this evidence on the table, what do you think is a sensible tactic moving forward? Should we petition to expand that list to include non-Democrats? Or make a similar list on this page? Or even a whole new page still altogehter?
Jccali1214 (
talk)
21:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Before the recent debate, every mainstream news source had been repeatedly saying for years that Biden's mental health was fine, and that any claims to the contrary were "right wing conspiracy theories," "fake news," of "cheap fakes."
However, after the debate, every one of these mainstream news sources admitted that there was indeed something wrong with Biden's mental condition.
This article needs to address why the media lied and covered up Biden's mental state.
On another note, this calls into question Wikipedia's reliable sources policies. A number editors and admins declared that
Fox News can't be used as a source for political topics, yet Fox was one of the only media outlets honestly reporting on Biden's rapid mental decline. Also, if most of the legacy media are repeating a false narrative, as was happening in the case of Biden's mental acuity, then Wikipedia's policies and guidelines abjectly failed in this case and there needs to be a reckoning and a correction.
152.130.15.15 (
talk)
13:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
neither of you are accurately depicting what the press, or editors, or Fox News, or Wikipedia policies did here. you're barking up the wrong trees.
soibangla (
talk)
13:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Fox News wasn't the only legacy media to question the mainstream media narrative on Biden's mental competency. The Wall Street Journal published a detailed article on it a few weeks ago, but the rest of the legacy media ignored it.
152.130.15.15 (
talk)
13:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Here's the WSJ article:
[18]. But notice, as soon as it was published a prominent CNN columnist attacked it:
[19]. So, this episode supports what Beaver and I said above.
152.130.15.15 (
talk)
14:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
It doesn't support anything of the sort other than your biases. Murdoch-owned media produced flawed reporting, which CNN appropriately called out. "But an examination of the report reveals a glaring problem: Most of the sources reporters Annie Linskey and Siobhan Hughes relied on were Republicans. In fact, buried in the story, the reporters themselves acknowledged that they had drawn their sweeping conclusion based on GOP sources who, obviously, have an incentive to make comments that will damage Biden’s candidacy." –
Muboshgu (
talk)
14:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I am very aware of what you are talking about, and as I said, they are not accurate depictions, they include partial truths and distortions, much in the same way many conservative commentators fabricate fake scandals. I don't have the time to dive deep into this, I shouldn't have responded in the first place. I'm out.
soibangla (
talk)
14:38, 3 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The fact that the Democrats and most of the legacy media (with the exception of "Murdoch" media and few others) were conspiring, apparently for years, to conceal from the public that the chief executive was a vegetable will likely be one of the biggest political scandals in US history. In fact, I expect during Trump's now increasingly inevitable second term that there will likely be criminal investigations over it. This scandal will probably merit its own article soon, but for now a section in this article and the general 2024 election article may suffice. Here's a source to get us started:
[20] 152.130.15.103 (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
152.130.15.103 (
talk)
The blatant political bias in all you have just written is making this a pointless discussion. It should be closed now.
HiLo48 (
talk)
00:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The media lies about all sorts of stuff; if they started out focusing directly on something like this, they would have to address how they've treated everything else, and that would lead to a chain reaction that would literally destroy civilization as we know it. What form, exactly would address of the matter around Joe Biden take, if conspiracy around Joe Biden was to be addressed directly?
Tyrekecorrea (
talk)
14:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Biden’s health issues needs its own article
Ever since the debate, his health issues have become front and center. It needs its own article because with the media coverup too, this could be the biggest American political scandal since Watergate. Also, the June 2024 debate should have its own article again. It might be the most consequential one in our history.
Vinnylospo (
talk)
04:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Trump is not currently the president and Biden is the oldest president in history with many politicians, donors, newspapers, etc demanding he drop out and/or resign from office.
Vinnylospo (
talk)
13:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Vinnylospo: I tend to agree, but we have to be aware of the precedent set by
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump, where many participants cited HIPAA and the
Goldwater Rule (which bars medical commentary by persons who have not directly examined the subject), and which led to the removal of basically any content about the subject's health that was not provided by the subject themselves. My personal opinion is that we should cover anything about either subject that is reported in reliable sources, but that has been overruled.
BD2412T15:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Has President Biden invoked section 3 of the 25th amendment, lately? Has Vice President Harris & a majority of the cabinet invoked section 4 of the 25th amendment, lately? AFAIK, neither have.
GoodDay (
talk)
15:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Loads of Democrats and public figures have been calling for the President to step down because of the debate performance and it’s a massive news story that is only getting bigger. It needs an article 25th amendment or not.
Vinnylospo (
talk)
22:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Perhaps, considering that both Biden and Trump face the same aging concerns (if elected, Trump will become the oldest person ever to take the oath of office), we should have a single article on the shared health concerns of both subjects.
BD2412T20:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Absolutely. Especially with how much publicity it’s getting. Wikipedia has so many articles involving Trump and/or Biden, I don’t see why they can’t have another one.
Vinnylospo (
talk)
22:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I disagree because we are not seeing a lot of reliable media sources making Trump's age and health a big focus in the same way that they are with Biden. Certainly there has been some talk about Trump's age/health, but we really have to go with what reliable sources tell us is notable, and to act as if the sources are making Trump's age as big of a deal as Biden's age seems to be false balance.
JMM12345 (
talk)
23:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, have a look and see what sources you come up with. The question is whether it is appropriate to have this kind of article at all, about anyone. If it is, then the question becomes whether there are sources to support it at all. As far as I can recall, there are enough sources to support discussion of all three candidates. Nikki Haley made an issue of both of their ages in her primary campaign, that received some coverage.
BD2412T00:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Lot's of people are old, but not uniquely old as candidates for the presidency. Our existing articles cover this in a piecemeal fashion, when a single article could discuss under one title all of the concerns and ramifications of this situation.
BD2412T03:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I think there's a case for this; there hasn't been direct and sufficiently substantial address of the matter, and the state of Mr Biden's well-being has tremendous implications for the present and future of America, and there is a need for awareness and address of it. However, I'm concerned that it will never be addressed completely, in the kind of way that would help. It's pretty sick to say that the specifics are a matter of national security. One thing that nags at me, though, is that this isn't like the FDR administration; we don't have the tools and the luxury of being able to research things like this so easily and document it as we go, and look how much we've learned and how much has been brought to light about the life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in retrospect.
Tyrekecorrea (
talk)
14:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)reply
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In the "Arab and Muslim Americans" section, the sentence, "Due to Michigan's status as a swing state, some analysts have said that Biden's support of Israel could cause him to lose the state" is inaccurate: he would not lose the state due to its status as a swing state; he would lose it due to opposition to his stance by voters. What it needs to say is, "Due to Michigan's status as a swing state, some analysts have said that Biden's support of Israel could cause him to lose not only the state, but the election." This is supported by both the refs at the end of the sentence.
2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:64A1:3911:63E1:44F6 (
talk)
14:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Why is the list of names of the "national advisory board" members in the article? I think it's there just because it was a very early announcement of a board which seems to be largely meaningless.
Walsh90210 (
talk)
18:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)reply
New article regarding Biden's decision to drop out - can be retooled from a deleted one
Could we get eyes on the navbox
Template:2024 United States presidential election? It is currently describing
Kamala Harris as the "presumptive nominee", but my understanding is that that description is not accurate/precise at the moment, but I am not sure what the right label is. "Declared" was the verbiage used during primaries before a nominee became the presumptive one, but has Harris even officially "declared" at this stage? This is all rather unprecedented.
Mz7 (
talk)
18:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Deletion of "Groups and individuals publicly calling for President Biden to end his campaign" infobox and replacement with link to main article
This description box is very large and yet it still does not encapsulate the full breadth of calls for Biden to end his campaign. I suggest the infobox is removed and be replaced with the link to the main article: "List of Democrats who opposed the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign" which is far more detailed and complete. The paragraphs preceding the infobox can remain and serve as a major summary for what a user can find in the main article link.
Agent123456789 (
talk)
22:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)reply