Everyone I know that voted for him liked him for this particular reason.
Trump and Bush? Two major wars, 1 recession, 1 near major depression. And that’s just what Bush accomplished.
In a sense, Biden could be a very consequential President as he will operate similar to Clinton/Bush/Obama, and I sense the country has forgotten how a determined executive branch can have you talking about stuff they quietly championed 20 years later (as we are doing now).
Again, I did not vote for the man but facts matter, please don't get fooled by the same agenda even if executed by two (or three) different administrations with technically opposing parties.
Pretending that Donald “Take out the Terrorists’ families” Trump is a some kind of dove is a new one, especially when he’s still trying to attack Iran during his final lame duck days in office.
[1]- https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/20...
[2] - https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...
Yeah, and trump has not started any additional wars. That is true. However, the constant saber rattling vs iran as well as the "bloody nose" option vs north korea (a premptive nuclear strike) were openly floated by Trump and his administration. Trump would go for war if he believed it would be good for him.
Honestly, trump may still be president if he had attacked iran... Trump's own miscalculations are ironically what kept him being so "dovish". Republicans talk a good game about being doves but they want a hawk. They might not admit it openly because dear leader didn't attack iran yet - but if he had - trump's base would claim that iran should have been invaded forever ago...
Civilian casualties have substantially increased under Trump.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-saudi-arms-congress-i...
He has resumed arms sales to the Saudis for their bombing campaign in Yemen.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207
And suspended reporting on civilian casualties.
Oddly enough I think the fact that I see comments like yours so frequently is the biggest possible endorsement of his no-reporting policy. The amount of praise Trump receives for being 'anti-war', despite ample evidence to the contrary, is a good lesson for future establishments on the negative effect of transparency in such matters.
Obama classified military aged men (>= 16) as non civilians when killed by drones so those numbers are abslutaly skewed.
He also had signature strikes, the disposition matrix, expanded/initiated drone/bombing campaigns to an absurd and terrible degree.
Obama is a great example where partisanship makes people defend anything he did even where he was worse than Bush (And Trump has been criticized even more than Bush For less than Bush/Obama).
Trying to rewrite history to align party lines or "Orangemanbad" narratives doesn't really work.
Finally, it's disingenuous calling Obama's administration transparent when it was anything but. Even the ACLU said so and he was absolutely at war with whistleblowers.
Even Vox had to acknowledge that Trump brought a lot of good instincts to foreign policy, even if his execution was often lacking: https://www.vox.com/21564009/trump-biden-foreign-policy-chin....
If someone on the right-wing gets the messaging right, intermixed with competent political infrastructure, we could easily see more bills like the Patriot Act in the future, especially since Trump showed there is a massive appetite for some of the toxic rhetoric in this country. Anyone that can package those ideas in a palatable way can snake in nasty bills named ‘Totally not nasty and very good Act’.