Jump to content

Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)


Simon

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Well, if Joe Biden becomes crippled by scandal, what choice would the party have but go to the runner-up? Especially this late in the process.

 

Not that I think it's likely they would do that, unless this made Biden obviously unelectable. But I'd hate to see a repeat of 2016, where Trump wins because too many people find his opponent unpalatable.

 

If the Republicans are half as canny as I believe them to be and if there is more scandalous information waiting in the wings, they're going to release it far enough into the remainder of this race. I worry that retrieving Bernie at that point is going to be (somehow) unfeasible.

 

:no:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Well, if Joe Biden becomes crippled by scandal, what choice would the party have but go to the runner-up? Especially this late in the process.

 

Not that I think it's likely they would do that, unless this made Biden obviously unelectable. But I'd hate to see a repeat of 2016, where Trump wins because too many people find his opponent unpalatable.

Doesn't work that way.  One of the suspended campaigns, like Warren, would jump in with the de facto endorsement of major Biden backers.  

Bernie is, flatly speaking, less electable than Biden even if this allegation is credible.  Evidence?   He couldn't beat Biden once it became a two-way race, even with more money and volunteers and ads than Biden had.  Doesn't inspire the moderate and minority bases of the party.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:

 

If the Republicans are half as canny as I believe them to be and if there is more scandalous information waiting in the wings, they're going to release it far enough into the remainder of this race. I worry that retrieving Bernie at that point is going to be (somehow) unfeasible.

 

:no:.

 

Well, sounds like you're expecting Trump to keep his mouth shut after he hears of that information, until the campaign is farther along. I've seen nothing to suggest he has that much self-discipline.

 

5 minutes ago, megaplayboy said:

Doesn't work that way.  One of the suspended campaigns, like Warren, would jump in with the de facto endorsement of major Biden backers.  

Bernie is, flatly speaking, less electable than Biden even if this allegation is credible.  Evidence?   He couldn't beat Biden once it became a two-way race, even with more money and volunteers and ads than Biden had.  Doesn't inspire the moderate and minority bases of the party.  

 

Has a situation like this ever played out in the history of American politics? If it hasn't I don't know if there is any playbook for it.

But I'd feel okay if Warren actually could leapfrog into the candidacy. I consider her a credible candidate, more so than Biden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Troublesome Tara Reade Story

 

Quote

Reade seems to have, or have had, a strange obsession with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In an op-ed posted on Medium in 2018, she wrote, “President Putin has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness. His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity.” Since the Biden assault story broke, she has insisted she was merely writing a novel about Putin, but the Medium post was pretty clearly a political screed, headlined “Why A Liberal Democrat Supports Vladimir Putin.” She claimed that she quit working for Biden because she loves “Russia with all my heart” and was sickened by “the reckless imperialism of America” As the Times’ Michelle Goldberg points out, last December she tweeted, bizarrely, “I worked for the Senate, I know the plan to bring Russia to its knees.” She now repudiates Putin.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

Fauci won't be "disappeared" or anything, but it's likely he won't be the face of the administration on this issue for much longer. What worries me is that Trump and cronies will stop listening to his advice.

 

I can't believe that I forgot Brad Pitt played Anthony Fauci. Maybe we are overthinking this situation; maybe this is well-hidden jealousy.

 

  

17 minutes ago, Badger said:

Of all the Dem candidates that showed, Warren would probably be the last I would vote for.

 

+5 OCV to Hit Location (Bernie Sanders' back).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it would also depend on why.  But, I would get what you are saying with my political leaning.  (though that leaning doesn't tilt towards Trump)

 

But, let's just say how I found her to be in my opinion.  When confronting TRump on deceit and lies.  She has to make a saving roll vs (not shooting herself in the foot)

 

 

(and it is a tough roll to succeed) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Ragitsu said:

 

 

Unless this is proved true in a court of law this is just an attempt to smear Biden. And I'm sad to see that this is working on so many people here.

 

Trump cannot win any moral equivalency arguments against anyone unless all the weight is given to  recency bias of the the incident's reveal and failure of the Dems to fight back with his past history.

 

n.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lawsuits_involving_Donald_Trump#Lawsuits_around_potential_sexual_misconduct_and_assault

 

Note that this doesn't include his issues with Miss Universe or his "grab em by the p...y tape. It does include the two eventually dismissed lawsuits with his co-defendant Jeffrey Epstein for sexual misconduct with 12 and 13 year old girls. 

 

Yeah getting into the mud with the pig gets you dirty but sometimes that the only way to get bacon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Grailknight said:

 

Unless this is proved true in a court of law this is just an attempt to smear Biden. And I'm sad to see that this is working on so many people here.

 

Trump cannot win any moral equivalency arguments against anyone unless all the weight is given to  recency bias of the the incident's reveal and failure of the Dems to fight back with his past history.

 

n.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lawsuits_involving_Donald_Trump#Lawsuits_around_potential_sexual_misconduct_and_assault

 

Note that this doesn't include his issues with Miss Universe or his "grab em by the p...y tape. It does include the two eventually dismissed lawsuits with his co-defendant Jeffrey Epstein for sexual misconduct with 12 and 13 year old girls. 

 

Yeah getting into the mud with the pig gets you dirty but sometimes that the only way to get bacon.

 

Why the false dichotomy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:

 

Why the false dichotomy?

 

How is it false?

 

Those lawsuits happened. Those comments happened. We have documentation of them in courts of law and media footage. I will not say that the accusations against Biden are untrue. I suspect that if they go to court, it will be dismissed just as the Trump and Epstein cases were. But you're right, the accusation against Biden is different from the ones against Trump. One set would cost money and prestige, the other jail time.

 

This accusation wasn't taken seriously until after Biden wrapped up the nomination. My theory is therefore that this is more a political ploy to smear Biden than it is to get justice for his victim. You are not giving enough credit to Trump's political savvy. He and his people are world class spin doctors. He's positioned to champion this because it's been started by nominally neutral sources. He can claim it as a campaign issue later without the stigma of personally making the accusation as he did with the Ukraine mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Grailknight said:

 

How is it false?

 

Those lawsuits happened. Those comments happened. We have documentation of them in courts of law and media footage. I will not say that the accusations against Biden are untrue. I suspect that if they go to court, it will be dismissed just as the Trump and Epstein cases were. But you're right, the accusation against Biden is different from the ones against Trump. One set would cost money and prestige, the other jail time.

 

This accusation wasn't taken seriously until after Biden wrapped up the nomination. My theory is therefore that this is more a political ploy to smear Biden than it is to get justice for his victim. You are not giving enough credit to Trump's political savvy. He and his people are world class spin doctors. He's positioned to champion this because it's been started by nominally neutral sources. He can claim it as a campaign issue later without the stigma of personally making the accusation as he did with the Ukraine mess.


Just because you are disgusted with the acts (as of yet technically unproven, but looking more likely as the days roll by) of one person does not mean you support their opposition. My point of contention is how - by and large - the media has remained hush-hush concerning the allegation against Joe Biden. In general, is the court of public opinion all too eager to fetch the rope and guillotine? Yes. Does this mean that mainstream investigative journalism should downplay potential misconduct of individuals tasked with running this nation? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:


My point is that just because you are disgusted with the acts (as of yet technically unproven, but looking more likely as the days roll by) of one person does not mean you support their opposition. My point of contention is how - by and large - the media has remained hush-hush concerning the allegation against Joe Biden.

 

Turn that around and think about it for a second why don't ya.

 

My point is that as long as this is an accusation, then Trump has been accused of far worse than Biden and far more often than this single incident. All I am saying is, if you're going to hold this over Biden, then hold Trump's past against him also.

 

Ignore the media coverage and decide on merits and faults of both men.

 

On one side we have Biden, accused of inappropriate sexual conduct, on the other Trump accused of inappropriate sexual conduct and rape  of 12 and 13 year girls,  documented disregard for women, convicted racist and con artist and leader of the administration and campaign that has more legal convictions than any other president besides Nixon(in less than 4 years!).

 

That's an easy choice for me. I'd rather I had some other choices but i'll go with the best one I have. Don't ask the Democrats to replace their bad choice until you and unless you campaign just as strongly for the Republicans to deny Trump the nomination for 2020 also. Give me two new choices and we'll talk. Until then, I'll stick with Biden warts and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Grailknight said:

 

Turn that around and think about it for a second why don't ya.

 

My point is that as long as this is an accusation, then Trump has been accused of far worse than Biden and far more often than this single incident. All I am saying is, if you're going to hold this over Biden, then hold Trump's past against him also.

 

Ignore the media coverage and decide on merits and faults of both men.

 

On one side we have Biden, accused of inappropriate sexual conduct, on the other Trump accused of inappropriate sexual conduct and rape  of 12 and 13 year girls,  documented disregard for women, convicted racist and con artist and leader of the administration and campaign that has more legal convictions than any other president besides Nixon(in less than 4 years!).

 

That's an easy choice for me. I'd rather I had some other choices but i'll go with the best one I have. Don't ask the Democrats to replace their bad choice until you and unless you campaign just as strongly for the Republicans to deny Trump the nomination for 2020 also. Give me two new choices and we'll talk. Until then, I'll stick with Biden warts and all.

 

*rubs brow*

 

...christ...

 

Yes, I dislike Donald Trump; he shouldn't have been President of the United States much less dog catcher of the county. That still doesn't mean I give a pass to someone who manages to be not quite as terrible (and on multiple fronts beyond "mere" sexual assault).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ragitsu said:

 

*rubs brow*

 

...christ...

 

Yes, I dislike Donald Trump; he shouldn't have been President of the United States much less dog catcher of the county. That still doesn't mean I give a pass to someone who manages to be less terrible (and on multiple fronts beyond "mere" sexual assault).

 

Never said give Biden a pass. If he's guilty, then he should take it in the financial shorts. Notice he wouldn't go to jail over this, just lose money and any remaining political aspirations.

 

But railing on and on about this before it's proven,  just gives aid to Trump. You're tearing down the only opposition he has instead of highlighting the same and worse faults in Trump. Put the focus on both and the most light on the bigger cockroach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't watch online videos because of my slow connection. What is the "new evidence"?

 

Then... how credible is the sourcing? Given the initial lack of evidence found by the NYTimes, I'd want new evidence checked with extreme care. For one thing, Russian intelligence has meddled in US elections before, backing Trump, and hoaxing is a favorite technique. So if, say, any supporting documents suddenly appeared I would want them closely examined to make sure they aren't forgeries, or any gaps in their provenance.

 

While law enforcement and the media investigate Tara Reade's allegations, I hope they also investigate Tara Reade. Paranoid? Maybe. Perilously close to conspiracy-theorizing, I know. But we live in strange times, with known hidden actors and limits that once seemed uncrossable being crossed weekly.

 

Dean Shomshak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "new evidence" is a clip from the Larry King Show of a woman calling in in 1993, purportedly Tara Reade's mother (although not identified during the call), claiming that her daughter was a staffer for "a prominent senator" who "could not get through" proper channels with a complaint, but chose not to go to the press "out of respect" for the senator. This was from a show with former senator Howard Baker, former national security advisor Richard Allen, and Lois Romano of the Washington Post. It's not clear from the clip what the subject of the discussion was, but it seems to imply whistle-blowing of some sort. The rest of the YouTube video is of the host of the channel making some valid points about a woman complaining of sexual impropriety not being believed by groups claiming to help when the subject is someone they like, and  Biden supporters trying to sweep this under the rug; amidst a lot of unnecessary posturing by the host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump to order meat plants to stay open as worker deaths rise

 

Quote

In comments to the media, Trump said he will sign an executive order on Tuesday to shield meatpacking companies from legal liability from worker claims of not being adequately protected.

It's unclear how the executive order will address worker safety as employees must stay on the job.

OSHA has chosen not to impose mandatory safety rules and instead only issued recommendations. On Sunday, the agency released new guidance to intended to shield workers from infection.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, he could have ordered the plant to stay open but offered to cover the medical expenses of any volunteers and granted half pay and guaranteed employment to those who wanted to stay home.

 

Instead he forbids the workers from any recourse to compensation in a suddenly high risk industry(which already had worker health issues before Covid-19) and protects the companies from any complaints or liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Grailknight said:

Instead he forbids the workers from any recourse to compensation in a suddenly high risk industry(which already had worker health issues before Covid-19) and protects the companies from any complaints or liability.

 

Thank you for highlighting that specifically.  Devil is in the details... and people forget that easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the Tara Reade-Biden thing.  I will only say, just make sure as info comes out we don't do any mental hurdles to exonerate Biden in our minds, when we have  condemned others in the recent past of the same or similar.  My personal interest, I hope, will be in the truth.  The consequences must fall as they may, for me.

 

Note: Just laying it out how I am going to stand personally on the matter.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...