Author Topic: 2020 POTUS Candidates  (Read 292313 times)

skp

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Location: oh
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2800 on: March 29, 2020, 11:34:15 AM »
OK. I thought it was a well known fact.  OK got it icky and creepy only. 
But Biden still isn't a done deal.  It isn't a choice between him or Trump. Yet. The convention hasn't happen  You can back out.  You can investigate.   Is there any talk of investigations?  And there will be more primaries.  It will be interesting to see how many vote for Biden now.
Does anyone think he should be investigated and what the chances of that happening are?  Any thoughts about how this might effect him in the primaries going foreward?

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2657
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2801 on: March 29, 2020, 11:36:46 AM »
OK. I thought it was a well known fact.  OK got it icky and creepy only. 
But Biden still isn't a done deal.  It isn't a choice between him or Trump. Yet. The convention hasn't happen  You can back out.  You can investigate.   Is there any talk of investigations?  And there will be more primaries.  It will be interesting to see how many vote for Biden now.
Does anyone think he should be investigated and what the chances of that happening are?

Absolutely should be investigated.  As should the tons of allegations against Trump.

Chances of that happening with the Dems? I am not sure.  They've pushed a few politicians out over less serious allegations but the stakes weren't so high.  I suspect they will push not to investigate this, but I am a cynic.

Chances of it happening with the GOP re: Trump? Zero.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2802 on: March 29, 2020, 01:37:56 PM »
I think it depends on how much attention and credibility this ends up building. You can see a few dems trying to line up and take the nomination. I think someone like Cuomo is trying to present himself as an acceptable presidential nomination should Biden be forced to withdraw or have his votes vacated. It's only going to happen if Biden take +60% of the delegates and thus Bernie likely still wouldn't have enough support to claim the nomination at the convention. There's still the undertones of a brokered convention mumbling about. We won't know for sure until come June, and party leaders see where the delegate count falls to make their moves.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2803 on: March 29, 2020, 06:05:37 PM »
Trump has turned his daily virus press conference into a wonderful sales pitch for what he is now doing.  He can be criticized for his former inaction, but that can be sold off as "water downstream."  I simply can't envision Joe Biden making any headway against this showman.

Can't the Democrats draft some young charismatic person to counter Trump?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16649
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2804 on: March 29, 2020, 06:27:46 PM »
Trump has turned his daily virus press conference into a wonderful sales pitch for what he is now doing.  He can be criticized for his former inaction, but that can be sold off as "water downstream."  I simply can't envision Joe Biden making any headway against this showman.

Can't the Democrats draft some young charismatic person to counter Trump?


No.  They seem to have spoken quite loudly on this matter.  Their representative can be centrist or somewhat left wing, but he absolutely has to be old, white, male, and relatively devoid of charisma.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5668
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2805 on: March 29, 2020, 06:47:28 PM »
Trump has turned his daily virus press conference into a wonderful sales pitch for what he is now doing.  He can be criticized for his former inaction, but that can be sold off as "water downstream."  I simply can't envision Joe Biden making any headway against this showman.

Can't the Democrats draft some young charismatic person to counter Trump?


No.  They seem to have spoken quite loudly on this matter.  Their representative can be centrist or somewhat left wing, but he absolutely has to be old, white, male, and relatively devoid of charisma.

I mean, only this time around, but yeah.

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3137
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2806 on: April 01, 2020, 10:28:05 AM »
Consider if Biden chose Cuomo as VP.  This would be reneging on his promise to choose a woman, of course.  Bad idea?  Terrible idea?  Good idea?

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5668
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2807 on: April 01, 2020, 10:31:14 AM »
Consider if Biden chose Cuomo as VP.  This would be reneging on his promise to choose a woman, of course.  Bad idea?  Terrible idea?  Good idea?

I think it's pretty meh. I think going back on his statement that he would be choosing a woman would bite him in the ass.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2808 on: April 01, 2020, 10:56:26 AM »
Consider if Biden chose Cuomo as VP.  This would be reneging on his promise to choose a woman, of course.  Bad idea?  Terrible idea?  Good idea?

In isolation it would potentially be a good idea (because he currently holds political office, Cuomo is doing a much better job of being a visible presence to americans in this crisis*) than Biden. Biden has basically disappeared from the news entirely as the seriousness of the crisis became apparent.** Definitely downsides to Cuomo as well, but I could see the case to be made for him.

But after what Biden said in the last debate, I don't think there is any way he could pick Cuomo (or anyone who isn't a woman) without it blowing up in his face.

This may end up being an good illustration of how openly committing to rule out half the population (either half) from consideration can come back to bite oneself on ones own ass.

*I'm not in new york and I certainly see to read about/hear about/see him constantly in the news.

**And, to be fair, also as the outcome of the democratic primary because clear.

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3137
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2809 on: April 02, 2020, 10:39:58 AM »
Not surprisingly, the Democratic National Convention has been moved out a month from July to August due to COVID-19.

I don't think this really changes much in the overall calculus.  Perhaps a bit bad for Biden in the short term as I personally think Sanders will stick around until the convention so the consolidation of the party will be delayed another month.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2810 on: April 02, 2020, 11:06:14 AM »
Not surprisingly, the Democratic National Convention has been moved out a month from July to August due to COVID-19.

I don't think this really changes much in the overall calculus.  Perhaps a bit bad for Biden in the short term as I personally think Sanders will stick around until the convention so the consolidation of the party will be delayed another month.

From what I've read from political statisticians the DNC and RNC don't do all that much anymore.  Any 'bump' the nominee might receive is both trivial and fleeting, as the audience is overwhelmingly politically active supporters of that particular party. Excluding the very unlikely outcome of a contested convention (which we haven't had in over 40 years) there is no surprise reveal.  Presidential debates have a larger impact.

Moving the convention from July to August?  Meh... it will still happen, it will still get the passionate supporters riled up and some headlines in papers and footage on TV.  But by-and-large we're just trading some free publicity in July for August.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2811 on: April 03, 2020, 07:42:28 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5815
  • Location: Avalon
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2812 on: April 03, 2020, 08:12:32 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.
Well, attention has been elsewhere.

Another problem is to find a solution which is not worse than letting it go.  If these allegations had been made a year ago (and I can see no reason why they should not have been, or why now is better for the complainant than then) the response would have been likely very different.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2813 on: April 03, 2020, 08:33:02 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2814 on: April 03, 2020, 08:35:36 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

I take the accusations very seriously. Certain posters on the other hand...

ETA: This was unclear. I wasn't accusing anyone of not taking the accusations seriously, I was saying I don't take certain posters seriously.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 11:01:18 AM by Davnasty »

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2815 on: April 03, 2020, 09:34:48 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2816 on: April 03, 2020, 09:36:13 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

I think you are the one who has not read it.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2817 on: April 03, 2020, 09:40:10 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

I think you are the one who has not read it.

^^ bingo.

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2657
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2818 on: April 03, 2020, 09:43:55 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

I think you are the one who has not read it.

^^ bingo.

+1

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2819 on: April 03, 2020, 10:06:34 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

A person who is currently NOT an elected official, and you are concerned that after a week ... what exactly?  Iíve seen lots of commentary that we should not nominate someone if these allegations are true. But as the convention is in August, why are you surprised after one week of confusing reports?

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2820 on: April 03, 2020, 10:16:30 AM »
I think we would both agree that Presidents really have little control over the economies in which they preside (despite Trump's love of controlling tariffs). Any business can fake profits for a good long while. You don't have to look far to see companies like VGR or OMI that had big dividend payouts. They continued to add to their debt in order to continue paying those dividends. As long as your capital investment is outpacing your debt, then "hey, you're doing fantastic!". The fact though is that companies that practice this are taking on huge financial risks and once the next bad quarter rolls around, suddenly people recognize it for what it is. Not a cash machine, but simply a company that is leveraging itself in order to make cash payments to investors.

The economy right now is humming. But debts are piling up. The interest rate is being pressured to stay low. Tariffs are estimated to cost the average US household around $800 annually. Corporate tax reductions mean there is less room in the budget for welfare when lay-offs come. The government has no room to provide a stimulus when the economy would actually need and use it. Deregulation means companies will be more willing to destroy public goods and resources in order to make a profit. And economists are predicting that another yield inversion is likely coming in 2020.

Trump decided to pump up the economy 5 years too early for really no reason. Companies didn't know what to do with the money except pocket it. So no I don't think the tax cuts, tariffs, etc. have really done much to change the course of our economy. And instead all the risk factors are increasing for really no valuable trade-off.

If only this whole situation weren't so predictable...

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Dallas
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2821 on: April 03, 2020, 10:54:35 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

big_owl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 895
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2822 on: April 03, 2020, 11:17:09 AM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

I'd like to see them use it as an excuse to find a more inspirational candidate.  Because watching JB in his home studio is....beyond painful.  He makes trump look young and full of vigor. 

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16649
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2823 on: April 03, 2020, 11:43:33 AM »
It's hard for octogenarians to look young and full of vigor . . . being that they're old, set in their ways, and on the verge of death.


At this point, the only real alternative to Joe is Bernie Sanders.

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2657
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2824 on: April 03, 2020, 12:06:23 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

I'd like to see them use it as an excuse to find a more inspirational candidate.  Because watching JB in his home studio is....beyond painful.  He makes trump look young and full of vigor.

Well, in theory that's good. But who?  Presumably everyone who wanted to be president ran for president, and most of them didn't excite that many voters. 

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2825 on: April 03, 2020, 12:27:59 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Havenít heard such comments yet. In general these things seem to be taken very seriously among Dems as of late. Seems to me that one week for someone not in office doesnít equate to not taking charges seriously.

What?  Just read this thread.

I think you are the one who has not read it.

If more accusations from other women come forward I definitely think it could doom Biden's primary bid.

Oh, FFS

We are in a DESPERATE situation with the current administration, led by someone who has committed and continues to commit multiple heinous acts.

I DO NOT CARE what Biden did or didnít do xx years ago.

Plus, based on the link posted above: not a reputable major news source, a questionable accuser with vague accusations, and ALMOST THIRTY YEARS AGO.

What are you looking for?

If he did this, is it wrong? Yes.
Is it concerning? Yes.
Should it be investigated? Yes.

Currently, though, we have a President that has admitted to sexual assault vs a candidate that is accused of sexual assault.

However, Trump has been accused of raping 12/13 year olds with Epstein and those events were corroborated by Epstein's assistant. Charges were brought and then dropped on 2 separate occasions.

Just want to point out that we have a President who has not only admitted to sexual assault, but has also been accused of sexual assault, including rape, even rape of a minor, multiple times, probably dozens of times.

In fact, just looked this up... these are the named accusers.  https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-rape-sexual-assault-minor-wife-business-victims-roy-moore-713531

So, turns out, like I said...a lot of "whataboutism" comparisons to Trump as a way to deflect from the Biden story at least a couple posts about the story/woman not being believable.

Carry on.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2826 on: April 03, 2020, 12:35:07 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5815
  • Location: Avalon
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2827 on: April 03, 2020, 12:44:39 PM »
What investigation, precisely, do you think could be done?  It's a "he said she said", with no indication that there were any witnesses.  Did the accuser mention the assault at any point before this?  For Franken there was a photograph and his own admissions.  For Kavanaugh there was corroboration in the form of his diary, his obvious lies, the witnesses and Blasey Ford's previous disclosures.  If there is anything to investigate in relation to Biden I think it should be investigated, but as far as I am aware no lines of investigation have been proposed.

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2828 on: April 03, 2020, 12:48:02 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

You literally quoted calls to investigate in your previous post.

It seems to me that everyone except OzzieandHarriet is being entirely consistent.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2829 on: April 03, 2020, 12:50:26 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

Thanks D&S. I really thought I was going a little crazy until your responses. I can't understand how anyone can say that this isn't whataboutism for Trump who almost certainly has done worse things, admittedly. People keep bringing up Franken as a good example of the Democrats handling things well. I agree! But as D&S said, it's looking like this is being handled very differently. Like it or not, this is an accusation that is completely credible on the face of it, and it's not being handled consistently by some Democrats in this thread and some that I've encountered in real life. That being said, I've also encountered several in real life and on this thread that have said, we will treat this credible accusation as such and would never vote for someone who is a rapist.

big_owl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 895
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2830 on: April 03, 2020, 01:07:38 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

I'd like to see them use it as an excuse to find a more inspirational candidate.  Because watching JB in his home studio is....beyond painful.  He makes trump look young and full of vigor.

Well, in theory that's good. But who?  Presumably everyone who wanted to be president ran for president, and most of them didn't excite that many voters.

Not my job to solve that one but this is I think the most pathetic lineup we've had in my lifetime. 

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2831 on: April 03, 2020, 01:31:10 PM »
Well, in theory that's good. But who?  Presumably everyone who wanted to be president ran for president, and most of them didn't excite that many voters.

Not my job to solve that one but this is I think the most pathetic lineup we've had in my lifetime.

Really? I'd take this election's lineup over the options we had in 2016, and it's not even close.

Biden doesn't inspire much excitement, but at least voters don't seem to feel he holds them in contempt (the reaction Clinton provoked in a lot of voters). Sanders was in both '16 and '20 so cancels out.

Booker, Yang, Warren and Buttigieg all inspired a lot more passion and rallied a lot more support than any of the also rans in 2016* and I'd have taken any of them as the nominee over the top two finishers in 2016.

*Including such hits as Lincoln "Let's put american on the metric system" Chafee, and Martin "I own a guitar" O'Malley.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 02:03:00 PM by maizeman »

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2832 on: April 03, 2020, 01:37:12 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

Thanks D&S. I really thought I was going a little crazy until your responses. I can't understand how anyone can say that this isn't whataboutism for Trump who almost certainly has done worse things, admittedly. People keep bringing up Franken as a good example of the Democrats handling things well. I agree! But as D&S said, it's looking like this is being handled very differently. Like it or not, this is an accusation that is completely credible on the face of it, and it's not being handled consistently by some Democrats in this thread and some that I've encountered in real life. That being said, I've also encountered several in real life and on this thread that have said, we will treat this credible accusation as such and would never vote for someone who is a rapist.

First, whataboutism is a logical fallacy when used to excuse one person's behavior based on another person's behavior. I haven't seen anyone trying to excuse Biden's (alleged) behavior but rather they are saying they would still vote for Biden as the lesser of two evil's. It's not whataboutism if it's literally the other side of a binary choice. If someone used Roy Moore as the comparison, that would be whataboutism.

Second, I can only speak for myself here, but I have been consistent on my opinions between Kavanaugh and Biden. I recall when I first heard someone had accused Kavanaugh my reaction was "It's just an accusation, so what". It wasn't until more information about the circumstances and more importantly Kavanaughs's behavior in response to the accusation entered into the equation that I thought he should be replaced.

On the concept of "believe women" I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of that phrase. It does not mean that allegations=guilt. Can you imagine a world where any politician could be effectively removed from a race with just an allegation? That would be absurd.

It means that we should take accusations at face value and not dismiss them because we assume they are born of ulterior motives. It means that we should not automatically assume the accuser is a liar because we don't want their claim to be true.

Believe women ≠ presumption of guilt
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 01:40:19 PM by Davnasty »

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2657
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2833 on: April 03, 2020, 02:04:31 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

Do you have some sort of problem with reading comprehension?

What part of my sentence on March 29th do you not grasp?  "Absolutely should be investigated.  As should the tons of allegations against Trump."

I'm really sick of you constantly saying that the Dem voters on this board just don't seem to care about this allegation against Biden.  You fixated on one poster, and then extrapolated to some imaginary group of 'all of us' that exists in your imagination.  FUCKING STOP IT.

skp

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Location: oh
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2834 on: April 03, 2020, 02:05:45 PM »
I wonder how many Democrats even know anything about these new allegations on Biden.  I admittedly "half follow" the news.  Mostly I get my political news from online MSN face page and here. My husband has Fox news on Sirius radio, and I will get tidbits here and there so I guess you can say I get some from that. I heard nothing about it on FOX news.  Just for giggles,  I checked out the MSN politics section today, and I didn't see anything.  That's why upthread I didn't think this was anything new with Biden.  I thought it was the same old same old accusations the Dems already knew about. Is CNN covering it?  I know the coronavirus is taking up 99% of the new. 

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2835 on: April 03, 2020, 02:33:47 PM »
I wonder how many Democrats even know anything about these new allegations on Biden.  I admittedly "half follow" the news.  Mostly I get my political news from online MSN face page and here. My husband has Fox news on Sirius radio, and I will get tidbits here and there so I guess you can say I get some from that. I heard nothing about it on FOX news.  Just for giggles,  I checked out the MSN politics section today, and I didn't see anything.  That's why upthread I didn't think this was anything new with Biden.  I thought it was the same old same old accusations the Dems already knew about. Is CNN covering it?  I know the coronavirus is taking up 99% of the new.

I think you could fairly rephrase the question ďhow many people know anything about these allegations.Ē Itís not a huge priority while thousands die and millions are losing their job every week, particularly since it has been only a week. Donít rush to conclusions about how this might play out
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 02:55:36 PM by nereo »

big_owl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 895
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2836 on: April 03, 2020, 02:49:26 PM »
Well, in theory that's good. But who?  Presumably everyone who wanted to be president ran for president, and most of them didn't excite that many voters.

Not my job to solve that one but this is I think the most pathetic lineup we've had in my lifetime.

Really? I'd take this election's lineup over the options we had in 2016, and it's not even close.

Biden doesn't inspire much excitement, but at least voters don't seem to feel he holds them in contempt (the reaction Clinton provoked in a lot of voters). Sanders was in both '16 and '20 so cancels out.

Booker, Yang, Warren and Buttigieg all inspired a lot more passion and rallied a lot more support than any of the also rans in 2016* and I'd have taken any of them as the nominee over the top two finishers in 2016.

*Including such hits as Lincoln "Let's put american on the metric system" Chafee, and Martin "I own a guitar" O'Malley.

Well yes, it *was* more inspiring, but now we've got three almost 80yo white dudes left.   And frankly, put JB and DT in a debate and I think DT comes across as more together, scary as it is.  But basically I'm expecting Grumpy Old Men remake. I'm a single issue voter so JB will get my vote but it's gonna be the saddest vote of my life. 

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2837 on: April 03, 2020, 02:49:54 PM »
Sexual assault allegation against Biden beyond the "uncomfortable hugging" stuff. Is this enough to derail his nomination? Thoughts...?

https://newsone.com/3917043/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accuser-breaks-silence/

A week ago the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination was accused of sexual assault and....no one cared.  A lot of, "Well, I don't believe her" from "believe survivors" liberals.  Or "yeah, but he hasn't raped as many women as Don" gross excuses.

Cool, cool.

Serious question: what do you want people to do about this? What is it that you'd like to see being said and done? What in your estimation is the right course for pro-Biden or pro-Democratic voters to take with this info?

Well, I've seen basically no calls to investigate the claim (and, I realize - as we all should - that it's almost impossibly to fully "investigate" 30-year old claims and come with the magic smoking gun of evidence that would prove/disprove the claim).  Not like we saw with Blasey Ford.  So, some consistency there would be nice.  Either we should treat all accusations with seriousness or not.  Dismissing certain allegations because they're inconvenient just makes one a hypocrite.

As for "what to do," I'm not in a position to tell people what to do.  Certainly, post-Weinstein people have made big deals (and rightfully so) about sexual harassment and sexual assault, even allegations that never rose to criminal conviction.  This, strangely (Ö/s), does not seem to be getting the same rigor and drumming up fervor like, say, Al Franken.  There is no rallying around the woman (notably Gillibrand) like in the Franken case.

So if I boil it down to one thing, it's just consistency.  Being principled.  Either you care about sexual assault allegations made against politicians/people in power and want to get as close to the truth as possible (like I said, almost impossible in a lot of these situations) or you don't.  But don't play up "these should be investigated!" or "believe survivors!" if you only do it when the allegations are made against people you don't particularly like.  Franken was a good case of people being principled.  Biden, for whatever reason, appears to be getting a pass.  People are dismissing Reade like she's a Bernie or Trump plant.

Thanks D&S. I really thought I was going a little crazy until your responses. I can't understand how anyone can say that this isn't whataboutism for Trump who almost certainly has done worse things, admittedly. People keep bringing up Franken as a good example of the Democrats handling things well. I agree! But as D&S said, it's looking like this is being handled very differently. Like it or not, this is an accusation that is completely credible on the face of it, and it's not being handled consistently by some Democrats in this thread and some that I've encountered in real life. That being said, I've also encountered several in real life and on this thread that have said, we will treat this credible accusation as such and would never vote for someone who is a rapist.

First, whataboutism is a logical fallacy when used to excuse one person's behavior based on another person's behavior. I haven't seen anyone trying to excuse Biden's (alleged) behavior but rather they are saying they would still vote for Biden as the lesser of two evil's. It's not whataboutism if it's literally the other side of a binary choice. If someone used Roy Moore as the comparison, that would be whataboutism.

Second, I can only speak for myself here, but I have been consistent on my opinions between Kavanaugh and Biden. I recall when I first heard someone had accused Kavanaugh my reaction was "It's just an accusation, so what". It wasn't until more information about the circumstances and more importantly Kavanaughs's behavior in response to the accusation entered into the equation that I thought he should be replaced.

On the concept of "believe women" I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of that phrase. It does not mean that allegations=guilt. Can you imagine a world where any politician could be effectively removed from a race with just an allegation? That would be absurd.

It means that we should take accusations at face value and not dismiss them because we assume they are born of ulterior motives. It means that we should not automatically assume the accuser is a liar because we don't want their claim to be true.

Believe women ≠ presumption of guilt

Well, someone did mention Moore earlier....but that aside point taken about not excusing the behavior.

That's fair enough about your personal perspective on Kavanaugh, but I feel that this is not the case for everyone on that topic.

If that's the case, then what is the proper response if it's a 30 year old accusation where someone accused someone else of rape and someone denies it. There's no way to completely prove it, of course. There's always reasonable doubt and burden of proof.

So, I have questions for you. One, if it's a "simple" accusation with no way to prove it but also made by someone who we know knew the person, was almost certainly in a situation where this could have happened, but beyond that there's no proof - a lot (not all) of proof for Kavanaugh was that he was there at the party, he reacted horribly to the accusations, etc, and I think there was plenty of reason to disqualify him from the position. This level of proof fits a large number of rape accusations, where it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, reasonable doubt doesn't seem to be the bar that needs to be met for disqualifying someone from an elected/appointed position, and I don't believe it should be. It doesn't need to meet that level, again, it's a big nation out there, we can select someone else.

I'll also phrase it differently, what if it was to the level of Trump's "proof" that he has commited rape that everyone on here says with assurity that he did. That still isn't courtroom law beyond reasonable doubt level (or it hasn't been proven to be that level yet), yet people still talk with the full confidence he did it and mention it as a completely disqualifying thing for being president. What are your thoughts on that?

Finally, let's say there was DNA evidence level of stuff with witnesses and video that Biden did it. What do you think the morality would be for voting for him or not voting for him. I feel that to vote for him in that situation is inherently unethical. Obviously this won't be the case with that level of proof. It's just a thought experiment. However, I also think at some point even with less proof, it also crosses this threshold. Where that is, is a gray area. However, it seems that you do not think that it would unethical to vote for him even in the most extreme situation. Am I correct in this?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16649
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2838 on: April 04, 2020, 12:34:32 PM »
Trump's actions, comments, and history have well marked him as a sexual predator.  I'm not sure the same can be said of Biden at this point.  But assuming that was the case, then I think a large number of people would have ethical problems voting for him.  I certainly wouldn't vote for a person like that.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2839 on: April 04, 2020, 02:05:41 PM »
Trump's actions, comments, and history have well marked him as a sexual predator.  I'm not sure the same can be said of Biden at this point.  But assuming that was the case, then I think a large number of people would have ethical problems voting for him.  I certainly wouldn't vote for a person like that.

You can't - Yer across the border.  I'll bet the vast majority of Canadian politicians have more integrity than the two that will be running down here to be commander in chief.

ministashy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 179
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2840 on: April 06, 2020, 02:27:50 AM »
I wonder how many Democrats even know anything about these new allegations on Biden.  I admittedly "half follow" the news.  Mostly I get my political news from online MSN face page and here. My husband has Fox news on Sirius radio, and I will get tidbits here and there so I guess you can say I get some from that. I heard nothing about it on FOX news.  Just for giggles,  I checked out the MSN politics section today, and I didn't see anything.  That's why upthread I didn't think this was anything new with Biden.  I thought it was the same old same old accusations the Dems already knew about. Is CNN covering it?  I know the coronavirus is taking up 99% of the new.

So after reading the allegations here and elsewhere, I did some research.  So far this writeup by Salon seems to be the best overview of Reade's allegations, and why the big news networks might not be so eager to jump all over them.  (Hint: it's not because there's a vast conspiracy to elect Biden.)  https://www.salon.com/2020/03/31/a-woman-accuses-joe-biden-of-sexual-assault-and-all-hell-breaks-loose-online-heres-what-we-know/

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2841 on: April 06, 2020, 07:27:13 AM »
...snip
Thanks D&S. I really thought I was going a little crazy until your responses. I can't understand how anyone can say that this isn't whataboutism for Trump who almost certainly has done worse things, admittedly. People keep bringing up Franken as a good example of the Democrats handling things well. I agree! But as D&S said, it's looking like this is being handled very differently. Like it or not, this is an accusation that is completely credible on the face of it, and it's not being handled consistently by some Democrats in this thread and some that I've encountered in real life. That being said, I've also encountered several in real life and on this thread that have said, we will treat this credible accusation as such and would never vote for someone who is a rapist.

First, whataboutism is a logical fallacy when used to excuse one person's behavior based on another person's behavior. I haven't seen anyone trying to excuse Biden's (alleged) behavior but rather they are saying they would still vote for Biden as the lesser of two evil's. It's not whataboutism if it's literally the other side of a binary choice. If someone used Roy Moore as the comparison, that would be whataboutism.

Second, I can only speak for myself here, but I have been consistent on my opinions between Kavanaugh and Biden. I recall when I first heard someone had accused Kavanaugh my reaction was "It's just an accusation, so what". It wasn't until more information about the circumstances and more importantly Kavanaughs's behavior in response to the accusation entered into the equation that I thought he should be replaced.

On the concept of "believe women" I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of that phrase. It does not mean that allegations=guilt. Can you imagine a world where any politician could be effectively removed from a race with just an allegation? That would be absurd.

It means that we should take accusations at face value and not dismiss them because we assume they are born of ulterior motives. It means that we should not automatically assume the accuser is a liar because we don't want their claim to be true.

Believe women ≠ presumption of guilt

Well, someone did mention Moore earlier....but that aside point taken about not excusing the behavior.

That's fair enough about your personal perspective on Kavanaugh, but I feel that this is not the case for everyone on that topic.

If that's the case, then what is the proper response if it's a 30 year old accusation where someone accused someone else of rape and someone denies it. There's no way to completely prove it, of course. There's always reasonable doubt and burden of proof.

My response is to not have much opinion one way or the other. I don't know the accuser and I wasn't there, why would I think she's lying? I don't really know Biden and I wasn't there, why wouldn't I trust him?

Quote
So, I have questions for you. One, if it's a "simple" accusation with no way to prove it but also made by someone who we know knew the person, was almost certainly in a situation where this could have happened, but beyond that there's no proof - a lot (not all) of proof for Kavanaugh was that he was there at the party, he reacted horribly to the accusations, etc, and I think there was plenty of reason to disqualify him from the position. This level of proof fits a large number of rape accusations, where it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, reasonable doubt doesn't seem to be the bar that needs to be met for disqualifying someone from an elected/appointed position, and I don't believe it should be. It doesn't need to meet that level, again, it's a big nation out there, we can select someone else.

I don't see a question here but I agree that my bar is lower than the law's. However in the case of Kavanaugh I thought his behavior alone was enough that he should have been rejected, even if he was not guilty of the primary accusation. He lied about other things in the process of defending himself.

Quote
I'll also phrase it differently, what if it was to the level of Trump's "proof" that he has commited rape that everyone on here says with assurity that he did. That still isn't courtroom law beyond reasonable doubt level (or it hasn't been proven to be that level yet), yet people still talk with the full confidence he did it and mention it as a completely disqualifying thing for being president. What are your thoughts on that?

I can't say with certainty that Trump is guilty of that specific accusation and I don't think any of us should pretend we can. Where I mentioned this was just to give an example of something even worse that Trump has been accused of as I believe that was the context of the conversation.

On the other hand I trust Trump less so I give him less of a benefit of doubt. He earned that reputation fair and square. There's a well documented history of Trump lying without hesitation in any instance where the lie benefits him (and sometimes when it doesn't). He's not even good at it. I don't kid myself that I can spot your average liar, but if had to trust my instincts and decide when Trump is lying I feel like I could do so with a decent level of confidence.

His 40 year running history of sexual misconduct allegations (and occasional boasts/confessions) doesn't help his case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Quote
Finally, let's say there was DNA evidence level of stuff with witnesses and video that Biden did it. What do you think the morality would be for voting for him or not voting for him. I feel that to vote for him in that situation is inherently unethical. Obviously this won't be the case with that level of proof. It's just a thought experiment. However, I also think at some point even with less proof, it also crosses this threshold. Where that is, is a gray area. However, it seems that you do not think that it would unethical to vote for him even in the most extreme situation. Am I correct in this?

I think I've already answered this so I'll try a different way of explaining my position. In the unique situation of voting for president in our current system, I firmly believe that not voting for a candidate's opponent is effectively supporting that candidate. So no, I do not believe it is unethical to vote for the lesser evil and in turn vote against the greater evil. If I personally could choose that the lesser evil could be replaced with a decent human being then I would do so and vote for them instead.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2020, 07:36:20 AM by Davnasty »

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2842 on: April 06, 2020, 08:46:04 AM »

So, I have questions for you. One, if it's a "simple" accusation with no way to prove it but also made by someone who we know knew the person, was almost certainly in a situation where this could have happened, but beyond that there's no proof - a lot (not all) of proof for Kavanaugh was that he was there at the party, he reacted horribly to the accusations, etc, and I think there was plenty of reason to disqualify him from the position. This level of proof fits a large number of rape accusations, where it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, reasonable doubt doesn't seem to be the bar that needs to be met for disqualifying someone from an elected/appointed position, and I don't believe it should be. It doesn't need to meet that level, again, it's a big nation out there, we can select someone else.

I don't see a question here but I agree that my bar is lower than the law's. However in the case of Kavanaugh I thought his behavior alone was enough that he should have been rejected, even if he was not guilty of the primary accusation. He lied about other things in the process of defending himself.

Quote
I'll also phrase it differently, what if it was to the level of Trump's "proof" that he has commited rape that everyone on here says with assurity that he did. That still isn't courtroom law beyond reasonable doubt level (or it hasn't been proven to be that level yet), yet people still talk with the full confidence he did it and mention it as a completely disqualifying thing for being president. What are your thoughts on that?

I can't say with certainty that Trump is guilty of that specific accusation and I don't think any of us should pretend we can. Where I mentioned this was just to give an example of something even worse that Trump has been accused of as I believe that was the context of the conversation.

On the other hand I trust Trump less so I give him less of a benefit of doubt. He earned that reputation fair and square. There's a well documented history of Trump lying without hesitation in any instance where the lie benefits him (and sometimes when it doesn't). He's not even good at it. I don't kid myself that I can spot your average liar, but if had to trust my instincts and decide when Trump is lying I feel like I could do so with a decent level of confidence.

His 40 year running history of sexual misconduct allegations (and occasional boasts/confessions) doesn't help his case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Quote
Finally, let's say there was DNA evidence level of stuff with witnesses and video that Biden did it. What do you think the morality would be for voting for him or not voting for him. I feel that to vote for him in that situation is inherently unethical. Obviously this won't be the case with that level of proof. It's just a thought experiment. However, I also think at some point even with less proof, it also crosses this threshold. Where that is, is a gray area. However, it seems that you do not think that it would unethical to vote for him even in the most extreme situation. Am I correct in this?

I think I've already answered this so I'll try a different way of explaining my position. In the unique situation of voting for president in our current system, I firmly believe that not voting for a candidate's opponent is effectively supporting that candidate. So no, I do not believe it is unethical to vote for the lesser evil and in turn vote against the greater evil. If I personally could choose that the lesser evil could be replaced with a decent human being then I would do so and vote for them instead.

Fair enough on the assessment of Trump. Oops, I did not really ask questions in my points well. My steps were really to lead up to at what point should something "unproveable" but heinous enough and with a great enough possibility impact whether a person should be disqualified from going for an elected/appointed position, meaning would they be disqualified at this point or the next point or the "Trump level" or whatnot? My gut feeling which hasn't been helped by this thread is that liberals' views on this won't be the same level when it's a Democrat whose accused and the stakes are high (i.e. Franken wasn't big enough stakes, so he was handled one way but this is bigger so it won't really be treated the same). How they handle the allegation in the coming months will prove or disprove this and affect my opinion one way or the other, for whatever that's worth, lol.

That's fair enough, I just wanted to make sure I understood what you were saying. I now fully understand and firmly disagree with your sentiment. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that. I've seen too many over-intense this is the end of all things, beginning (in my experience of paying attention to politics) with Clinton then Bush then Obama and now Trump. It's been consistent on both sides of the aisle. Everything is a black swan, we have to overlook everything to rally the troops and vote for the lesser of the two evil because the other guy is just so so so bad. Now is Trump worse than any of those three - certainly. I just think at some point, we have to take a stand and say on principle, I will not vote for someone if certain conditions are met, and I won't be swayed because the "stakes are so high."

J Boogie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2843 on: April 07, 2020, 02:06:54 PM »
At this point the Howard Schultz candidacy is starting to sound pretty attractive.

The DNC seems to have its hands tied and it would probably be unfair for them to declare a do over and move Mayor Pete or Sen. Klobuchar to the front of the line and they certainly don't want it to be Bernie. It seems like nothing short of hospitalization will stand in the way of a Biden nomination and if they somehow keep pushing a credibly accused and cognitively declining candidate that could cause all voters to see that same obstinate and glib DNC that Bernie voters see.

If the DNC refuses to change course, I could imagine an independent enjoying unprecedented popularity and someone like Schultz is actually pretty solid considering how crazy 3rd party candidates can be. If it were between him, Biden, and Trump - I would imagine most reasonable people could readily see he is by far the most qualified and capable. Thanks to the duopoly, we probably couldn't get anyone with recent political experience to run as independents other than someone like the recently exiled Justin Amash, whose appeal might be a little too narrow.

edited to add that this might be unlikely given that Schultz cited Biden as the reason he wouldn't need to run.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2020, 02:08:59 PM by J Boogie »

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2844 on: April 07, 2020, 02:42:55 PM »
Uhh Schultz already tried pushing a candidacy and he couldn't get through an interview without saying something stupid. He has even less credibility or experience to run country than Bloomberg and that went nowhere. I don't see how anywhere near a majority of people would come out to vote for Schultz.

I've yet to see an interview yet where Biden can make through a complete thought. And the thoughts that he does present are weak. When people in 2016 were saying that a rock would have beat Trump and Hillary, well, I guess they got their choice this time around.

There was a lot of talk about using the 25th to remove Trump early on in his presidency. I honestly don't see how we make it through a Biden presidency without him dying or being declared mentally unwell. It could be that the DNC's strategy here is to have a strong young VP that ends up taking on more of the speeches, interviews, and addresses. A VP who ends up more as an acting-President and basically guides Biden's hand. That's the only way I see Biden working.

v8rx7guy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
  • Location: Bellingham, WA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2845 on: April 07, 2020, 02:59:46 PM »
Uhh Schultz already tried pushing a candidacy and he couldn't get through an interview without saying something stupid. He has even less credibility or experience to run country than Bloomberg and that went nowhere. I don't see how anywhere near a majority of people would come out to vote for Schultz.

I've yet to see an interview yet where Biden can make through a complete thought. And the thoughts that he does present are weak. When people in 2016 were saying that a rock would have beat Trump and Hillary, well, I guess they got their choice this time around.

There was a lot of talk about using the 25th to remove Trump early on in his presidency. I honestly don't see how we make it through a Biden presidency without him dying or being declared mentally unwell. It could be that the DNC's strategy here is to have a strong young VP that ends up taking on more of the speeches, interviews, and addresses. A VP who ends up more as an acting-President and basically guides Biden's hand. That's the only way I see Biden working.

It amazes me that somehow Biden flopped out of the primaries as the leader, with so many incredible options available at the outset.  I don't know if I met one single person that actually had Biden as their top choice heading into the primaries... and yet here he is at #1.  I think Warren would be a super strong candidate right now in light of all the things happening.

Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 517
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2846 on: April 07, 2020, 04:35:35 PM »
Uhh Schultz already tried pushing a candidacy and he couldn't get through an interview without saying something stupid. He has even less credibility or experience to run country than Bloomberg and that went nowhere. I don't see how anywhere near a majority of people would come out to vote for Schultz.

I've yet to see an interview yet where Biden can make through a complete thought. And the thoughts that he does present are weak. When people in 2016 were saying that a rock would have beat Trump and Hillary, well, I guess they got their choice this time around.

There was a lot of talk about using the 25th to remove Trump early on in his presidency. I honestly don't see how we make it through a Biden presidency without him dying or being declared mentally unwell. It could be that the DNC's strategy here is to have a strong young VP that ends up taking on more of the speeches, interviews, and addresses. A VP who ends up more as an acting-President and basically guides Biden's hand. That's the only way I see Biden working.

It amazes me that somehow Biden flopped out of the primaries as the leader, with so many incredible options available at the outset.  I don't know if I met one single person that actually had Biden as their top choice heading into the primaries... and yet here he is at #1.  I think Warren would be a super strong candidate right now in light of all the things happening.

It's almost like this is a super shitty way to pick a nominee.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2847 on: April 07, 2020, 05:19:33 PM »
It's almost like this is a super shitty way to pick a nominee.

I don't necessarily disagree,* but what method of picking a nominee would you propose instead?

*I think the sole reason Biden is not the presumptive nominee is because people were so afraid of Sanders getting it and/or afraid of a brokered convention they lined up with whoever seemed most likely to stop him and it.

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2657
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2848 on: April 07, 2020, 05:34:40 PM »
Uhh Schultz already tried pushing a candidacy and he couldn't get through an interview without saying something stupid. He has even less credibility or experience to run country than Bloomberg and that went nowhere. I don't see how anywhere near a majority of people would come out to vote for Schultz.

I've yet to see an interview yet where Biden can make through a complete thought. And the thoughts that he does present are weak. When people in 2016 were saying that a rock would have beat Trump and Hillary, well, I guess they got their choice this time around.

There was a lot of talk about using the 25th to remove Trump early on in his presidency. I honestly don't see how we make it through a Biden presidency without him dying or being declared mentally unwell. It could be that the DNC's strategy here is to have a strong young VP that ends up taking on more of the speeches, interviews, and addresses. A VP who ends up more as an acting-President and basically guides Biden's hand. That's the only way I see Biden working.

It amazes me that somehow Biden flopped out of the primaries as the leader, with so many incredible options available at the outset.  I don't know if I met one single person that actually had Biden as their top choice heading into the primaries... and yet here he is at #1.  I think Warren would be a super strong candidate right now in light of all the things happening.

These two sentences almost certainly reflect a case of strong selection bias in your subgroup of acquaintances.

I didn't personally know anyone who had Biden as a first choice either, but that's a function of the context of my particular socio-cultural and economic/employment sampling pool, not Biden's level of objective support.  (I also found this giant pool of candidates far from 'incredible'.  I wasn't very happy with any of them, but I don't know if that was a common feeling.  I suspect not.)

Biden certainly didn't 'flop out of the primaries' to take the lead.  He was ALWAYS the leader in national polling, starting from before he entered the race or even gave a strong indication that he would run.  He entered the race as a fairly robust (numerically speaking) front-runner and led the whole time with the exception of a short window after the first couple primaries when Sanders mounted a brief but very strong challenge, which lasted only until Super Tuesday. All that sound and fury, all those debates, changed almost nothing about Biden's support or position as the front-runner.

So a whole lot of someones favored Biden as their choice from before he even entered the race, even if they are not someones that you and I happen to have spoken to.

Practically everyone I personally talked to was voting for Warren, yet she never gained much polling traction nationally.  My social circle consists mostly of middle to upper middle-class, white, highly educated, knowledge-economy-employed people (Warren's 'base'), so it seemed very surprising to me on an emotional level that she did so poorly nationally. In retrospect, of course, it seems pretty logical that my demographic's preference didn't dominate nationally.  I also knew a few Sanders supporters, and a few Klobuchar and Buttiegieg supporters.  I didn't know anyone who supported ANY of the other candidates of this huge cast, but that's likely only a function of my socio-cultural and employment position, not their support or lack thereof.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2020, 05:41:44 PM by wenchsenior »

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2849 on: April 07, 2020, 06:41:29 PM »
It's almost like this is a super shitty way to pick a nominee.

I don't necessarily disagree,* but what method of picking a nominee would you propose instead?

*I think the sole reason Biden is not the presumptive nominee is because people were so afraid of Sanders getting it and/or afraid of a brokered convention they lined up with whoever seemed most likely to stop him and it.

Not allowing three small states to determine who remains to run for the rest of the primary season. The memes that point out that the "racially diverse and tolerant Democratic Party chose two old white guys to represent them" bugs me because the Party didn't choose them and the population as a whole didn't choose them. Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina did.