Jump to content
mu2010

The Democratic Party

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

Well unfortunately you're right. The MeToo movement is going to be dead in the water. On what moral grounds can the Democrats criticize the behaviors of Trump and Kavanaugh, while elevating Biden, an alleged serial abuser who screwed over Anita Hill.

 

The MeToo movement will be as happy to use Biden as its champion as Christian family values conservatives were to use Trump as theirs.  Hypocrisy is seldom a fatal sin in politics, especially in two-party politics where both sides have to make peace with fellow travelers they'd rather not (unless you want to end up a jaded, friendless, and marginalized commentator even among those who could have been your allies).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, YABO713 said:

Here's my thoughts, FWIW:

 

1. Believing women is noble, and the burden of proof should always be on the accused in these situations, IMO. 

 

 

 

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

1 hour ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

The Democratic Party as it exists now is an explicitly anti-progressive organization. This is all out in the open. If progressive change is going to happen, it will have to either happen outside of the Democratic Party (and possibly electoral politics in general), or the party would have to be completely rebuilt.

 

The Democratic Party is the most progressive it has ever been in my 20-plus years of political awareness.  There was a time when I was a Democrat.  Now this board considers me a conservative (though of course this board leans strongly left, just not as left as you).

 

There were pro-life Democrats once upon a time.  The only even remotely prominently placed such person I'm aware of is the governor of Louisiana.

 

There were Democrats who supported traditional marriage once upon a time, and many more who at least paid lip service to the traditional ideal.  Not only are they all ancient history, but the Democratic vanguard has swept on to whether a man who declares himself a woman becomes a woman instead of a lunatic, and whether the state can and should deny otherwise universally accessible nonprofit tax exemptions to any religious institution on the losing side of a 5-4 Supreme Court decision not yet even five years old.

 

Single-payer has never had higher support, or at least not in the last 20 years.  I doubt it had that much support even when Eugene Debs was a political force.

 

MMT is effectively the animating monetary theory of even the Republican Party today.

 

Socialist or social-democratic policies that would have been absolutely unthinkable 20 years ago are now within the Democrats' Overton Window.  Not the country's, perhaps, but the party's.  Abolish ICE.  Forgive all student loans.  They might not yet be 51% of even the Democratic Party, but considering that they were starting from basically 0%, they've come a long way in a couple of decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^But the Establishment Democrats don't let any of those things actually happen. It doesn't matter if "the idea is out there" if it doesn't result in policy and platforms of the party... not just individual politicians withing the party who may or may not win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History is never over.

 

The fact that an idea goes from 1% to 30% or 40% support within a party is still quite significant.  At the very least, it means that something is no longer "fringe," at least within that party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

So I do NOT mean in a court of law. Lol not even close. My bad my wording was highly imperfect

 

I mean in the sense that Joe Biden needs to provide an affirmative defense as to why he didn't do it as a candidate. This cannot and should not include "this is a political hit job" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 

So I do NOT mean in a court of law. Lol not even close. My bad my wording was highly imperfect

 

I mean in the sense that Joe Biden needs to provide an affirmative defense as to why he didn't do it as a candidate. This cannot and should not include "this is a political hit job" 

Why should it be on the accused? That just reeks of unfairness.anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Even if it is not a court of law, you should not place the burden on an accused to show they are innocent, even in the court of public opinion. You are asking them to prove their innocence to even the most salacious rumor at that point.  Given people's thirst for power, you open the floodgates for anyone to accuse someone of anything from anytime in their history, and make that person answer to it without any evidence to corroborate otherwise.  You can destroy many good people by having such a standard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Well 1) Bernie was never my top choice and I didn't end up voting for him.  2) There is no jurisdiction that I'm aware of with investigative powers into this claim - it's past the statute of limitations.  The FBI "investigation" was a sham, but they, of course, did not have criminal jurisdiction nor subpoena power when looking into the Kavanaugh allegation(s).

 

I'm not asking people to do anything other than apply their principles consistently.  Did you believe Ford because she told her therapist and husband?  Why do you not believe Reade even though she told her neighbor, mother, etc.?

 

Had the pandemic not hit / Bernie not suspended his campaign, I would encourage people to vote their conscience considering there was a viable alternative candidate without sexual harassment and assault allegations in his past.

 

I think all such allegations have to be taken seriously, but I'm not more likely to believe one versus the other.  It's about what can be proven.  With Kavanaugh, I didn't like how Republicans didn't want to bother even vetting him properly, let alone take any allegations seriously.  With Biden, of course we have to take it seriously, but as you say that the SOL has passed even if there was an investigation into the matter.  So it comes down to who you believe and whether you're willing to take another chance on Trump based on the principle of something that may or may not have happened.  I guess everyone has to make that choice for themselves.  

Personally, if these claims could be verified, I'd want the Democrats to nominate someone else.  Since they can't seem to, my focus has to still be on beating Trump.  I don't think that's hypocrisy at all, but just what we have to work with at this point.  

 

A lot of people voted their conscience and we got the worst US leader in history who has done incredible damage to our institutions, as well as helping to cause the deaths of tens of thousands by refusing to either do his job or accept basic science. So yeah, I would rather people vote rationally once they've thought things through.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Do you think this is going to stop Fox News from running this round the clock from now until November?

 

No.  But the problem continues to be that so many people care what Fox News has to say about anything.  That they exist at all is an indictment on the American education system, as well as its general culture of embracing the lowest common denominator at every turn.  If it hadn't been this, they would've just found something else.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

The Democratic Party as it exists now is an explicitly anti-progressive organization. This is all out in the open. If progressive change is going to happen, it will have to either happen outside of the Democratic Party (and possibly electoral politics in general), or the party would have to be completely rebuilt.

 

This is tiresome.  Just vote for Trump and stop gaslighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

 

This is tiresome.  Just vote for Trump and stop gaslighting.

Sorry that you feel that way, and lack seem to lack any concept of criticizing the party from the left. You also seem to be unable to comprehend that I would still vote for Biden despite my criticisms. He is marginally better than Trump, but basically my one vote has now become worth far less than what it was before, in terms of the change that it can bring about. The right wing of the party is basically holding everyone hostage saying, here, you gotta vote for us or you get Trump again. Their explicit strategy this election is to move to the right. And the funny thing is that Trump can run to Biden's left when it is convenient. The entire Democrat strategy is hinging on Trump massively screwing up and Biden keeping upright and semi-coherent, which is entirely possible, but a very poor hand to gamble our future. And as I've said previously, another mediocre Democrat presidency paves the way for an even worse wannabe-fascist down the road, just as Clinton did for Bush and Obama did for Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Why should it be on the accused? That just reeks of unfairness.anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Even if it is not a court of law, you should not place the burden on an accused to show they are innocent, even in the court of public opinion. You are asking them to prove their innocence to even the most salacious rumor at that point.  Given people's thirst for power, you open the floodgates for anyone to accuse someone of anything from anytime in their history, and make that person answer to it without any evidence to corroborate otherwise.  You can destroy many good people by having such a standard. 

 

If I were to step out on my soapbox tomorrow and say "Joe Biden punched me in the face in 5th grade".... that wouldn't demand a response - I agree. 

 

Anyways - this isn't the right forum for my soap box on this. Title IX hearings have forever scarred my perception of allegations. But, I do believe Tara Reade seems credible. 

 

Again, though. Not sure the GOP wants oppo research into this topic finding that some NDA silence can be bought for less than a million... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Socialist or social-democratic policies that would have been absolutely unthinkable 20 years ago are now within the Democrats' Overton Window.  Not the country's, perhaps, but the party's.  Abolish ICE.  Forgive all student loans.  They might not yet be 51% of even the Democratic Party, but considering that they were starting from basically 0%, they've come a long way in a couple of decades.

 

https://www.dataforprogress.org/the-new-progressive-agenda#college

 

Free college has net positive support in 37 states among all voters.

The Green New Deal has net positive support in 44 states among all voters.

 

Progressive policies are highly popular, even in purple and red districts/states.  The issue, which has been one for a long time, is that progressive candidates who champion such policies don't have great electoral success.

 

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

I think all such allegations have to be taken seriously, but I'm not more likely to believe one versus the other.  It's about what can be proven.  With Kavanaugh, I didn't like how Republicans didn't want to bother even vetting him properly, let alone take any allegations seriously.  With Biden, of course we have to take it seriously, but as you say that the SOL has passed even if there was an investigation into the matter.  So it comes down to who you believe and whether you're willing to take another chance on Trump based on the principle of something that may or may not have happened.  I guess everyone has to make that choice for themselves.  

Personally, if these claims could be verified, I'd want the Democrats to nominate someone else.  Since they can't seem to, my focus has to still be on beating Trump.  I don't think that's hypocrisy at all, but just what we have to work with at this point.  

 

Unless I'm mistaken, your first post on the matter was there was no more truth to the claims than Obama's birth certificate being fake.  That led me to believe you don't believe Reade's account.

 

Reade's claims have largely been swept under the rug.  Is Biden being asked directly about them in any interview?  Are journalists doing investigative work beyond The Intercept?  Etc.  So I wouldn't say the claims can't be verified, just that not much effort so far has been put into doing so.  And fwiw, I don't know how they would be "verified" beyond the contemporaneous accounts we've already gotten from her brother, neighbor, etc.  Same reason so many believed Ford - she confided in those closest to her at the time.

 

I will say this much....very rarely are those "one time" occurrences.  With Ford, you had another credible account from Ramirez in college with Kavanaugh.  But aggressive assaults are basically never "tried it, got away with it, never did it again."


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^WaPo has given a fair amount of coverage to it this past weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

^But the Establishment Democrats don't let any of those things actually happen. It doesn't matter if "the idea is out there" if it doesn't result in policy and platforms of the party... not just individual politicians withing the party who may or may not win.

 

This isn't true, though. The Dems do not control the levers of power in the federal government. Having one half of one branch makes it hard to get progressive reform done. But TONS of progressive policies have been implemented at the local and state levels by "establishment" Democrats over the past few years. There's no reason to believe Dems won't push for progressive policies at the federal level if given the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

Sorry that you feel that way, and lack seem to lack any concept of criticizing the party from the left.

 

There's a BIG difference between criticizing the party from the left and saying the Democratic party is a fundamentally anti-progressive organization. That's just not true. As I mentioned above, the party has moved left and we're seeing the results of that in policies at the local and state level. The House has also passed several very progressive bills this term, that of course have no chance of going anywhere with a GOP controlled Senate and White House. Folks like AOC need to keep pushing the party left. Progressive candidates need to primary incumbents in safe districts. Replacing centrist incumbents with progressive ones is important. But electing centrists in districts that tilt R is also important. And then, when you get those progressive policies to President Biden's desk he'll sign them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

Sorry that you feel that way, and lack seem to lack any concept of criticizing the party from the left. You also seem to be unable to comprehend that I would still vote for Biden despite my criticisms. He is marginally better than Trump, but basically my one vote has now become worth far less than what it was before, in terms of the change that it can bring about. The right wing of the party is basically holding everyone hostage saying, here, you gotta vote for us or you get Trump again. Their explicit strategy this election is to move to the right. And the funny thing is that Trump can run to Biden's left when it is convenient. The entire Democrat strategy is hinging on Trump massively screwing up and Biden keeping upright and semi-coherent, which is entirely possible, but a very poor hand to gamble our future. And as I've said previously, another mediocre Democrat presidency paves the way for an even worse wannabe-fascist down the road, just as Clinton did for Bush and Obama did for Trump.

 

I'm not a registered Democrat, so I have zero problem criticizing them and have on many, many occasions.  But your "both sides are equally bad" schtick is so very tired.  Literally any rationally-thinking human being would be able to see very clear differences both in policy and standards.  There is absolutely no move to the right.  There is no secret strategy to avoid progressive policy.  This is a delusion, and you have not been able to back any of those claims up with any evidence whatsoever.  You simply repeat them over and over and over hoping someone takes them seriously.  It's not working.  I'm sorry that your preferred candidate lost, but that is no excuse to lose touch with reality and burn everything to the ground with lies and fear-mongering.  Frankly, if anyone is a secret Republican, my money would be on you, because I can't imagine someone so dead set on pushing progressive policy forward spending so much time trashing the only realistic option to get it.  But you do you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's annoying waiting for the top of the party to catch up with what people under 50 (and some over) feel but we're just going to have to keep putting up with it for the next 4-12 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Unless I'm mistaken, your first post on the matter was there was no more truth to the claims than Obama's birth certificate being fake.  That led me to believe you don't believe Reade's account.

 

Reade's claims have largely been swept under the rug.  Is Biden being asked directly about them in any interview?  Are journalists doing investigative work beyond The Intercept?  Etc.  So I wouldn't say the claims can't be verified, just that not much effort so far has been put into doing so.  And fwiw, I don't know how they would be "verified" beyond the contemporaneous accounts we've already gotten from her brother, neighbor, etc.  Same reason so many believed Ford - she confided in those closest to her at the time.

 

I will say this much....very rarely are those "one time" occurrences.  With Ford, you had another credible account from Ramirez in college with Kavanaugh.  But aggressive assaults are basically never "tried it, got away with it, never did it again."

 

No, I said absent any evidence or an investigation, they had no more validity than the birtherism stuff.  Anyone can make an allegation about anything, and that's why we have the concept of burden of proof.

 

The claims are not being swept under the rug.  There have been stories about it on every mainstream news outlet.  If the thinking is that the media is trying to help Biden, what does it mean when that same media doesn't hold Trump accountable for all his lies and BS?  Because they don't.  There is no conspiracy here except perhaps that the media sucks at doing a thorough job because ratings are better with conflict.

 

If the claims can be verified, by all means, let's have it out.  I'm not attached to Biden, I'm attached to beating Trump... a man who has admitted to sexually assaulting multiple women, who has at least 25 rape accusers, who watched women get naked during Miss America, who suggested he would date children if they were a bit older, who seems to actively hate women that he can't manipulate or use.  And that's just the tip of the iceberg of what he's done, and not just with women.  All this handwringing over an unproven allegation about Biden is a reward for Trump, who we *know* did these things and so much more.  I do think, though, that if they change the nominee, Trump wins.  

 

 

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DEPACincy said:

 

This isn't true, though. The Dems do not control the levers of power in the federal government. Having one half of one branch makes it hard to get progressive reform done. But TONS of progressive policies have been implemented at the local and state levels by "establishment" Democrats over the past few years. There's no reason to believe Dems won't push for progressive policies at the federal level if given the chance.

 

The House has passed numerous progressive proposals that the Senate won't even vote on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

The House has passed numerous progressive proposals that the Senate won't even vote on.  

 

Exactly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple things to summarize this whole argument for me.

  1. Criticizing the party from the left is a perfectly normal thing to do. It's time to take another look at the 90s era third-way policies of the Democrats. Or even Obama era 2000s policies.
  2. This doesn't mean that every politician who advocated for those policies is irredeemable. Those policies were mainstream thought back then. Given the mood of the country at the time towards 'big government,' they reflected public opinion of the time. Public opinion is now shifting. Bernie Sanders has been at the forefront of this, to his credit.
  3. There are nihilists and "burn it all down" types who have jumped on to the Bernie Sanders/"Progressive" movement. They push "both sides are the same" and convince people (usually young people who don't have context for the political debates of yesteryear) that the Democrats are equally bad as Republicans. In terms of raw time spent and emotion spent on Democrats, these nihilists seem to hate Democrats far more than Republicans. They've created an insane rage-filled echo chamber of irrational hate towards the Democratic Party that isn't grounded in reality at all. Many of them are YouTube and podcast hosts, bloggers, most of them are just out there to get Patreon donations. Like Fox News, they want hate and controversy because it makes money. They are the ones pushing the "Bernie or nobody" stuff because their business model depends on having Saint Bernie fighting the strawman version of the Democrats. They want Biden to lose to Trump because if Biden wins, they become irrelevant. I don't trust them one bit and neither should you.
  4. The party will move in a "Bernie" direction on policy over the coming decade and it will eventually go mainstream. Biden isn't a leader on ideology. He's more of a consensus politician, and that style won the day. He is going to try to stake out positions that thread the needle to pick up the most votes from all factions. Not an unwise strategy but always hated by those in point (3). 
  5. I hope the Bernie left begins to stake out more of a "Proud Democrat but further to the left" message in future cycles. AOC seems to be getting it.
  6. On the Tara Reade allegations, they were first pushed by the people in point (3), doing it for nakedly political purposes and they clearly had no interest in sexual assault victims. I think that there are some legitimate questions about her credibility vs. other accusations in the past, but I also believe that women don't tend to just make this stuff up. It's all very disappointing.
16 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

And as I've said previously, another mediocre Democrat presidency paves the way for an even worse wannabe-fascist down the road, just as Clinton did for Bush and Obama did for Trump.

 

This is a statement you often hear from Bernie supporters but I think it deserves a deeper questioning. The assumption that's being made is that a Sanders presidency would somehow not pave the way for an even worse wannabe-fascist while a Biden presidency would. The assumption is that somehow Trump supporters (white working class Trump supporters to be specific) would be helped by Sanders' policies to such a large extent that they would abandon their fascism. I question all these assumptions. First of all, I question the idea that Bernie would get his policies through Congress at all, and second of all, I question the idea that Trump supporters are voting on economics. Most of the social science is telling us that polarization and tribalism and identity are what people vote on, full stop. I don't believe a Bernie presidency would be any better than any other Democrat at somehow preventing future Republican insanity. I think we're stuck with that for a few more decades. I think American politics right now is in a state of trench warfare/stalemate, and the only thing right now is to keep fighting and try to ride it out and see if things eventually cool down.

Edited by mu2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

No, I said absent any evidence or an investigation, they had no more validity than the birtherism stuff.  Anyone can make an allegation about anything, and that's why we have the concept of burden of proof.

 

The claims are not being swept under the rug.  There have been stories about it on every mainstream news outlet.  If the thinking is that the media is trying to help Biden, what does it mean when that same media doesn't hold Trump accountable for all his lies and BS?  Because they don't.  There is no conspiracy here except perhaps that the media sucks at doing a thorough job because ratings are better with conflict.

 

If the claims can be verified, by all means, let's have it out.  I'm not attached to Biden, I'm attached to beating Trump... a man who has admitted to sexually assaulting multiple women, who has at least 25 rape accusers, who watched women get naked during Miss America, who suggested he would date children if they were a bit older, who seems to actively hate women that he can't manipulate or use.  And that's just the tip of the iceberg of what he's done, and not just with women.  All this handwringing over an unproven allegation about Biden is a reward for Trump, who we *know* did these things and so much more.  I do think, though, that if they change the nominee, Trump wins.  

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912441

 

Quote

It’s interesting how the people who always have these stories, histories and multiple accusations pretty much always end up guilty.  And no, this isn’t political.  Trump was and is accused, but his 2016 Republican opponents weren’t.  Whether it’s Cosby or Weinstein, Trump or Clinton, this stuff follows them around for a reason.  Had there been another nominee besides Kavanaugh, it’s unlikely there would’ve been similar accusations.  Because again, it’s not political.  People who have this in their past tend to have it show up when they’re being vetted for something or in public view.  Now, we cant punish or indict on the perception of guilt, but desperately trying to say nothing is there is pretty gross when you consider the scope of the potential crimes.  You’d have to be a real scumbag to not want to see a thorough- and fair- investigation.  Sadly, in terms of justice, politics will likely prevent that from ever happening.  

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912655

Quote

I specifically said above that there should be a thorough, but fair investigation.  The investigation to this point has basically been "We don't believe the accusations, so it's case closed".  That's not justice or due process.  That's throwing them out the window for purely political reasons.  If this was Clinton or some other Democrat, I'd want them investigated and I would be railing against Democrats if they pulled the same shady disregard for the process as Republicans have.

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857528

Quote

Furthermore, it’s troubling that they would be demoralized not by the fact that he potentially tried to rape women, but that he wouldn’t be confirmed because of that possibility.  I simply don’t understand your priorities at all.  I’d want the equivalent liberal immediately replaced.  It’s amazing to me the lengths you all will go to justify this.  Even if you don’t believe Ford (and even if his innocence or guilt even seemed to matter whatsoever) if conservatives truly believed in “law and order”, they would either be delaying while an investigation happened or they would want his nomination withdrawn because who the hell would be okay taking such a risk when there are others available who have no such baggage?

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857361

Quote

She is the one who reached out about this because she clearly felt that it was time to come forward.  Whatever her reasoning is hers alone, and the Democrats rightly want the truth out about a man who is nominated for an enormously powerful lifetime appointment.  After all this, the Democrats don’t owe her anything. As far as I know, none of them are qualified as therapists or grief counselors, and she doesn’t seem like she’s interested in book deals or fame in general.  What she deserves is a normal life knowing she got the truth out about a man that will never truly face the consequences he deserves.  She’s a hero in my book.

 

Outside of Business Insider, I'm not aware of any *original* reporting on this.  WaPo was mentioned, but they've covered it from a "these claims were made against Biden" perspective.  They may be running their own investigation right now, who knows.  If "ratings are better with conflict," why is no one asking Biden about this?  Seems like it'd be a conflict to me.

 

Setting aside the assault claim, Reade did make a sexual harassment claim against Biden at the time and she said she was fired for it.  That type of thing should be much easier to corroborate.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, YABO713 said:

 

If I were to step out on my soapbox tomorrow and say "Joe Biden punched me in the face in 5th grade".... that wouldn't demand a response - I agree. 

 

Anyways - this isn't the right forum for my soap box on this. Title IX hearings have forever scarred my perception of allegations. But, I do believe Tara Reade seems credible. 

 

Again, though. Not sure the GOP wants oppo research into this topic finding that some NDA silence can be bought for less than a million... 

From a legal perspective, I think Tara Reade's allegations are more credible than Kavanaugh's. With Reade, there is contemporaneous evidence and witness accounts from immediately after the incident that help corroborate her credibility. This is what was missing in the Kavanaugh case. None of the people at the site could corroborate Ford's claims. Heck, even her parents would not corroborate her claims. I am not saying Biden did it, but I believe her story has more credibility.

 

From the GOP oppo research, overplaying their hand on this, they dont need to do anything else. It is a distraction to Biden and plays out on the Dem side. Most GOP voters dont really care about the issue (heck Trump won despite his past), so the issue is an internal Dem discussion. End of the day, they would take Biden in a second over Trump, so the harassment issue is not really a huge deal for most Dem voters anyway. The only thing is that it forces him to address it to his base in such a way that takes him off message for a while from the rest of the campaign. That is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mu2010 said:

I don't believe a Bernie presidency would be any better than any other Democrat at somehow preventing future Republican insanity. I think we're stuck with that for a few more decades.

If I had to bet on any outcome with even odds, I'd say we're screwed regardless, but Bernie gave us a shot and Biden does not. Being stuck with the status quo for "a few more decades" will wreak havoc on future society. Current environmental and socio-economic practices are not sustainable and we are nowhere near on a course to correct it. In other words, the current system cannot produce progress quickly enough to outrun the decay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912441

 

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912655

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857528

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857361

 

Outside of Business Insider, I'm not aware of any *original* reporting on this.  WaPo was mentioned, but they've covered it from a "these claims were made against Biden" perspective.  They may be running their own investigation right now, who knows.  If "ratings are better with conflict," why is no one asking Biden about this?  Seems like it'd be a conflict to me.

 

Setting aside the assault claim, Reade did make a sexual harassment claim against Biden at the time and she said she was fired for it.  That type of thing should be much easier to corroborate.

 

I'm pretty sure WaPo did some original reporting on it a few weeks ago- I'm working from memory here, but I think the reporter who did that reporting was then on NPR.  They were talking about her investigation.  Reade's sexual harassment claim was searched for, but not found, and nobody in the office at the time could corroborate it, iirc.  The only corroboration they found at the time was the friend and partial from the brother (she apparently told her mother who has since passed).  The Larry King thing is later, but also pretty vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

From a legal perspective, I think Tara Reade's allegations are more credible than Kavanaugh's. With Reade, there is contemporaneous evidence and witness accounts from immediately after the incident that help corroborate her credibility. This is what was missing in the Kavanaugh case. None of the people at the site could corroborate Ford's claims. Heck, even her parents would not corroborate her claims. I am not saying Biden did it, but I believe her story has more credibility.

 

From the GOP oppo research, overplaying their hand on this, they dont need to do anything else. It is a distraction to Biden and plays out on the Dem side. Most GOP voters dont really care about the issue (heck Trump won despite his past), so the issue is an internal Dem discussion. End of the day, they would take Biden in a second over Trump, so the harassment issue is not really a huge deal for most Dem voters anyway. The only thing is that it forces him to address it to his base in such a way that takes him off message for a while from the rest of the campaign. That is all.

 

Meh - I mean ... is there a single one of us who didn't know of Tara Reade's allegations prior to these primaries? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what to think of this whole thing but this seems weird. I'm not sure if this is reliable or not.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912441

 

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=912655

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857528

 

https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/15692-scotus/?do=findComment&comment=857361

 

Outside of Business Insider, I'm not aware of any *original* reporting on this.  WaPo was mentioned, but they've covered it from a "these claims were made against Biden" perspective.  They may be running their own investigation right now, who knows.  If "ratings are better with conflict," why is no one asking Biden about this?  Seems like it'd be a conflict to me.

 

Setting aside the assault claim, Reade did make a sexual harassment claim against Biden at the time and she said she was fired for it.  That type of thing should be much easier to corroborate.

 

Are these some attempt at a gotcha?  If anything, I think they show I've been consistent in my views- that accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated.  And those that do have a lot of accusations do tend to end up guilty.  Has Biden had a lot of this kind of thing around him over the years?  All those other people did. We also have endless examples where accusations turned out to be false.  Hence why it's dangerous to accept any accusation at face value without doing due diligence, and I said as much before about perception of guilt. Trump admitted to his sexual assault, so I feel comfortable saying he did it.  Kavanaugh denied the accusation against him, but there was no attempt to follow through with it, so there will always be doubt.  I have already stated more than once that I'd be fine following through on Biden and that I'm not attached to his candidacy if there is something there.  I'm not sure what more you want. 

 

Now let me ask you... who do you think the nominee should be?  Bernie couldn't bring out the votes and won't in the general, so who can?  Or are we talking about sacrificing the country to another 4 years of Trump?  Because that's what all this seems to be leading to.  

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this quote in one of the articles about this whole debacle that I thought was pretty apt.  Something along the lines of "If #MeToo is about believing every woman no matter the facts of the case, it's just a hit squad.  I believe the movement is much more than that."  What we currently know is Biden does not have a history of sexual assault (creepiness and shoulder-touching, yes, sexual assault, no) and that both the NYT has tried to downplay this and his accuser has changed her story and edited past blog posts to match the story up.  There's a lot of dust flying around, and his team is playing this exactly how he should.  Say that women should be heard, calmly deny it, and let investigative teams do the digging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, X said:

I'm pretty sure WaPo did some original reporting on it a few weeks ago- I'm working from memory here, but I think the reporter who did that reporting was then on NPR.  They were talking about her investigation.  Reade's sexual harassment claim was searched for, but not found, and nobody in the office at the time could corroborate it, iirc.  The only corroboration they found at the time was the friend and partial from the brother (she apparently told her mother who has since passed).  The Larry King thing is later, but also pretty vague.

 

Gotcha.  Admittedly, I haven't followed every twist and turn of this story.  Just seemed like it wasn't "breaking through" until this last week, but also...there's only one major story right now.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 10albersa said:

There's a lot of dust flying around, and his team is playing this exactly how he should.  Say that women should be heard, calmly deny it, and let investigative teams do the digging.

 

He could release his papers from his time in the Senate to see if there's any merit to Reade's claim she was fired for voicing a complaint about being harassed.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

Are these some attempt at a gotcha?  If anything, I think they show I've been consistent in my views- that accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated.  And those that do have a lot of accusations do tend to end up guilty.  Has Biden had a lot of this kind of thing around him over the years?  All those other people did. We also have endless examples where accusations turned out to be false.  Hence why it's dangerous to accept any accusation at face value without doing due diligence, and I said as much before about perception of guilt. Trump admitted to his sexual assault, so I feel comfortable saying he did it.  Kavanaugh denied the accusation against him, but there was no attempt to follow through with it, so there will always be doubt.  I have already stated more than once that I'd be fine following through on Biden and that I'm not attached to his candidacy if there is something there.  I'm not sure what more you want. 

 

Now let me ask you... who do you think the nominee should be?  Bernie couldn't bring out the votes and won't in the general, so who can?  Or are we talking about sacrificing the country to another 4 years of Trump?  Because that's what all this seems to be leading to.  

 

Not playing "gotcha," just that you seemed much more forceful about Kavanaugh than Biden.

 

Ford didn't file a police report, didn't speak out when Kavanaugh was appointed to the DC Circuit, and no one witnessed the assault or would go on the record saying so.  Reade didn't file a police report (at the time), didn't speak out when Biden was nominated VP, and no one witnessed the assault or would go on the record saying so.

 

This isn't directed at you, but *so many* people who claimed to believe Ford now say they don't believe Reade or that her claims don't have merit.

 

From the start, I didn't think Biden should be the nominee.  So are you asking who is my "ideal nominee" or who do I think should be the nominee in light of the recent allegations made against Biden?  Two different questions.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

Ford didn't file a police report, didn't speak out when Kavanaugh was appointed to the DC Circuit, and no one witnessed the assault or would go on the record saying so.  Reade didn't file a police report (at the time), didn't speak out when Biden was nominated VP, and no one witnessed the assault or would go on the record saying so.

 

This is not to say that dismissing one's allegations outright and believing the other's is right, but I think there are some differences you're ignoring.  First of all, the VP is a lot more visible than a DC Circuit judge, so it's more likely that allegations would have come out then than when Kavanaugh was appointed to the DC Circuit.  Also, Ford was one of three accusers against Kavanaugh.  Are there any others accusing Biden of sexual misconduct?  I think the allegations should be looked into, and I hope they prove to be false, but I agree that it's not right to just dismiss them.

Edited by jam40jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jam40jeff said:

 

This is not to say that dismissing one's allegations outright and believing the other's is right, but I think there are some differences you're ignoring.  First of all, the VP is a lot more visible than a DC Circuit judge, so it's more likely that allegations would have come out then than when Kavanaugh was appointed to the DC Circuit.  

 

I think there's an argument that a VP is also a lot more powerful than a DC Circuit judge, so an accuser could be more fearful of repercussions. Anyhow there's a story today in the NYT:

 

Democratic Frustration Mounts as Biden Remains Silent on Sexual Assault Allegation

Activists and women’s rights advocates have urged Mr. Biden to address a former aide’s allegation that he sexually assaulted her in 1993. His lack of response has angered them.

 

For more than three weeks, progressive activists and women’s rights advocates debated how to handle an allegation of sexual assault against Joseph R. Biden Jr. The conversations weren’t easy, nor were the politics: Mr. Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, faced one allegation; his opponent, President Trump, at least a dozen.

 

Finally, several of the women’s groups prepared a public letter that praised Mr. Biden’s work as an “outspoken champion for survivors of sexual violence” but also pushed him to address the allegation from Tara Reade, a former aide who worked in Mr. Biden’s Senate office in the early 1990s.

 

“Vice President Biden has the opportunity, right now, to model how to take serious allegations seriously,” the draft letter said. “The weight of our expectations matches the magnitude of the office he seeks.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/29/us/politics/tara-reade-joe-biden.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_NN_p_20200430&instance_id=18091&nl=morning-briefing&regi_id=102158875&section=whatElse&segment_id=26273&te=1&user_id=c9e72708f4bc66e6d64b23c3b36509c8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Gotcha.  Admittedly, I haven't followed every twist and turn of this story.  Just seemed like it wasn't "breaking through" until this last week, but also...there's only one major story right now.

 

 

This NYT article was also written prior to the Larry King tape coming out - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, surfohio said:

I think there's an argument that a VP is also a lot more powerful than a DC Circuit judge, so an accuser could be more fearful of repercussions.

 

I don't think that's a valid argument.  If fear of repercussions was the cause of not coming forward when he was running to be VP, why would the accuser come forward when he's running for president?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me this came out about a month ago the charges from Reade. Yes, it was out there before that she felt uncomfortable with whatever happened. It seems she keeps ratcheting it up what happened to her. I would think that Biden has addressed it before. I’m not following this very closely either. Because this is a politically charged case the Republicans are going to want to bang pots and make sure this story stays in the front page of the papers. It will be the 33000 emails that trump can talk about over and over like he has any room to talk.  My feeling is that now that we have a new witness that Reade spoke with, her neighbor, and that neighbor says she’s voting for and supporting Biden, then that answers the question for me. Whatever happened likely was not a big enough deal to warrant all this fuss 27 years later. 

Edited by audidave
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, audidave said:

It seems to me this came out about a month ago the charges from Reade. Yes, it was out there before that she felt uncomfortable with whatever happened. It seems she keeps ratcheting it up what happened to her. I would think that Biden has addressed it before. I’m not following this very closely either. Because this is a politically charged case the Republicans are going to want to bang pots and make sure this story stays in the front page of the papers. It will be the 33000 emails that trump can talk about over and over like he has any room to talk.  My feeling is that now that we have a new witness that Reade spoke with, her neighbor, and that neighbor says she’s voting for and supporting Biden, then that answers the question for me. Whatever happened likely was not a big enough deal to warrant all this fuss 27 years later. 

 

I saw a story somewhere about a week ago (I think in WaPo) that showed the details of the allegations over time.  It has slowly moved from "made me feel uncomfortable" to "he touched my shoulders" to "hand up skirt" to "digital penetration" over a span of many years.  I don't know what to make of it all, but it seems odd to me that the story would just keep getting gradually worse.  I would think that an accuser would normally hold everything in until they feel ready to talk about it, and then talk about exactly what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Are these some attempt at a gotcha?  If anything, I think they show I've been consistent in my views- that accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated.  And those that do have a lot of accusations do tend to end up guilty.  Has Biden had a lot of this kind of thing around him over the years?  All those other people did. We also have endless examples where accusations turned out to be false.  Hence why it's dangerous to accept any accusation at face value without doing due diligence, and I said as much before about perception of guilt. Trump admitted to his sexual assault, so I feel comfortable saying he did it.  Kavanaugh denied the accusation against him, but there was no attempt to follow through with it, so there will always be doubt.  I have already stated more than once that I'd be fine following through on Biden and that I'm not attached to his candidacy if there is something there.  I'm not sure what more you want. 

 

Now let me ask you... who do you think the nominee should be?  Bernie couldn't bring out the votes and won't in the general, so who can?  Or are we talking about sacrificing the country to another 4 years of Trump?  Because that's what all this seems to be leading to.  

@DarkandStormy

 

I think @jon81oh is sincere in his beliefs and does not deserved to be called to the carpet from 2 years ago. It may seem in context but it is a different situation, so applying a quote from the Kavanaugh situation to Biden is disingenuous and uses his words without proper context. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jam40jeff said:

 

I saw a story somewhere about a week ago (I think in WaPo) that showed the details of the allegations over time.  It has slowly moved from "made me feel uncomfortable" to "he touched my shoulders" to "hand up skirt" to "digital penetration" over a span of many years.  I don't know what to make of it all, but it seems odd to me that the story would just keep getting gradually worse.  I would think that an accuser would normally hold everything in until they feel ready to talk about it, and then talk about exactly what happened.

That is exactly what i had gathered as well. One of the things I’m seeing from party people is that this lady is a kook in that she has written a love poem to Putin.  So there is some wonder if this lady is getting some backing from the russians to keep this a story.  Which makes sense if she keeps ratcheting up what happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jam40jeff said:

 

I don't think that's a valid argument.  If fear of repercussions was the cause of not coming forward when he was running to be VP, why would the accuser come forward when he's running for president?

 

Because we often see it takes time for people overcome their fears. Same reason I'm assuming Kavanaugh's accusers didn't come forward until later.

 

That being said I have no idea whether these claims are valid and the political angle and timing are absolutely suspect. But it's interesting this accuser did previously accuse Biden of inappropriate behavior last year...that seem's like it would have been the reasonable time to give her entire story.

Edited by surfohio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, audidave said:

That is exactly what i had gathered as well. One of the things I’m seeing from party people is that this lady is a kook in that she has written a love poem to Putin.  So there is some wonder if this lady is getting some backing from the russians to keep this a story.  Which makes sense if she keeps ratcheting up what happened. 

 

The Putin things gives me pause, too (and the timing- right after there was no viable alternative for the Democrats?).  But we should be careful about dismissing women as "kooks" when they make this sort of charge.  That has a long, bad history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, X said:

 

The Putin things gives me pause, too (and the timing- right after there was no viable alternative for the Democrats?).  But we should be careful about dismissing women as "kooks" when they make this sort of charge.  That has a long, bad history.

The point was the lady that is calling out Biden is idolizing putin.  That is kooky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, X said:

 

The Putin things gives me pause, too (and the timing- right after there was no viable alternative for the Democrats?).  But we should be careful about dismissing women as "kooks" when they make this sort of charge.  That has a long, bad history.

 

The Putin thing is very strange. She claimed to NYT that the Putin praise posts were written because "she was writing a novel at the time." Which makes no sense at all. They were written as opinion pieces.

 

The other thing is that, from the start, she's coordinated the release of her allegations with several "Bernie or Bust," anti-Democratic Party media outlets, the Intercept, Current Affairs, and the podcast she first made the allegation on. The editor of current affairs, Nathan Robinson, discussed on Twitter how he coached Reade's brother before the brother talked to WaPo.

 

It's a massive conflict of interest. These are writers and outlets that regularly talk about 'punishing' the Democratic Party for being too centrist. Whatever your stance on their political views, given their open disdain towards Biden's wing of the party, they clearly are not impartial. When other women have come forward with accusations in the past, to my recollection they have hired attorneys like Gloria Allred to coordinate, not media outlets openly aligned in favor of the political rivals of the accused, right at the end of a bitter primary.

 

I agree with the need to have restraint with accusers and not call them 'kooks' and I think we need to be very careful. This accusation could be true. But I hope that the desire to avoid mistakes of the past doesn't turn into the mainstream press handling this with kid gloves.

Edited by mu2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right and left wing media now want access to all of Biden's senate papers stored at the University of Delaware... A new 2020 version of Hillary's emails. Or "release the transcripts!!" remember that one?

Edited by mu2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF?? If the Democratic Party can't do better than pull out back issues from their presidential archives and trot them out as new releases, then they're going to get beat again.

 

As Biden struggles, Hillary waits for the call

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/495371-as-biden-struggles-hillary-waits-for-the-call

 

 


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden's response is about as good as he can do. He emphasized everyone to investigate it fully (which is what "believe all women" is actually about - taking their claims seriously and doing a proper investigation as if it were real) while denying the allegation itself. Luckily there are still a few months before the Democratic Convention and 6 months until the general election.

 

Unfortunately, I highly doubt there is concrete evidence either way, but some of the contemporaneous evidence leans toward seriously investigating the claim (like her mother's call in to Larry King).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jam40jeff said:

This is not to say that dismissing one's allegations outright and believing the other's is right, but I think there are some differences you're ignoring.  First of all, the VP is a lot more visible than a DC Circuit judge, so it's more likely that allegations would have come out then than when Kavanaugh was appointed to the DC Circuit.  Also, Ford was one of three accusers against Kavanaugh.  Are there any others accusing Biden of sexual misconduct?  I think the allegations should be looked into, and I hope they prove to be false, but I agree that it's not right to just dismiss them.

 

True - I don't think anything is ever really completely apples-to-apples.

 

As for more accusing Biden of "sexual misconduct," I mentioned this to CA earlier this week (I think?) - depends on if you view sexual assault in the same light as other claims.  Lucy Flores, Amy Lappos, D.J. Hill, Caitlyn Caruso, Ally Coll, Sofie Karasek, and Vail Kohnert-Yount are all on the record making varying claims against Biden that, depending on your view of what constitutes sexual misconduct vs. inappropriate vs. creepy/weird, may or may not fit the bill of what you ese as "others accusing Biden of sexual misconduct."


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...