Jump to content
mu2010

The Democratic Party

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, KJP said:

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

 

Not sure I'd be taking opinion pieces from...*checks notes*...Liz Peek too seriously when it comes to the Democratic nominee.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


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

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).

 

He did call for his Senate personnel files to be released, which I noted he could do.

 

It's a very different tone (and again, the comparisons aren't entirely the same) than Kavanaugh.  Asking for the claims to be investigated, asking for his personnel files to be released to see if he was mentioned directly when she allegedly made the complaint upon being fired.

 

I'm not really sure what else Biden could do, from a "pro Biden" perspective.  His letter was respectful while standing his ground and also being open about investigating it and trying to get his personnel records released.  I realize we're in a "we'll never really know" type of situation, but it's about as best as could be expected.  I assume investigative journalist teams will do their best digging beyond what's been done so far.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2020 at 1:00 PM, DarkandStormy said:

 

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.

 

Maybe, but my overall views have been consistent in both cases, I think. 

 

Personally, I think the "all women should be believed" thing is going a little too far.  All accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated as much as possible, of course, but it seems to me that automatically believing anyone who makes an accusation is a presumption of guilt.  Even if a lot of these accusations turn out to be true, due process still matters even for people we hate.  I didn't like Kavanaugh or his views, but I supported a fair investigation.  Had Trump not freely admitted his guilt, as much as I despise him, he still deserves fair treatment under the law.  Biden is not even close to my first choice to be the nomination, either.  He also deserves due process if at all possible.  Sometimes it's not possible, and in the US justice system, what can't be proven can't be punished (or at least, it's not supposed to be, though I imagine a lot of minorities would disagree.)

 

And you're right, there is some hypocrisy from some people.  For the record, though, I've seen a LOT less of that from the left than I was expecting.  I've seen more people discussing it and saying it should be looked into.  

 

Barring a major event, like Biden contracting Covid-19, it seems like it's a lock he'll be the nominee at this point.  So my question is more who do you think should be the nominee if the allegations were verified in some way.  But I think you would rather there be a different nominee chosen regardless of the outcome of the allegations, but rather because they exist at all.  So who do you think it should be?  And do you think picking someone else concedes the election?  I'm very uncomfortable with the prospect of helping him win again, directly or not.

 

 

Share this post


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

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

 

 

 

How is Biden struggling, though?  His polling is all pretty good against Trump at this point, even in some traditionally Republican states.  The DNC had better not do something as stupid as putting Hillary back in.  It's another loss.  At this point, I wouldn't take this seriously quite yet.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


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

 

How is Biden struggling, though?  His polling is all pretty good against Trump at this point, even in some traditionally Republican states.  The DNC had better not do something as stupid as putting Hillary back in.  It's another loss.  At this point, I wouldn't take this seriously quite yet.

she's a fox news person, that kind of language is standard for them. don't think too hard about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

He's "struggling" because he has no "buzz".

Biden will never have it. That's why his best way forward is to be more in the background and selective about his public comments. Because at this rate Trump seems to be doing quite enough to hang himself. 

Share this post


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

 

Maybe, but my overall views have been consistent in both cases, I think. 

 

Personally, I think the "all women should be believed" thing is going a little too far.  All accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated as much as possible, of course, but it seems to me that automatically believing anyone who makes an accusation is a presumption of guilt. 

Maybe I’m misunderstanding the movement, but when people say “believe women,” what you’ve stated is what they’re asking for. For an allegation to be taken seriously and not dismissed out of hand.

 

This situation is very different from Kavanaugh because of that; the GOP had no interest in investigating the claims, and tried to limit the investigation while simultaneously claiming it was vindicating. I haven’t seen anything like that with Biden so far.

Share this post


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

Maybe, but my overall views have been consistent in both cases, I think. 

 

Personally, I think the "all women should be believed" thing is going a little too far.  All accusations have to be taken seriously and investigated as much as possible, of course, but it seems to me that automatically believing anyone who makes an accusation is a presumption of guilt.  Even if a lot of these accusations turn out to be true, due process still matters even for people we hate.  I didn't like Kavanaugh or his views, but I supported a fair investigation.  Had Trump not freely admitted his guilt, as much as I despise him, he still deserves fair treatment under the law.  Biden is not even close to my first choice to be the nomination, either.  He also deserves due process if at all possible.  Sometimes it's not possible, and in the US justice system, what can't be proven can't be punished (or at least, it's not supposed to be, though I imagine a lot of minorities would disagree.)

 

And you're right, there is some hypocrisy from some people.  For the record, though, I've seen a LOT less of that from the left than I was expecting.  I've seen more people discussing it and saying it should be looked into.  

 

Barring a major event, like Biden contracting Covid-19, it seems like it's a lock he'll be the nominee at this point.  So my question is more who do you think should be the nominee if the allegations were verified in some way.  But I think you would rather there be a different nominee chosen regardless of the outcome of the allegations, but rather because they exist at all.  So who do you think it should be?  And do you think picking someone else concedes the election?  I'm very uncomfortable with the prospect of helping him win again, directly or not.

 

I will say this - most conservatives railed about "due process" for the Kavanaugh claims, but that's not really what's being asked.  I don't think anyone expected Kavanaugh to be criminally prosecuted, indicted, etc. and the same is true of Biden.  This is sort of what Yabo was talking about - there should be room for other types of, I don't want to say punishment, but perhaps ramifications outside of the law (whether that's left up to voters or Senators voting on a judicial nominee or whatever).  Especially in sexual assault cases where it's something like less than 1% of all perpetrators are ever found guilty.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-take-tara-reades-allegations-against-biden-seriously-and-im-still-voting-for-him?ref=scroll

 

I think this is a pretty fair piece.

 

Quote

But the long-term consequences of Democrats refusing to acknowledge inconvenient truths around Their Guy, again, could and will alienate the women who make the backbone of the party’s present, and the progressives who represent the party’s future. I don’t have any insight on why women’s groups have been largely silent on the accusations, but if I had to guess, it’s because what Biden is alleged to have done pales in comparison with things Trump has been accused of, and that Reade is, at press time, the only person to make serious assault allegations against Biden. 

 

But that’s no reason to ignore Tara Reade. It could be that Reade’s initial accusation wasn’t backed by much evidence beyond her word, but as more reporting on her story emerges, that defense doesn’t hold water anymore. Or it could be that partisans of all stripes have a difficult time applying the same moral standards to people on both sides of the aisle. Or some combination of the three. 

 

Quote

Allegations as serious as sexual assault should be taken seriously enough to be investigated, but not so credulously that the accusations themselves stand as proof enough that what the accuser says happened actually happened. False accusations can and have been weaponized (recall during Alabama’s 2017 Senate election, when an activist group tried and failed to plant a fake sexual-assault story in The Washington Post in order to discredit the paper). But Reade’s allegations against Biden are being vetted by journalists as we speak, and during the #MeToo era we have treated much thinner allegations against other men with much more seriousness. Biden should not get let off the hook. 

 

Quote

There is enough information here for me to confidently conclude that Tara Reade believes—and believed 27 years ago—that Biden’s office was a hostile place for her to work. I cannot say confidently that I believe Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade. But I cannot say confidently that I believe he did not. The Biden camp’s talking points are that Reade is lying. 

 

There are some other good, NSFW, lines in the rest of the article as well.

 

Unfortunately, due to timing and people getting hung up on Reade "changing her story," her allegations are being taken less seriously.  Ford was a more credible accuser and it also helped that other credible accusations against Kavanaugh came out.  Biden is a more credible denier of these accusations than Kavanaugh.  So the claims being taken less seriously does make some sense.

 

Like was mentioned, there is no entity with jurisdiction to investigate or subpoena in either case.  Investigative journalism is about all we have, and I would expect any new "bombshells" around Biden to be out within weeks, should they exist.  So my answer about the nominee may change if more does come to light.

 

I was adamant throughout the primary process that the candidate with the most votes should be the nominee.  That is Biden.  My personal preferences don't really factor in or matter.  Every candidate had/has weaknesses.  Biden seemed to be the only one who had "creepy with women" on his resume, and that threatens a lot of the progress women have made within the Democratic Party and the progressive movement since 2016.  Women voted Democrat by an estimated +19 margin in 2018.

 

If, say, this is somehow further corroborated (I don't know what that would even look like) or more people make claims against Biden, I think he should withdraw.  In that case, I don't know if the superdelegates would step in and pick a non-Bernie candidate or what.  If this claim fizzles out, I think Biden will be the nominee.  I don't really have an issue with it, though I do think his many weaknesses have been overlooked by a lot of voters.  My issue mainly was people either ignoring the claim (initially...seems like it is at least being acknowledged/discussed now) and/or immediately dismissing it out of hand.

Edited by DarkandStormy

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


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

I was adamant throughout the primary process that the candidate with the most votes should be the nominee.  That is Biden.  My personal preferences don't really factor in or matter.  Every candidate had/has weaknesses.  Biden seemed to be the only one who had "creepy with women" on his resume, and that threatens a lot of the progress women have made within the Democratic Party and the progressive movement since 2016.  Women voted Democrat by an estimated +19 margin in 2018.

 

If, say, this is somehow further corroborated (I don't know what that would even look like) or more people make claims against Biden, I think he should withdraw.  In that case, I don't know if the superdelegates would step in and pick a non-Bernie candidate or what.  If this claim fizzles out, I think Biden will be the nominee.  I don't really have an issue with it, though I do think his many weaknesses have been overlooked by a lot of voters.  My issue mainly was people either ignoring the claim (initially...seems like it is at least being acknowledged/discussed now) and/or immediately dismissing it out of hand.

 

If he were to drop out there would be nobody technically in the race, and I'd assume all candidates' delegates would basically be free to vote for whomever they wanted. It'd be the contested convention that all the pundits have been dreaming about for years.

 

If that were actually to happen, my gut says Warren would be the nominee. Biden's delegates wouldn't all go to Bernie, but I don't think the nomination would go to some rando like Cuomo or Hillary or whoever the wacky-article-du-jour has been discussing. It'll go to somebody who was actually in the race and could be something of a consensus candidate for all delegates at the convention.

Edited by mu2010

Share this post


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

 

If he were to drop out there would be nobody technically in the race, and I'd assume all candidates' delegates would basically be free to vote for whomever they wanted. It'd be the contested convention that all the pundits have been dreaming about for years.

 

If that were actually to happen, my gut says Warren would be the nominee. Biden's delegates wouldn't all go to Bernie, but I don't think the nomination would go to some rando like Cuomo or Hillary or whoever the wacky-article-du-jour has been discussing. It'll go to somebody who was actually in the race and could be something of a consensus candidate for all delegates at the convention.

 

I think Trump wins in any contested nomination.  I would like to believe Democrats are not that stupid... and that the voters who have been expressing their dislike for Trump the last 4 years are not that stupid... but it seems every day lately I am further disappointed by people.  Despite the economy, the virus, the disaster upon disaster, I still give Trump at least a 50/50 shot at winning re-election even with Biden staying the nominee. Societies in cultural freefall never seem to be able to stop it, and Trump was our Trojan horse. 

Share this post


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

If he were to drop out there would be nobody technically in the race, and I'd assume all candidates' delegates would basically be free to vote for whomever they wanted. It'd be the contested convention that all the pundits have been dreaming about for years.

 

If that were actually to happen, my gut says Warren would be the nominee. Biden's delegates wouldn't all go to Bernie, but I don't think the nomination would go to some rando like Cuomo or Hillary or whoever the wacky-article-du-jour has been discussing. It'll go to somebody who was actually in the race and could be something of a consensus candidate for all delegates at the convention.

 

Well, many candidates only "suspended" their campaigns.  They could unsuspend them.  Though, unendorsing and then jumping back into the race is fairly unprecedented.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


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

 

Well, many candidates only "suspended" their campaigns.  They could unsuspend them.  Though, unendorsing and then jumping back into the race is fairly unprecedented.

 

It could be done, but Biden would probably still come out with an absolute majority of delegates this late in the game. We're exactly a month away now from most of the delayed primaries happening (Tues June 2). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I hope some of these documents can be examined and the truth can come out, though the most likely outcome is no evidence at all and questions still linger. Biden is right to be very careful.

 

Edited by mu2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://apnews.com/aec7beb03e9e0e0e6e3c58111293e0ea?utm_medium=AP_Politics&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Tara Reade, the former Senate staffer who alleges Joe Biden sexually assaulted her 27 years ago, says she filed a limited report with a congressional personnel office that did not explicitly accuse him of sexual assault or harassment.

“I remember talking about him wanting me to serve drinks because he liked my legs and thought I was pretty and it made me uncomfortable,” Reade said in an interview Friday with The Associated Press. “I know that I was too scared to write about the sexual assault.”

Reade said she described her issues with Biden but “the main word I used — and I know I didn’t use sexual harassment — I used ‘uncomfortable.’ And I remember ‘retaliation.’”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, freefourur said:

^ and the story changes yet again.

 

She is undermining her own position here.  Why file a complaint about sexual harassment/assault... that leaves out any mention of either?  "Chickening out" is the reasoning given, but that seems strange to me given that she took the time to file a report at all.  This makes it seem like she is trying to get ahead of the fact that there is no corroboration in it for the allegations. 

 

The stuff she mentions about Biden liking her legs and stuff... I could absolutely see Biden behaving that way and making such comments.  He's long had an issue with creepy behavior around women in that regard.  But that doesn't arise to sexual assault, and we would need more.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


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

 

She is undermining her own position here.  Why file a complaint about sexual harassment/assault... that leaves out any mention of either?  "Chickening out" is the reasoning given, but that seems strange to me given that she took the time to file a report at all.  This makes it seem like she is trying to get ahead of the fact that there is no corroboration in it for the allegations. 

 

The stuff she mentions about Biden liking her legs and stuff... I could absolutely see Biden behaving that way and making such comments.  He's long had an issue with creepy behavior around women in that regard.  But that doesn't arise to sexual assault, and we would need more.

Biden called her bluff and now she is scrambling. She canceled he interview with Fox''s Chris Wallace shortly after Biden spoke yesterday. I do believe he might have made inappropriate comments which is creepy but is a long way from sexual assault. 

 

Share this post


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

 

Warren emerging as the front-runner for VP pick.

 

Torn between Warren and Harris (as Biden himself probably is). Warren will do a lot to bring home the progressive wing, but I find Harris to be magnetically charismatic and also obviously she's not white. Both would be able to do the job.

 

One bad thing about Warren, we'd get a GOP senator for the time between inauguration and the special election, which could be very bad for 'first 100 days' legislation, if the Senate map continues to look as good as it does for Democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And

 

Edited by KJP

"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

 


"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

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/21/tara-reade-biden-expert-testimony-274460

 

Quote

Defense lawyers look to reopen cases where Tara Reade testified as an expert

 

Not sure yet how it relates to the Biden allegations, but this story is gaining traction a bit - Reade apparently exaggerated or made false claims about her education as well as her role in Biden's Senate office.

 

Probably belongs in a 2020 Election thread, but those remain closed.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The left vs. the establishment

By David Leonhardt 

 

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party has had a rough couple of election cycles.  In 2018, not a single candidate endorsed by a progressive group like Our Revolution or Justice Democrats won a swing House district. More moderate Democrats, on the other hand, flipped dozens of districts. In 2020, the more liberal presidential candidates lost the nomination to Joe Biden.

 

But the left flank of the party has had success in one kind of federal race — primaries in safely Democratic House districts — and there is one such high-profile election today. It has become a proxy fight between establishment Democrats and progressives. Many on the left, feeling emboldened by the coronavirus crisis and the success of Black Lives Matter, see the race as a chance to create another prominent figure along with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, who both upset long-tenured House incumbents in 2018.

 

The incumbent this time is Eliot Engel, who is 73 and has been in Congress since 1989. The Times calls Engel “a faithful practitioner of old-school Washington politics, rising in committee ranks and bringing home perks for his diverse and overwhelmingly Democratic district.” He’s been endorsed by Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo, Hillary Clinton, the Congressional Black Caucus, Planned Parenthood and multiple unions. Engel has called criticisms of his record “a farce.”

 

The challenger is Jamaal Bowman, 44, who grew up in public housing and became the founding principal of a Bronx middle school. “We’ve anchored our race in fighting for racial and economic justice from the very beginning,” he told my colleague Jesse McKinley. Bowman, who’s black and has spoken about being unjustly arrested, supports reducing police budgets. He has been endorsed by Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Democratic Socialists of America and Move On.  The New York Times editorial board has also endorsed Bowman, while The Yonkers Times has endorsed Engel.  Public polling in House primaries tends to be sparse and unreliable, and the available evidence suggests either candidate could win. Michelle Goldberg, a Times Opinion columnist, has called the race “a test of whether the energy on American streets translates into votes.”

Edited by surfohio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2019 at 10:57 AM, eastvillagedon said:

 

looks like AOC is going to face some serious competition next year

 

 

So far, AOC is easily winning with about 73% of the vote. Although we won't have final results for quite some time due to the high number of absentee ballots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2020 at 10:52 PM, taestell said:

So far, AOC is easily winning with about 73% of the vote. Although we won't have final results for quite some time due to the high number of absentee ballots.

 

AOC won a higher percentage of the vote in her "contested" primary than Joe Biden did in his "uncontested" primary in New York.


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...