• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing Dem Debacle Thread: Commander will kill us all

myDeaconmyhand said:
None of the sexual assault allegations are going to grow legs because the Democratic party can't risk actually investigating them and potentially finding them true. Luckily for them, much like the Republicans, the voters don't pay attention, and the ones that do pay attention don't believe them.
Click to expand...

She's changed her story three times in the past month.

But you guys totally dismissed Bernie's sexism and unfair pay practices in 2016 that have been proven.
 
RJKarl said:
She's changed her story three times in the past month.

But you guys totally dismissed Bernie's sexism and unfair pay practices in 2016 that have been proven.
Click to expand...

You really don’t have to whatabout everything. It’s exhausting.
 
Jamison2Carter said:
^bernie to be the nominee
Click to expand...

That's a load of crap. There is no way that Bernie is the nominee even if Biden drops dead tomorrow. Even assuming establishment Dems put their personal dislike for Bernie aside, they cannot and will not just give it to the second place person because many of the Biden votes were specifically against said second place person.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
You really don’t have to whatabout everything. It’s exhausting.
Click to expand...

What total BS!!!

They are separate issues. The first is this woman has changed her story numerous times in a month. Which story can be believed? All can't be true.

As to the second part, it was there to show the hypocrisy of Bernie supporters.

Each is independent of the other and each stands on it own. Whatabout is deflection.
 
deactherunner said:
That's a load of crap. There is no way that Bernie is the nominee even if Biden drops dead tomorrow. Even assuming establishment Dems put their personal dislike for Bernie aside, they cannot and will not just give it to the second place person because many of the Biden votes were specifically against said second place person.
Click to expand...

I think if Biden dropped out bernie would be the nominee.

Biden was vetted for VP; was VP for 8 years, has run for president numerous times, Reade’s changed her allegation, recently tweeted support for Biden, etc.

She’s just not credible. And Democrats/liberals have kind of suffered justified backlash for going way overboard with the MeToo movement and what constitutes a reasonable standard of proof and a fair process to evaluate these claims on a case by case basis. Many sexual assault claims decades later will be totally truthful; some will not. Probably in most cases we’ll never know one way or the other; but there ought to be compelling proof beyond the bare fact that a complaint was filed before we cast people out from society.
 
RJKarl said:
She's changed her story three times in the past month.

But you guys totally dismissed Bernie's sexism and unfair pay practices in 2016 that have been proven.
Click to expand...

you're a goddamn moron. Bernie doesn't have a 30 year history of touching women and making them uncomfortable, nor has any woman accused him of raping them with his fingers. Any other terrible whatabouts you want to make?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
no they haven't, unless you're talking out of your ass about the vetting process, or you know more than CNN apparently

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/02/politics/tara-reade-allegation-joe-biden/index.html
Click to expand...

So answer the question. What more do you want? Unless you can clearly articulate what you want an investigation to look like and you can accept an investigation may not find what you want, it’s pretty damn reasonable to believe your motivation isn’t the truth or to address the problem of sexual assault. You just don’t like Biden.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
you're a goddamn moron. Bernie doesn't have a 30 year history of touching women and making them uncomfortable, nor has any woman accused him of raping them with his fingers. Any other terrible whatabouts you want to make?
Click to expand...

And we've gone over the cultural issues of hugging, kissing on the cheek.

The woman who has claimed 'assault" has changed her story almost every time she is interviewed. She isn't credible at all.
 
PhDeac said:
So answer the question. What more do you want? Unless you can clearly articulate what you want an investigation to look like and you can accept an investigation may not find what you want, it’s pretty damn reasonable to believe your motivation isn’t the truth or to address the problem of sexual assault. You just don’t like Biden.
Click to expand...

unlike you loathsome pathetic fucks I don't pick and choose which sexual assault allegations to believe based on my personal preferences.
 
I haven't called you a name or impugned your intelligence, but you can't control yourself.

I don't care whom I prefer when it's a principle. If someone changes their story over and over again, it's not credible.

For this entire campaign, you have immediately gone to name calling and insults if people don't goosestep to every period, comma and word of your manifestos.

If you actually had paid attention, you would have known Biden was not in my Top 3 until it became obvious he was going to be the nominee. Rather that beating Trump, you want absolute purity and fealty to your ideas.

Who else does that? Oh yeah, Trump.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
unlike you loathsome pathetic fucks I don't pick and choose which sexual assault allegations to believe based on my personal preferences.
Click to expand...

You should decide based on available evidence. Instead of calling people with whom you disagree “loathsome pathetic fucks” you could make a persuasive argument about why Reade’s allegation meets any reasonable burden of proof. Not even proof beyond a reasonable double, since the court of public opinion is not a court of law. Just proof sufficient to end someone’s career and derail the most important Dem nominee in possibly a generation. The facts of this case can, and may, of course evolve over time/investigation(s), but your inability to engage in civil discourse, not to mention the fact that you can’t provide factual support for you position is pretty much indicative of why you’ve resorted to baseless name calling. And it is generally why nobody takes you seriously or enjoys interacting with you here.
 
Jamison2Carter said:
This article articulates many of the same reasons why I don’t believe her. Not to mention personnel complaints at the time would not have been the property of a senator; but of the government.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3046962001
Click to expand...

>opens article
>reads "But as the news media have investigated Reade’s allegations, I’ve become increasingly skeptical. Here are some of the reasons why:"
>alright let's get into these reasons
>first point: "Reade waited 27 years to publicly report her allegation that Biden sexually assaulted her."
>closes article

starting to think that men who haven't been sexually assaulted might not have the objective read they think they have on this
 
This half of the M&Ms has basically been reduced to sniping and drive-bys ever since Bernie lost his grip in the primary.

“Believe all women” is going to die a well-deserved death now. Do we just believe allegations of wrong-doing in any context just because someone says so? Of course not. It’s silly. Hopefully what can replace it is a sensible, balanced approach to vetting sexual assault claims outside of the criminal courts. And the realization for many will sink in that when, for whatever reason, you wait 20+ years to report a sexual assault - while totally common and understandable, that person likely will not be able to prove their claim.

Many liberals will deservedly get lashed for hypocrisy re: the Reade claims. It makes it hard to argue they’re not credible or to articulate the differences with these facts and other cases/facts when your mantra is “believe all women; just not this one.”
 
TenaciousKory said:
>opens article
>reads "But as the news media have investigated Reade’s allegations, I’ve become increasingly skeptical. Here are some of the reasons why:"
>alright let's get into these reasons
>first point: "Reade waited 27 years to publicly report her allegation that Biden sexually assaulted her."
>closes article

starting to think that men who haven't been sexually assaulted might not have the objective read they think they have on this
Click to expand...

I’m going to let you in on a secret. Men make up about half of juries and half of the public. We can and should provide structure to protect sexual assault victims that addresses the institutional inequalities that protect male assailants; but we also can’t ignore evidence or throw reason out the window. Considering a delay is reporting, especially within the context of a shifting story - one that escalated from harassment in 2019 to rape in 2020 around the time Biden took control of the primary - is perfectly reasonable. It is neither qualifying or disqualifying for a claim of sexual assault. But it can be taken into account objectively. As bad as we are, collectively, and historically, in grappling with sexual assault in a male dominated society - it seems pretty widely accepted that many legitimate victims of sexual assault delay, or more commonly never, report their assaults. That’s why context and other evidence matters, as it does in Reade’s case. At least for me. And if some compelling evidence on her behalf arise; I and everyone should reserve the right to weigh it and change their conclusion if necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top