• 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

Goddamnit Biden just needs to keep his shit together. What the hell was he thinking? In what world was that a cool thing to say? Jesus Christ it might be the time to pull the plug and throw someone else in.

Biden is a good guy, and probably would make a decent president but I’m not sure he can keep it together long enough to win in December.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Goddamnit Biden just needs to keep his shit together. What the hell was he thinking? In what world was that a cool thing to say? Jesus Christ it might be the time to pull the plug and throw someone else in.

Biden is a good guy, and probably would make a decent president but I’m not sure he can keep it together long enough to win in December.
Click to expand...

Biden is only a "good guy" if you don't consider the repercussions of his legislative history. You talk about the morherfucker like he's moving into your neighborhood instead of you know, a politician running for the most powerful position in the world. For some reason, people think a politicians personality and persona mean jack shit. I'd vote for a lump of wet clay that fought for progressive ideology, meanwhile people would vote for Satan himself if they "liked the cut of his jib" or some dumb shit.
Fuck "Amtrak Joe"
 
They already voted for satan and the cut of his jib includes a knife to the back and expected praise and thanks for the stabbing.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Biden is only a "good guy" if you don't consider the repercussions of his legislative history. You talk about the morherfucker like he's moving into your neighborhood instead of you know, a politician running for the most powerful position in the world. For some reason, people think a politicians personality and persona mean jack shit. I'd vote for a lump of wet clay that fought for progressive ideology, meanwhile people would vote for Satan himself if they "liked the cut of his jib" or some dumb shit.
Fuck "Amtrak Joe"
Click to expand...

Aren’t you saying Biden’s personality and persona mean jack shit?
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Goddamnit Biden just needs to keep his shit together. What the hell was he thinking? In what world was that a cool thing to say? Jesus Christ it might be the time to pull the plug and throw someone else in.

Biden is a good guy, and probably would make a decent president but I’m not sure he can keep it together long enough to win in December.
Click to expand...

Biden is addled and a freaking moron! The Dems are lucky they have had Covid for two months so he is stuck in his basement & not stepping on his Johnson every hour of the day in the media in interviews. He made his “Black” comment and CNN hasn’t even commented on for hours. What a joke if a network!!
 
deaconson said:
They already voted for satan and the cut of his jib includes a knife to the back and expected praise and thanks for the stabbing.
Click to expand...

Of course. Just turns out there's bad guys on both sides, and they both play that folksy shit for the people in the cheap seats.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Kavanaugh had two accusers, and one of those was without question not credible.
Click to expand...

And neither accuser was credible and the first was from freaking high school and could not even identify Kavanaugh. She just knew something happened to her. She was paid by Dem operatives to come out of the woodwork & start the crap. CNN took the ball & then had Avenatti nominated for Prez. Now to see those same Dem Senators and it is suddenly a waste of time & political to investigate Biden’s payoffs for Burisma for his son Hunter.
 
Damn ref is next level dumb. He should check in with his dr and get the hook removed from his mouth.
 
avalon said:
I don't like when people say it either, because they're saying it to attack the accuser. That blame should go to people eager to have a false accusation to point to (for the rest of time) whenever accusations come out that they don't want to believe.

IF someone makes accusations that turn out to be false, criticize them for their actions and the direct harm they've caused, not things out of their control.

I appreciate the thoughtful response, though.
Click to expand...

Got it. That makes sense, thanks.

I’ve been thinking about this some lately, and I can’t quite organize my thoughts properly, so I apologize in advance. It seems like the general consensus is that women should be encouraged to come forward publicly, their claims should be investigated publicly to the fullest extent (presumably by journalists), and then both the accuser and the accused are judged in the court of public opinion. On the surface it seems the safe approach, maybe even the obvious one. But when I think about what the likely outcomes are, I can’t help but wonder if there is a better way.

For one, the framing that suggests a full investigation will bring to light a set of facts that allow for a real “verdict” seems to be a set up for failure. I don’t have any official stats to prove this, but would anyone argue that the vast majority of these cases won’t be resolved by clear evidence one way or the other? Of course there are exceptions, but most cases end up like Tara Reade. And so there are exhaustive arguments about “credibility” and everyone looks at each other with disgust as they lines up on opposite sides.

But how good are we really at determining credibility? Putting aside for a second the biases that we all have based on politics, news source, life experiences, etc. Even with a perfectly unbiased look at the results of these investigations, how much confidence do you have that you are getting it right? Even if there is someone with significant credibility problems, to paraphrase someone earlier in this thread, liars can still get raped. And conversely, scummy pervy dudes can get falsely accused of rape. Most of the time, we really just don’t know one way or the other. But that’s so deeply unsatisfying that everyone is shoehorned into “I believe her” or “she is not credible.” And that puts us in a really shitty spot, because then what.

It certainly doesn’t help politics. So much time is wasted on arguments about things that are ultimately unknowable and unprovable, and it fosters a real enmity between groups that transcends simple policy disagreement.

I also don’t think it helps the cause of justice. Hopefully no one is arguing against punishment for instances when a criminal case can be proven; and for personal and/or professional consequences for cases with clear evidence of harassment. But absent hard evidence, I think it’s difficult to make a moral/ethical case that someone accused should face significant consequences base what is ultimately a subjective assessment of credibility.

But maybe none of that matters, because the most important group in all of this is the victims. And maybe the above problems don’t matter if this is the best way to support and empower victims. But…is it? I’m asking because I really don’t know. I’m sure there is tons of scholarship on this and I’m admittedly ignorant. I’m also a white dude who hasn’t experience even a hint of meaningful harassment of any kind. So I probably deserve some shit for this, and I’d love to learn. But we’ve seen several of these cases play out over the years. And it’s great when someone like Weinstein is brought to justice. And it’s awful when an accusation is proven to be false. But those are the outliers. Usually, it’s cases like Dr. Ford, who was harassed so badly she had to move multiple times to escape the threats. Tara Reade has seen her reputation, fairly or unfairly, smeared in an incredibly public way, and I can’t imagine the next few years are going to be a cakewalk for her. And I think it all comes back to that fall choice: I believe her or I don’t.

I am typically annoyed when people talk about how broken something is without suggesting a solution to fix it. But I honestly don’t know what the right solution is here, and victims of abuse, not me, should be the ones making these kind of calls. But is there any way we can re-frame or re-center our approach to these cases. Can we make the focus on supporting the victim rather than punishing the accused? Would that allow us to come together as people that care about people rather than political groups defending our own? Is it possible to protect and empower victims that way, or the lack of consequences undermine the work?

This is hard, fuck.
 
woof, that's long and rambly, with many typos, and I can't edit. sorry team.
 
tiltdeac said:
woof, that's long and rambly, with many typos, and I can't edit. sorry team.
Click to expand...

I think it's a great post. The incredible nuance of the topic makes it very difficult to discuss without drawing sides. I think it's important for victims to speak up, even if they can't prove themselves, because it increases societies awareness of the act, and hopefully it eases the shame for other victims who are afraid to come forward
 
"Moments of national crisis tend to build solidarity and boost faith in government. Trust reached its highest point in recent history immediately after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But it started falling again after the invasion of Iraq, through Barack Obama’s presidency and now that of Donald J. Trump. Since 2008, it has not risen above 25 percent."
 
Ongoing Dem Debacle Thread: debacle 69% of the time, every time

Why is this on the Dem debacle thread? Republicans have committed to destroying faith in government with the help of media more than happy to tear down anybody who tries to make government work.

You can claim that Democrats didn’t understand why Republicans were up to until too late but you’d have to go back to the 1980 and 1984 elections at least in order to fix it. Republicans changed the game well before Democrats realized it.
 
Last edited:
Unemployment rates as of April 2020:

- Germany: 4%
- Denmark: 6%
- Finland: 8%
- Portugal: 9%
- France: 10%
- United States: 14.7%

And, the US is the only one above where you can lose your health care when you become unemployed.

The governments of France, Germany, the UK, Denmark and the Netherlands are all directly paying companies to keep workers on payroll. It's cheaper and more effective than our PPP program.

Dems couldn’t even get the Paycheck Guarantee through the Dem controlled House.

And it’s going to get so much worse. Most of these jobs aren’t coming back. But relief efforts will stop. Income inequality is not a stated policy position the Democratic Party aims to address.
 
avalon said:
Isn't this what reps say when they get primaried from the left?
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
Why is this on the Dem debacle thread? Republicans have committed to destroying faith in government with the help of media more than happy to tear down anybody who tries to make government work.

You can claim that Democrats didn’t understand why Republicans were up to until too late but you’d have to go back to the 1980 and 1984 elections at least in order to fix it. Republicans changed the game well before Democrats realized it.
Click to expand...

That sounds like an ongoing dem debacle. It also will be the context Biden inherits and enacts his agenda within.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top