Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: The Killing Hoax

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Comparing Wellstone- whose reputation was spotless, to people actually accused of shit is no different than saying because some people in your profession are up to no good that you yourself are part of it. Smearing someone who has never been accused of doing, saying, enabling, or covering up anything inappropriate like that is just being obtuse for no reason.

That's a fair assessment in the abstract.  But, even if say Wellstone was this paragon you imagine, wouldn't it be objectionable that he allowed this to go on all around him before he died?  If I'm not allowed to ethically vote for Biden by your standards, why do you hold up Wellstone as an officeholder that at the least sat by and tolerated said standards?  I'm not smearing any one person, I'm smearing an era.  If you have arguments that I'm wrong about that, please do tell.

Share this post


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

Conservative policies, especially as it relates to the Supreme Court, are intimately related to aiding and abetting sexual abusers/harassers. A good example is these corporate nondisclosure agreements. Or look at what DeVos has done on campuses in regards to sexual assault accusations.

I didn't used to realize that Republicans and libertarians actively want wealthy men to get away with sexual abuse and harassment. They completely do. (I don't think they care either way if middle class or working class men also get away with it)

Thank you. That's the bit about our favorite feel good high and mighty moral high ground keyboard warriors don't seem to get, or seem unwilling to think thru to the bitter end.

But I am sure they will protest against the next Kavanaugh like Supreme Court judge alongside Susan Sarandon, while they invoke Hitler and Stalin as some thought out argument.

Share this post


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

I have a very hard time believing that.  You were on the front lines of defending anything negative being associated with Sanders to an annoying degree.  Pretty sure you once admonished me for referring to someone innocuously as a Sanders "staffer" rather than an "advocate."  As if that made a substantive difference.  We all have our political biases.  I think it's important to recognize that -- particularly within a necessarily two-party system. 

This "concern" about Biden seems obviously motivated by people that are still pissed he got the nomination.  I'm pissed he got the nomination too.  But sometime over the past 20 years I grew up in terms of my political perspective (whereas I failed to grow up basically in all other aspects of life) and realized politicians were never going to meet my expectations.  You have to choose the better of two evils in this electoral system.  To use another odious term, welcome to "adulting."

Believe what you want.  I was definitely a very vocal and probably strident Sanders defender, but then he was never accused of anything like this.  And I do remember pointing out that Zephyr Teachout was not on Sanders' staff when she wrote that piece about Biden being corrupt, call it admonishing if you want to.  

I also am fairly certain I've never dismissed an allegation like this or castigated someone for bringing it up.  If everyone sees my motivation for bringing this up as suspect, oh well.  Doesn't change anything.

Yes, I understand that our system is necessarily a lesser of two evils choice most of the time.  I've voted that way since I've been voting, contrary to what Jace said about me not being a voter.  I don't live in a swing state, but I will in all likelihood vote for Biden, if only to run up the numbers.  But I'm also going to be critical and if there's any chance that he feels that he needs to move to the left to appease skeptical voters, I'm all for it.  Maybe that's childish, sounds pretty pragmatic to me though.

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Thank you. That's the bit about our favorite feel good high and mighty moral high ground keyboard warriors don't seem to get, or seem unwilling to think thru to the bitter end.

But I am sure they will protest against the next Kavanaugh like Supreme Court judge alongside Susan Sarandon, while they invoke Hitler and Stalin as some thought out argument.

As already noted, the alternatives to a Kavanaugh type are almost infinite. The alternative to Biden is Donald Trump. The possibility of a Presidential candidate who doesn’t have a potentially damning sexual history at this point is zero, as is the possibility of a candidate who will represent hope for sexual assault victims.

The possibility of helping all kinds of other types of victims is still there, though. That’s the call everyone has to make for themselves, though it seems a pretty clear cut one to me. 

Edited by James Arryn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

But I'm also going to be critical and if there's any chance that he feels that he needs to move to the left to appease skeptical voters, I'm all for it.  Maybe that's childish, sounds pretty pragmatic to me though.

Ok, so it's not a moral imperative or anything, it's a political tactic?  Good to clarify.  You are using the Biden accusations to try and move Biden to the left.  You're right, it's not childish, but it's politically stupid.  It can't help.  I'm not sure it hurts much either, but it definitely doesn't do anything more than make you feel better about yourself.

Share this post


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

 

I think the VP nomination is way different than looking like the democratic nominee against serial rapist/racist/oligarch/dangerous moron Donald Trump. For one, nobody gets to vote on who gets the VP nod, it’s up to the nominee alone ultimately. And if you can imagine the pitchforks that would come out against someone viewed as trying to ding the campaign of the first black president- before #metoo, when Weinstein and Epstein were still raping with impunity- you’re out of your mind if you don’t think the situation is way different now.

That's a poor defense of the idea that it was too important not to come out against him running for President, but not important enough to come out against him running for or spending eight years as VP.

And what is the reasoning that "she thought maybe he had changed" supposed to convey? That she only spoke out because all his other non-existent rape accusers? She chose to come out with a rape accusation in the midst of complaints of inappropriate touching skin to examples that were done in public, sometimes televised.

Despite attempts to smear us as being like the GOP that actively shut up an witnesses and an investigation, it seems to me that most Democratic voters here say we should have an investigation. We don't want to sweep it under the rug. Someone is lying, and now it is essential we find out who.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, DMC said:

That's a fair assessment in the abstract.  But, even if say Wellstone was this paragon you imagine, wouldn't it be objectionable that he allowed this to go on all around him before he died?  If I'm not allowed to ethically vote for Biden by your standards, why do you hold up Wellstone as an officeholder that at the least sat by and tolerated said standards?  I'm not smearing any one person, I'm smearing an era.  If you have arguments that I'm wrong about that, please do tell.

Jesus Christ dude- I never said *you* were not allowed to vote for Joe Biden. I said that *I* personally am undecided whether I will be able to bring myself to vote for Joe Biden because I suffer from PTSD from being raped. I don’t know why you’re picking those words to put in my mouth but knock it the fuck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

As already noted, the alternatives to a Kavanaugh type are almost infinite. The alternative to Biden is Donald Trump.

 

One of the reasons this topic has turned so damn bad-tempered is that there are two different conversations going on at crossporpuses. Apart from Simon Steele, I don't think most people condemning Biden are saying they won't vote for him or will vote for Trump. They're saying the choice should not be between Biden and Trump and working off the probably-too-hopeful assumptiuon that Biden could still be forced to withdraw and someone else credibly take his place. And then the other side are mostly arguing with Simon's premise that Biden and Trump are the same and therefore voting for neither is valid, which is obviously nuts but not what the majority is saying. Hence, frustration and anger on both sides. 

Obviously there are some people for some reason arguing that Biden is a credible choice aside from the allegations and should therefore be nominated anyway, but, ya know, to paraphrase a great Frenchman, these Americans are crazy.

Share this post


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

Jesus Christ dude- I never said *you* were not allowed to vote for Joe Biden. I said that *I* personally am undecided whether I will be able to bring myself to vote for Joe Biden because I suffer from PTSD from being raped. I don’t know why you’re picking those words to put in my mouth but knock it the fuck off.

you don't appear to grasp that the only other realistic alternative is Donald Trump, who is far worse than Biden on that issue and a host of others.

That said, I suggest you contemplate this:  Biden has said he intends to select a woman (presumably without sexual harassment baggage) as Vice president.  Biden is old.  Very possibly he will not make it through a full term.

Share this post


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

 

One of the reasons this topic has turned so damn bad-tempered is that there are two different conversations going on at crossporpuses. Apart from Simon Steele, I don't think most people condemning Biden are saying they won't vote for him or will vote for Trump. They're saying the choice should not be between Biden and Trump and working off the probably-too-hopeful assumptiuon that Biden could still be forced to withdraw and someone else credibly take his place. And then the other side are mostly arguing with Simon's premise that Biden and Trump are the same and therefore voting for neither is valid, which is obviously nuts but not what the majority is saying. Hence, frustration and anger on both sides. 

Obviously there are some people for some reason arguing that Biden is a credible choice aside from the allegations and should therefore be nominated anyway, but, ya know, to paraphrase a great Frenchman, these Americans are crazy.

I don’t think it’s even that. There are people saying that we are almost certainly stuck with Biden and these allegations aren’t being taken seriously enough and we should get this over with before the convention so some kind of peace through acknowledgement of victims and some policy concessions can be made to hopefully get some people on the fence to turn out in spite of this and to not poison the well for the whole damn party any more than is inevitable. And then there are people saying that those people are not voters, are helping Trump, or are forbidding others to vote for Biden. It’s getting pretty silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2020 at 6:55 PM, DMC said:

This tack led to a realignment based on education - at least among the white population.  The tradeoff is the white working class gravitates to the right while professional class whites gravitate towards the left.  Considering this tradeoff is also conditioned on the GOP relying on activating white racial resentment that alienates minorities, I will gladly take that tradeoff in the long run.  Moreover, as Obama 2008 (and to a lesser extent 2012) demonstrated, the white working class can still be somewhat poachable for the Dems when sociotropic economic voting favors their side.  

Thanks for the explanation.

I have one question about this. It's my impression that education cleavage isn't only something that is happening in the US, but is largely happening in Europe as well.  Is my impression wrong, or only partially correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

you don't appear to grasp that the only other realistic alternative is Donald Trump, who is far worse than Biden on that issue and a host of others.

That said, I suggest you contemplate this:  Biden has said he intends to select a woman (presumably without sexual harassment baggage) as Vice president.  Biden is old.  Very possibly he will not make it through a full term.

Dude- I do not need you to tell me what I grasp and what I need to consider. You clearly do not understand what PTSD is. You should educate yourself on that. I’m not saying I’m considering planting my feet and crossing my arms because I find it morally repugnant. I am saying I am considering staying home to avoid having a physical hyperventilating panic attack inside my polling place. No amount of thinking about Donald Trump is gonna help me with that, and you are being extremely condescending and ignorant to think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

Jesus Christ dude- I never said *you* were not allowed to vote for Joe Biden. I said that *I* personally am undecided whether I will be able to bring myself to vote for Joe Biden because I suffer from PTSD from being raped. I don’t know why you’re picking those words to put in my mouth but knock it the fuck off.

You said:

11 hours ago, Fury Resurrected said:

If we all know more than one person this has happened to- that’s a big big problem for the DNC, not just for the general election, but for downticket races as well because if you’re no voting for these reasons, you’re probably not showing up to vote at all. These allegations have been largely ignored by the DNC and the Biden campaign and by other democrats running for office. To a survivor, this says loud and clear the party cares about us only when the perpetrator is someone they didn’t like anyway, and we are only a weapon to be used against an enemy, not real people. 

That's an argument for why voting for Biden should make you feel bad, plain and simple.  Another way to say that is this quote is telling me I should view voting for Joe Biden as unethical, which is what you're objecting to here.  You ARE guilting anyone that still decides to vote for Biden.  Without warrant.  I stand by that statement, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fury Resurrected said:

And then there are people saying that those people are not voters, are helping Trump, or are forbidding others to vote for Biden. It’s getting pretty silly.

 

Jace made it perfectly clear years ago that she's here to be a supervillain. She's in it to watch the world burn and, if possible, kick over a few cans of gasoline on the way.

What I'm saying is, don't ignore what Jace is saying, but taking seriously the manner in which she says it only feeds her power.

Share this post


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

You said:

That's an argument for why voting for Biden should make you feel bad, plain and simple.  Another way to say that is this quote is telling me I should view voting for Joe Biden as unethical, which is what you're objecting to here.  You ARE guilting anyone that still decides to vote for Biden.  Without warrant.  I stand by that statement, thanks.

No, if you read the post (which you should have, since you quoted it) it clearly states that it’s an argument for why the Democratic Party as a whole should be doing more to address these allegations and to consider how a significant portion of their electorate is impacted by their reactions or lack thereof in these times. I never said anyone should feel anything, but I did say democrats should be more considerate of victims during this time (which I thank you for providing the shining example of that I mean here and how the reactions of Democrats is pretty hard for victims to deal with). And you just keep moving the goalposts- first I said you are not allowed to vote for Biden, now I said voting for Biden should make you feel bad. I didn’t even say that I myself was decided against voting for Biden. I said I don’t know, and that’s true. I do know I want my party to get better about this.

Why is saying anything other than golly I can’t wait to vote for Biden such a bad thing to you? 

Share this post


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

That's an argument for why voting for Biden should make you feel bad, plain and simple.  Another way to say that is this quote is telling me I should view voting for Joe Biden as unethical, which is what you're objecting to here.  You ARE guilting anyone that still decides to vote for Biden.  Without warrant.  I stand by that statement, thanks.

 

I read the paragraph like four times and it never, not once, mentions what voters should be doing or feeling bad about. It's about the establishment and the way they seem to take the ideas behind #metoo seriously only when it's not inconvenient to them (doesn't even say not they shouldn't have picked Biden, just that they shouldn't be so dismissive of the allegations if their previous attitude of 'listen to women' is meant to be taken seriously as anything more than a convenient political stunt on their part), not you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a great microcosm of the party as a whole. Most of the posters (and absolutely the most prolific ones and those who get the most engagement from others) are pretty centrist and male. When someone says hey, when these allegations come up we should be more careful how we respond or don’t because there are a vast number of victims of similar crimes out there and I myself am one, and if we want to take the moral high ground we need them to know they are heard and considered- that person gets accused of telling others they cannot vote for Biden and are guilting people. I’m not the only person on this board who has been through this, and I guarantee some of those are reading these threads and don’t want to jump in and make any comment because of how anything even mildly critical of the prevailing opinion gets treated, with no consideration for trauma even when that trauma is explicitly stated.

 

And that’s what I’m trying to say this party needs to put in the work on. If you want to know how to navigate sexual assault and rape allegations without bullying or talking down to people or just sweeping it under the rug- you MUST do a lot of listening to victims. I don’t see that happening in the wider party than I do on this board and I don’t think that’s a good thing or something that’s going to help electorally in the long term. I also think it is the kind of attitude that creates more victims. 
 

We should be at least trying really hard to find a way to do even a little bit better. 

Share this post


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

Why is saying anything other than golly I can’t wait to vote for Biden such a bad thing to you? 

Pretty sure the original specific point of contention was about your naivete concerning Paul Wellstone.  As for criticizing Biden, the entire basis of this discussion is derived from whether or not you should vote for Biden.  Pretending it's not is not only disingenuous and silly, but makes the discussion really fucking boring. That goes for @polishgenius's response too.  Like, are you guys trying out for FNC Anchors and they make you obfuscate as much as possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Like, are you guys trying out for FNC Anchors and they make you obfuscate as much as possible?

:rolleyes:


If you can't deal with discussion topics being about slightly other things than the exact thing you want to talk about, probably just make your own and stay in that. I mean you're really sitting there telling Fury Resurrected that she can't be talking about what she says she's talking about, even though she's clarified multiple times just in case the first one was unclear, because that's not what you're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, DMC said:

Pretty sure the original specific point of contention was about your naivete concerning Paul Wellstone.  As for criticizing Biden, the entire basis of this discussion is derived from whether or not you should vote for Biden.  Pretending it's not is not only disingenuous and silly, but makes the discussion really fucking boring. That goes for @polishgenius's response too.  Like, are you guys trying out for FNC Anchors and they make you obfuscate as much as possible?

Here again you are changing goalposts. Wellstone was brought up between Tywin Et Al and I (both Minnesotans) because of Al Franken- not Joe Biden anyway. My point about Wellstone was that he as someone who was never accused of wrongdoing of any kind, was better than Al Franken specifically, who groped a bunch of people- because they held the exact same senate seat and Minnesota democrats have a special regard for Wellstone and his legacy. If that’s naive to you, whatever, but that wasn’t even related to Joe Biden. As for the rest, you’re just sounding pretty insecure and defensive about not actually reading the posts you argue against and wanting to advocate against even listening to victims about how to manage responses to this. Which is very evident you are a staunch advocate against listening in general and if that’s your position I can disagree but I won’t bother arguing with you over it.

Edited by Fury Resurrected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...