Jump to content
Navv

General US Politics

Poll  

311 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you vote a third party?

    • Yes
      99
    • No
      129
    • Maybe
      83
  2. 2. Are you content with the results of the election?

    • Yes
      57
    • No
      133
    • Indifferent
      50


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, eclipse said:

Do you honestly think that 30% of Hawaii is going to decide to follow my logic?  Because that's literally what it would take for a shift from Democrat.

I know my demographic far better than you, on the basis of living here.  Notice how I'm NOT telling you how to vote?  That's because I don't know Maryland's culture or political climate, nor will I pretend to.  I strongly suggest not doing the same to anyone else.  I'll apologize if Hawaii's anything but blue, but I doubt I'm going to have to do this.  I'm still going to vote, as much as the second wave will let me.

If it makes you feel better, the conservative base is also worried.  But I think they have a good reason for it.

Notice how I'm not specifically telling you how to vote? Notice how I'm mostly talking in generalities? Notice how I'm commenting based on information given to me? Notice how I'm commenting on previous things that have happened? Am I not allowed to comment on a situation that's similar to mine, just because I don't live there? Are you shutting down any comment on Hawaii because you know more than me about where you live? I think, if it's the last sentence, that is the antithesis of this forum, based on the guidelines here.

I'm not telling you specifically to do shit. I'm talking about why I think it's pointless to vote third party, even in a deep blue or red state. In the end, I don't actually care what you, the user Eclipse, does. If you vote third party and the Republicans win Hawaii? Then we can all talk about retrospect like we did with Clinton & Michigan. Routinely had Democratic blowouts since 1992, and went to Trump by half a percent.

The arguments you're putting forth are reasons why you may feel too apathetic to vote. Like I've said in a previous thread -- and I'll gladly dig it up, because nothing has changed in years (hint: it was about net neutrality and I was talking about grassroots political organization, if you want to dig it up yourself) -- I'm not telling you, the user Eclipse, specifically, to do anything.

I'm here to talk about how I think the rhetoric behind voting third party or for not one of the two major parties in our current system is more dangerous than the rhetoric behind voting for one of the two major parties. Especially since, in our case, the united voting bloc will accept anything with an R, and the non-united voting bloc won't. Maybe these people should participate in a primary if they don't think their voices are being heard, considering the primary is supposed to take the moderate candidate of the bunch. If you're throwing Hawaii at me and saying "but don't comment on Hawaii because I know way more than you," then you really didn't seem to care about the point at all.

If you want to take for granted the blue vote, by all means, I'd say it's no skin off my back but I would be lying because this is not the election to make a point about how broken the voting system is. Because currently, everything is broken around us, and many, many people on this forum have had people die or get infected by COVID, have lost employment due to COVID, and the president refuses to do anything because he's clearly targeting demographics who wouldn't vote for him (poor, minorities, city people, blue state people, etc).

But my point right now is that it's dangerous to assume that oh I live in a deep blue state my vote doesn't count and then not vote. You seem to be encouraging this mentality, and I completely disagree with that rhetoric. I should be able to make this point without you saying

Quote

I know my demographic far better than you, on the basis of living here.  Notice how I'm NOT telling you how to vote?  That's because I don't know Maryland's culture or political climate, nor will I pretend to.  I strongly suggest not doing the same to anyone else.

Which comes off as an appeal to authority type of fallacy, and not... anything relevant to the point I'm making. It's twisting and turning what I'm saying to shutting it down. Please stop doing that. If you can see the future and predict the way the election is going to go, share the information with us. Otherwise, don't pretend I'm some crazy person shooting off some rhetoric to actually vote regardless of your circumstance if you're able to.

I live in a state that has just as big a chance as going red as Hawaii does. Since we have probably tons more black people, here's my appeal to authority from the border state -- the (older) black community knows far, far, far better than us the importance of voting and not taking elections for granted, and I would advise you listen to them over me, seeing as there are many of them in Maryland. Probably even more than Hawaii, given they're the most proportionally fucked over class of people in the country. They've managed to swing elections and there is much more on the line overall for them than there probably ever will be for us. Are we still doing appeals to people who know better here, or is this paragraph a bunch of bullshit?

I'm not here to win arguments or have a good time. I just completely and utterly disagree with your rhetoric and I'm vocalizing it. You living in Hawaii and me living in Maryland has absolutely nothing to do with it, it just means that I can't sympathize despite being in a similar voting situation. We're probably way more diverse, too, given we're full of a ton of international ancestry rather than a bunch of AAPI.

Share this post


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

I'm not here to win arguments or have a good time. I just completely and utterly disagree with your rhetoric and I'm vocalizing it. You living in Hawaii and me living in Maryland has absolutely nothing to do with it, it just means that I can't sympathize despite being in a similar voting situation. We're probably way more diverse, too, given we're full of a ton of international ancestry rather than a bunch of AAPI.

I don't mind that you disagree.  I DO mind that you're doing so in this manner - namely, out of what you think it should be, never mind the other person.  And as for diversity?  To truly understand that, you'd need to try to live here. . .which I wouldn't recommend, given the current state of the economy.  There's a reason why some people are really unhappy here, while others take to it like a duck to water.

Edited by eclipse

Share this post


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

I DO mind that you're doing so in this manner - namely, out of what you think it should be, never mind the other person.

You're doing the same thing back. My point is that everyone should vote affirmatively in this election. Your point is "what about Hawaii it doesn't matter." My point is "what about Michigan." Your point is "I know Hawaii better than you lol trust me it's a deep blue state." My response is "I live in a deep blue state, I'm still voting affirmatively, just cuz you know Hawaii better than me doesn't mean some bullshit can't happen, considering Michigan was blue as fuck and the Democrats lost it to Trump."

That's the discussion. You're just telling me to shut up and not lecture you on Hawaii, when you're the one who inserted it into the conversation in the first place. What is the point you are making?

2 hours ago, eclipse said:

And as for diversity?  To truly understand that, you'd need to try to live here. . .which I wouldn't recommend, given the current state of the economy.  There's a reason why some people are really unhappy here, while others take to it like a duck to water.

How about you describe it yourself? If you don't want to put in the effort, then don't tell me what I can and can't say about Hawaii's demographics. Otherwise, I'm not taking your word for it just because you know and I don't.

"To truly understand it, you'd need to live here" -- that's not true at all, you can describe it instead of this vagueness. You only brought up you're in a deep blue state -- how the hell am I supposed to relate beyond the fact that I'm from a deep blue state? I've even lived in wildly different demographics to Maryland (currently sorta kinda but not really living in Ohio, have lived long-term in Illinois and Arizona).

You say "a lot of people voted affirmatively in 2016/2018" and I say "a lot of people did not in other heavy blue states, so why still vote third party in this election when everything's on the line?"

"There's a reason why some people..." -- then state it, otherwise we'll go in circles and you'll just be policing without adding anything. I'm not doing research for a point you're making, if you're not going to properly offer a perspective then you add absolutely nothing but indifference. My point in the end is this is not the election to make a point other than a complete and total repudiation of Trump, who is actively trying to suppress votes, make up some #OBAMAGATE bullshit and who is trying to delegitimize any election result that occurs. Every state functions differently, but let's be real that anything can flip based on the fact that this virus is probably being allowed to spread as it does because it disproportionately targets groups that don't vote for Trump -- minorities and poor people.

As I will continue to say, this is not the election to take for granted.

Share this post


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

You're doing the same thing back. My point is that everyone should vote affirmatively in this election. Your point is "what about Hawaii it doesn't matter." My point is "what about Michigan." Your point is "I know Hawaii better than you lol trust me it's a deep blue state." My response is "I live in a deep blue state, I'm still voting affirmatively, just cuz you know Hawaii better than me doesn't mean some bullshit can't happen, considering Michigan was blue as fuck and the Democrats lost it to Trump."

Because I don't speak for Michigan.  Or any other swing state.  Only myself.  Get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What point are you making here? You sound like you're just responding without saying anything.

In the last page you've added literally nothing to this discussion other than "I know Hawaii more than you." Okay? Congratulations on not educating me on anything.

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

What point are you making here? You sound like you're just responding without saying anything.

In the last page you've added literally nothing to this discussion other than "I know Hawaii more than you." Okay? Congratulations on not educating me on anything.

The point is that I'm voting third-party specifically because of where I live and the political conditions.  If I lived in a place where the divide wasn't so stark, I'd probably vote for Biden.  Likewise, anyone else that does this kind of protest vote needs to know their own political climate before making that sort of decision.  It's a weighted risk.  In my case, I'm almost certain my state will be blue, hence why I'm willing to do it.  If my state was heavily red, I'd vote blue in protest.  If my state was a swing state, a third-party vote is definitely the wrong answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fair.

I still think there is lots and lots of merit in voting blue in a blue state -- it still means that the candidate will make the necessary concessions to take the state, which if you want that, then an affirmative vote is good for precisely that.

It's a common argument by some progressive factions that believe that it's pointless to vote for Biden despite him making some concessions (and there's 5-6 months more concessions for him to make) as a "protest vote." Because the logic is poor; they won't try to court people who won't show up, especially if they didn't show up for their candidate of choice in the primary.

In either case, I think the points I made were fairly clear about why voting third party in protest is suboptimal regardless of your own personal choice and your state situation. We're allowed to discuss this and you don't need to take it personally. In the end I was discussing a general idea and you were discussing your own personal choice. It's, ultimately, two wildly different points we are making.

That still doesn't mean that I'm telling you to vote a certain way. We didn't need to spend a page going over this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and no.

It's very important to figure out why someone's doing what they're doing.  Perhaps you're dealing with someone who's truly ignorant of the situation - then trying to talk to them about it is good.  But if it's someone who's already analyzed everything and come up with a conclusion that's wildly different, but otherwise supporting your general stance (namely, get Trump the hell out of office), that's where "agree to disagree" comes in.

I honestly hope it causes those who don't want Trump in office, but don't want Biden either to at least take a look at where their state may end up, and THEN figure out which is worse.  I think Biden isn't going to change much due to a stubborn Congress, but IMO he's vastly preferable to Trump, who will actively make things worse.

Which reminds me, voting Congress should be argued as heavily as voting for the president.  The lack of progress is partially the fault of a red Congress.  I'm going to keep to the Democratic nominee for mine, just because of that.

Share this post


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

I think Biden isn't going to change much due to a stubborn Congress, but IMO he's vastly preferable to Trump, who will actively make things worse.

The primary reason I'm hammering the point so hard -- not just in our conversation right now, but in general everywhere I am -- is because the president isn't about creating policy. It's about all the administrative things that involve the distribution of resources, making sure our courts are functional, making sure our agencies are functional, and everything to that effect.

 

I think Congress will be better off once people follow this:

3 hours ago, eclipse said:

Which reminds me, voting Congress should be argued as heavily as voting for the president.  The lack of progress is partially the fault of a red Congress.  I'm going to keep to the Democratic nominee for mine, just because of that.

💯💯💯💯💯

Cannot second this enough. I hope a blue congress doesn't gerrymander, either. Republicans deserve the opportunity to move left with the times. We need Trump and the Republicans out for 2020 and 2022, but we need an opposition party at all times no matter what, and the opposition party can't be wholly ideologically polarized and opposed like right now.

I don't even think it's a left vs right thing. I think it's entirely a "we all have a civic duty to make sure one choice and the other choice aren't polar opposites, so Republicans stop undoing and placing blame while Democrats pick up the pieces."

Although personally, I wouldn't be opposed to eliminating the republican party and splitting up the Democratic party. I sincerely do not believe that, due to the handling of COVID, the Republicans will be able to survive in their current form. There's 5-6 months left before the election and...  plenty can still happen, but also my friend put it well.

The defeatist takes just set us up for 5-6 months of disappointment and re-affirming our own narratives. One thing we need to keep in mind is that Texas is right now purple... 5-6 months out.

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad part is that I believe that without this whole corona business, Trump would probably win re-election against Biden. An incumbent is already hard to beat, unless the economy suffers under them i.e Jimmy Carter. It just so happens that bungling the response to this is something that doesn't swing in his favour.

On 5/9/2020 at 11:00 PM, Lord Raven said:

History will mercilessly destroy the Republican Party of the last 15 years. They will destroy the Tea Party movement. They will destroy George Wallace and Trump. The exact same as we treat the kings of old and fascists like Mussolini. There is nothing about the last four years -- arguably, 8 years -- that have been normal or okay. There is no ideology in our executive branch, and there never has been one for the entire four years. It's just people willing to let their opponents die so they can profit off of it as much as they can, and enablers who feel the same way.

I thought the Republican party should have been unviable for a long time after Dubya Bush, and yet that didn't really happen. I don't remember Bush being so liked in 2004, and yet he still was re-elected against an uninspiring John Kerry.

My biggest concern is that it is easy to make arguments against Biden that I can't really contest. I have seen sentiments from feminists I know that said they can't vote for Biden because of his behaviour. Their choice is essentially two old men who have been accused of sexual assault, and even if you are skeptical of the accusation (I am), there's no denying that Biden really has no concept of personal space from the public videos there are of him. And can I really argue against this refusal to support Biden for this reason? No, not really.

And when voters are disillusioned and more dont vote, Republicans win.

Perhaps I am a pessimist but I don't think Biden or the Democrats are really in a commanding position at all.

(And sadly, if policy was what mattered, I don't think Trump would have been elected in the first place)

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


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

The point is that I'm voting third-party specifically because of where I live and the political conditions.  If I lived in a place where the divide wasn't so stark, I'd probably vote for Biden.  

Yeah that makes sense tbh.

If I got a friend in New Jersey telling me they won't vote Biden and are gonna stay home or vote green party or do a write-in vote for Bernie Sanders I tell them: "okay. Do whatever. Its New Jersey."

If I got a friend across the bridge over in Pennsylvania telling me they won't vote Biden and are gonna stay home or vote green party or do a write-in vote for Bernie Sanders I tell them: "have you lost your damn mind???" 

Edited by Shoblongoo

Share this post


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

Yeah that makes sense tbh.

If I got a friend in New Jersey telling me they won't vote Biden and are gonna stay home or vote green party or do a write-in vote for Bernie Sanders I tell them: "okay. Do whatever. Its New Jersey."

If I got a friend across the bridge over in Pennsylvania telling me they won't vote Biden and are gonna stay home or vote green party or do a write-in vote for Bernie Sanders I tell them: "have you lost your damn mind???" 

I hope people who are disillusioned with Biden at least go vote for whatever Senate, etc elections there are, instead of staying home thinking only the presidency matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tryhard said:

I thought the Republican party should have been unviable for a long time after Dubya Bush, and yet that didn't really happen. I don't remember Bush being so liked in 2004, and yet he still was re-elected against an uninspiring John Kerry.

Bush's fuckups weren't nuanced enough. I was in high school in a hicktown (I'm not going into the nuances of this) who thought that Bush found WMDs and that the Iraq war was justified. There's people who conflate Iraq and 911.

Botching COVID19 and having well over 10k-15k times as many deaths -- and counting -- and we're gonna hit a point where you're only 2 degrees away from a covid death.

8 hours ago, Tryhard said:

Their choice is essentially two old men who have been accused of sexual assault, and even if you are skeptical of the accusation (I am), there's no denying that Biden really has no concept of personal space from the public videos there are of him. And can I really argue against this refusal to support Biden for this reason? No, not really.

Although the ironic thing is this

Are you talking to white women, perchance? I find it hard not to bring this up -- I actually firmly believe one reason Biden is so well positioned with minorities is because of that. I think that's entirely some sort of cultural understanding that people don't really understand, on top of the generational thing. It's something I'll not so much defend as say "well, this is why he did it, this is what it reminds me of, personal space issues seem to be a white person thing, and he's made it a point to stop in the face of criticism for it." Which is why, in the end... it's not that it's defensible so much as not really a point against him, especially when your other choice is pussygrabber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Excellen Browning said:

And a potential child rapist, considering the friendship with Epstein.

That one does remain a little bit amusing albeit in a bit of a dark way. 

Leading Democrats and Republican alike ended up having close ties with Epstein yet each party sees it as proof that only the other party is rotten to the core without the association saying anything about their own side. 

Edited by Etrurian emperor

Share this post


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

And a potential child rapist, considering the friendship with Epstein.

Well, I'm not going to go too hard into that, but pussygrabber was his name in this context, not like... a label. I'm trying to find multiple ways to find names to describe Trump as the revolting little mushroom penis person that he is.

I realized that calling him a cunt may not be the best thing cuz I actually like pussy, but the Stormy Daniels interview taught us a lot about him, more than I wish I knew but alas. Makes him an easier target.

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


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

Although the ironic thing is this

Are you talking to white women, perchance? I find it hard not to bring this up -- I actually firmly believe one reason Biden is so well positioned with minorities is because of that. I think that's entirely some sort of cultural understanding that people don't really understand, on top of the generational thing. It's something I'll not so much defend as say "well, this is why he did it, this is what it reminds me of, personal space issues seem to be a white person thing, and he's made it a point to stop in the face of criticism for it." Which is why, in the end... it's not that it's defensible so much as not really a point against him, especially when your other choice is pussygrabber.

'Twas not really the focus on the old white male part, because that was Sanders too, but rather on the fact that I have spoken with feminists that view Biden egregious enough to write off voting for him. Hard to argue against it without bringing up Trump as if that's some kind of gotcha.

You could say that it's irresponsible for them to be concerned with that when there are people who suffer at the end of policy at no choice of their own, but it's hard for me to tell them that they're wrong and instead of voting for Trump, who they already know is extremely dubious when it comes to sexual conduct, they should vote for Biden instead, who they are personally disgusted by as well.

The result? People who don't vote at all.

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

You could say that it's irresponsible for them to be concerned with that when there are people who suffer at the end of policy at no choice of their own, but it's hard for me to tell them that they're wrong and instead of voting for Trump, who they already know is extremely dubious when it comes to sexual conduct, they should vote for Biden instead, who they are personally disgusted by as well.

Probably because it is. I don't even see how hard it is to argue; people will vote for Trump regardless of accusations even worse than this, people are refusing to vote for Biden because... he gets up in your grill.

It's really vanity in the end. A non-vote is a vote for Trump seeing as Trump has the more united electorate.

People expect perfection from a candidate to convince them to vote for said candidate. It's vanity. If they didn't participate in the primaries, then they didn't attempt to get their voices heard in the first place. If they participated in the primaries and their candidate lost, then it's clear that there are concessions to be made. The guy doesn't assault people or even harass them. Some people just have a physical way of showing affection, and if him saying "I don't apologize for how I feel but I do apologize for getting into your personal space" isn't enough for them then I'm not sure what is.

Risking everything over something that many groups see as minor is ridiculous, I'm not quite sure where you're finding difficulty in telling them it's wrong. It sounds like a relatively fringe group that doesn't care about the big picture. Especially since not voting would ensure any pro-feminist legislation won't see the full light of day in our lifetime, given the Supreme Court's extremely fragile state right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What hate mobs on the internet often fail to understand about "listening to women" is that it entails listening to women. But since the alleged offender of this case is somebody they don't like, they're more than ready to weaponize the situation without learning the woman's name. I have no stance  on whether the allegations are true or false because there has been no criminal investigation. If Biden has an opportunity to prove his innocence, like with a DNA sample, I think he should take it, even if it would realistically change nothing about his reputation, it would at least restore some faith within his own camp. When it comes to the Biden situation, what confounds me most is that VPs undergo intense vetting. Obama's team would not have overlooked something so potentially severe from all those interviews. Certainly not as a favor to Biden - Obama didn't even like the guy in 2008.

I'm also curious about the timing. The Reade allegation had surfaced within days of it becoming clear that he was going to be the democratic nominee far ahead of Sanders. There are a great deal of reasons why somebody would not report their molestation at the time it occurred, but it's not like this is Biden's first career in the White House or his first, or second bid for the presidency since the alleged incident occurred.

I guess if I had to convince somebody to vote for Biden, who themself was convinced the Biden allegation is true at first blush and refuses to hear/research otherwise, all I can think to say is that history includes generations of women/progressives that voted and worked for sexually deviant pigs whenever it was a simple case of "picking a lesser of two evils". Today we may call that harmful compromise, but they would have told you it was picking the right hill to die on. When progress for women comes as slow as it does, you'll take some progress over the real threat of no progress (or even regression). I know that's a frustrating outlook, but if you want everything, you'll end up with nothing. That's a lesson I think goes overlooked when people engage in the voting process. That the system had somehow failed them when the perfect applicant isn't there - never questioning if the perfect person exists in the first place or somehow isn't being sabotaged by corporate interests/lobbyists when they do try their hand at politics. And in my estimation, people who seem like paragons of virtue are just people you haven't interacted with meaningfully yet.

Edited by Glennstavos

Share this post


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

What hate mobs on the internet often fail to understand about "listening to women" is that it entails listening to women. But since the alleged offender of this case is somebody they don't like, they're more than ready to weaponize the situation without learning the woman's name. I have no stance  on whether the allegations are true or false because there has been no criminal investigation. If Biden has an opportunity to prove his innocence, like with a DNA sample, I think he should take it, even if it would realistically change nothing about his reputation, it would at least restore some faith within his own camp. When it comes to the Biden situation, what confounds me most is that VPs undergo intense vetting. Obama's team would not have overlooked something so potentially severe from all those interviews. Certainly not as a favor to Biden - Obama didn't even like the guy in 2008.

This 100%.

I don't want to dive deeper in to it than you do -- it's a huge rabbithole that involves all the worst parts of sexual assault denial (and I'm trying to strip politics heavily OUT of her sexual assault allegation, as relevant as they may or may not be) -- but Biden is legitimately offering to her every possible source of evidence that she may look for. He actually requested a look through the senate records* and he was denied because it was a "faux attempt at transparency" (their words paraphrased, not mine).

My only issue with timing, by the way, is the fact that she tweeted "wait for it tick tock tick tock" like a month before she released the allegations. That makes me ridiculously suspicious. Everything else about the timing can be explained by trauma, aside from that aspect, which just throws enough of a wrench into things that in the end it just becomes legitimately impossible to verify one way or another.

*by the way the Delaware records are a true red herring and trying to open Biden up for fishing, they will contain nothing about the accusation in it

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm far more concerned about how the president that wins the election this year will deal with a fast-tanking economy and a medical crisis.  Get someone who can do the job first and foremost, because I don't feel like grandstanding on morals when the podium is made of corpses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come is it whenever a Democrat has some sort of allegation of sexual misconduct it is a massive deal, and many democrat voters are like well I'm not voting for a person cause of the accusation.  Al Franken and Katie Hill just humbly gave up their seats.  Republicans just deny the charges and fellow republican voters and legislators don't attack the person at all.  Trump can say oh yeah me rape her?  She is a dog, maybe a 4/10.  Gets no blowback from Republicans.  Meanwhile Democrats rip apart fellow Democrats like what is happening to Biden now.

It is like two sports teams, some members commit fouls constantly and dirty plays but his teammates don't say anything.  While the other team anytime any member commits a foul or dirty play he is torn apart by his own teammates.  It is complete BS.

Speaking of samples, one of the rape lawsuits, the woman found the dress she was wearing that night.  She requested a sample from Trump to compare, the DOJ shut that down.  So screw Biden providing a sample.   Stop shooting yourself in the foot.  Being the nice guy, the party of good means crap if you always lose.  Can't do anything if you lose.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy: Today's Republicans are rather shameless and just more interested in holding power. It's all about maintaining the majority where they can knowing that they have dwindling support.

Share this post


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

How come is it whenever a Democrat has some sort of allegation of sexual misconduct it is a massive deal, and many democrat voters are like well I'm not voting for a person cause of the accusation.  Al Franken and Katie Hill just humbly gave up their seats.  Republicans just deny the charges and fellow republican voters and legislators don't attack the person at all.  Trump can say oh yeah me rape her?  She is a dog, maybe a 4/10.  Gets no blowback from Republicans.  Meanwhile Democrats rip apart fellow Democrats like what is happening to Biden now.

Its a common saying that Democrats fall in love and that Republicans fall in line. We certainly see the Republicans fall in line since they very quickly embraced just about every negative aspect of the Trump administration. If Trump corruption is brought to light they insist its fake news, if Trump personally says something foolish they insist he was just joking and when things wrong they scream that it can't possibly be Trump's fault. Trump is their leader and he simply cannot be wrong.

But Democrats fall in love meaning they'll drop their leader in a heartbeat if he doesn't live up to their standards. And a possible sexual assault is a very real reason not to love someone anymore. 

8 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

I'm also curious about the timing. The Reade allegation had surfaced within days of it becoming clear that he was going to be the democratic nominee far ahead of Sanders. There are a great deal of reasons why somebody would not report their molestation at the time it occurred, but it's not like this is Biden's first career in the White House or his first, or second bid for the presidency since the alleged incident occurred.

That doesn't really have to be suspicious. I remember the woman who accused Kavanaugh also only did so after he was nominated as a member of the supreme court. And that itself is fairly logical. You can try to forget and move on, but if your tormentor then goes on to reach a very prestigious position, a position that requires a good deal of moral authority then that can feel completely unacceptable. You can try to forget but at that point you might feel you just have to step forward. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...