US Politics XXII: Idk About You, But This Is Thread 22

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
LuckyNumber7 said:
How do you not see your total hypocrisy and bias here?

I’m not going to go point for point with your explosive posts. Your most recent post is condescending as fuck. Some of the shit you say to me in there is offensive, but for “reading comprehension’s” sake, I’ve made my stance clear that I can’t and won’t draw a conclusion given the evidence put forward. You’re attempting to strong arm your way through this by claiming privilege of knowing how someone else feels and how they should behave, and spewing political bias in your posts. Oh, and you have a well documented history of spewing the bias.

There are many reasons to discredit the story, and there isn’t a history of Joe Biden being a sexual predator. There aren’t multiple claims against him. True or false, there’s not much you can tangibly do with this accusation, much like with Ford’s. It absolutely is comparable.

Your rhetoric of harsh condemnation of someone’s feelings which are not your own is inappropriate. You are not her. She might very well be a liar, but you don’t know that, and you can say whatever you want, but your biases are clearly doing the talking.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if you felt that me saying you having a lack of reading comprehension was condescending. But if its not that, then you are dismissing a huge amount of evidence and using that mind-frame to then twist my words into something that I'm not saying. You are picking out phrases, and then not actually taking in my explanation.

I'm not sure how you don't think it's condescending to call something I wrote "disgusting" or that me, as a survivor and person that has spent time listening to dozens of other survivors, is someone you can tell has no idea about victims of assault.

So this is your highlighted post of mine:

I'm not buying this line of argument at all. Women didn't have a voice before MeToo? Come on...
...Hell, Trump had wracked up 18 or so accusers by the end of 2016, a year before MeToo had taken off...

Is it not true that Trump had over a dozen accusations in 2016? MeToo came about (in it's current form) in October of 2017.

Reade claims that she submitted a report to the Senate office in 1993. One way her voice could have been heard, if a claim was actually made.

I'm not sure how you find fault in this statement. Isn't this the whole issue right now? Is there actually a report that was filed or not?

She claims the subject of going to the police came up, That was another way her voice could have been heard.


You act as though I'm pulling things out of the air. I'm only stating the options that she claimed to have thought about. As I then explained, the police may or may not have done anything with her claim. And as I've also said, if she decided not to go to the police or the press, then that's ok. It doesn't negate the fact that it was an option, and in no way am I inferring that it would have been effective.

She claims that the subject of going to the press came up, but didn't want to "out of respect" for the Senator in question. (You know, we all have the utmost respect for the person that sexually assaulted us).

I'm not sure why this shocks you so much. If you think that people that have been raped go around saying they have respect for their rapist, then sure, you go ahead and think that. If you think they go on Twitter and praise them and say "they speak the truth". That's your prerogative. Not something I've ever seen. The closest are very mixed and torn feeling about abuse from a family member.

Sounds again, much more in line with her "feeling uncomfortable" story. yet another way her voice could have been heard.

Addressed this above.

So her voice was heard. Unfortunately, as my lengthy post, and the article I posted yesterday lay out in great detail. Her "voice" has been an inconsistent mess.

You leave out the part where the "her voice was heard" is in relation to her doing a Newspaper interview and the podcast.
Was her voice not heard from these? We are currently having this discussion precisely because her voice was heard. But I guess these don't add up as "facts" to you.

She made her voice heard on twitter for 2 years with praise and likes for Biden. Then, suddenly as he was entering the race (against her guy Bernie)

Again, facts. The twitter posts and likes are there. Not my bias, not my conjecture. They are there, plain to see.
And was she not a strong Bernie supporter? Did she not go on a pro-Bernie podcast to make her latest claim? Again, if you can dispute that then please enlighten me.

I would never discount anyone's story because the length of time it took for them to come forward. That's pretty standard. But I absolutely would be suspicious if a changing story came out at a particular time that lined up with the accuser's known motives.

Again, not sure how this statement is shocking or disgusting to you. I know the majority of abuse victims take a long time to come forward. But they have one searing, concrete story that lives with them forever.
We know the facts here. Her story has changed. We know she had political stances that would be motive. That motive could be dismissed and I would normally not put that in the mix. BUT, then come the Twitter posts again. Multiple posts of her saying -
"Timing is everything. Tic Toc..." "It's all about timing. Tic Toc..."

And then after those posts, you get a newspaper interview about her feeling uncomfortable and harassed the SAME WEEK that Biden announced he was running.

And then, she does the podcast interview with new, wildly different claims right after Super Tuesday


You say you want facts. Facts have been given. You talk about "reasonable doubt". Well in a court of law, both facts are presented and circumstantial evidence is presented. Sometimes cases are only built on circumstantial evidence. The jury is asked to use their judgement and common sense to come to a decision.

So my question is - Can you point to anything in all of the facts and circumstantial evidence so far that you find supports Reade's claims of sexual assault? Not feeling uncomfortable, or that she was having problems in the workplace.

Next - What evidence would make up your mind on the matter, one way or the other?

Next - If this were in court, and you were a juror, what would you vote to do with the information we know now? What would you decide if there is no report? What if there is a report and it just says she felt that she was being treated poorly in the office due to sexism? Or that she felt she was uncomfortable with certain physical contact with Biden?

Facts we know:

Has her story changed - yes

Does she have a history of telling multiple stories about why she left DC - yes

Did she say she told people about the incident, but when asked have said that she didn't tell them - yes

Did she change her story of what was on the alleged complaint - yes

Did she post and like positive thing on Twitter for almost 2 years - yes

Did her brother's story about what was told to him change - yes

Do any of the over 24 staff members in the Senate office remember her making any claims of any kind about harassment or assault - No


Circumstantial:

Does she have a history of lying and exaggerating about other events and people in her life - yes

Does she have political bias or motive - yes

Did she threaten multiple times to drop a story that would harm a politician that ran counter to her political standing - yes

Have there been claims of her lying, stealing, defrauding in her past - yes (although these are just claims, and may not be true)

Does Reade have any witnesses that can corroborate her claim that her "life was shattered" and she "went into a downward spiral" - Not as of yet

Does the general area that she said the incident took place seem plausible - Not really, possible sure

Was there a strict dress-code for Senate employees at the time that would have made the incident nearly impossible - yes

Have multiple news agencies investigated this story in depth and found any verifiable evidence either way? None so far.

Has the accused ever had any other rape clam made against him - No

Was the accused stringently vetted for earlier political positions - yes

Is the accused being cooperative with there being an investigation into the claim - yes

Does the accused have a history of unwanted hugging, touching, kissing - yes


So I guess my larger point here is that from what has come out so far, I believe there is reasonable doubt to the allegation. Could it have happened? Yes. Is it likely from what we have seen so far? Not in my opinion.

I apologize if I came off condescending and if I have let my bias speak more than the facts. Which is why I'm trying to just list out all the evidence that we know so far and make my judgement from that.
The truth is when the story first hit, I believed her. I figured that it was possible with Biden's history of handsiness. But i took a lot of time to gather facts and circumstantial evidence because I still felt that it seemed out of character for what I have seen from Biden over the years. And so far, the evidence doesn't look good for Reade from what I've seen.
Yes, it's my opinion. I'm not stating 100%, and I apologize if I have given that impression.
 
Jerry Dunk said:
[tweet]1257350856766369793[/tweet]

Five weeks ago, Joe Biden said it would be harsh to say Donald Trump has blood on his hands.
Click to expand...

While Biden is 100% wrong on this (and his entire notion of still being able to work in a bipartisan manner with this class of Republicans), how is THAT your takeaway from the horrific statistic? I mean of all the things and criminality to be discussing, the real problem is what Joe Biden said 5 weeks ago?

No wonder the Republicans always win.
 
some good news. it seems the party that gets elected because they hate government because they say it doesn't work finds themselves in a situation when there's a problem that can only be addressed when government actually works, and it only works when people who believe government can work are elected.


Poll: Ernst lead evaporates in Iowa Senate race

The Senate race in Iowa is tightening, according to a new poll that shows Sen. Joni Ernst’s (R-Iowa) lead over her likely Democratic opponent, Theresa Greenfield, narrowing to just 1 point.

The survey from the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling shows Ernst leading Greenfield, 43 percent to 42 percent. That suggests a significantly closer race than a previous poll conducted by the firm in December that found Ernst ahead of Greenfield by a 6-point margin.

The poll also shows Ernst’s approval rating in her home state is underwater. Thirty-seven percent of respondents said they approve of the job she’s doing in office compared to 43 percent who disapprove.

That’s a marked change from the December survey, which showed Ernst’s approval at 45 percent and her disapproval at 43 percent.

Ernst’s seat isn’t among Democrats’ four core targets that they see as particularly crucial to recapturing a majority in the Senate. The party is focused primarily on flipping Republican-held seats in Arizona, Colorado, Maine and North Carolina.

But Democrats also believe that Iowa has the potential to swing in their favor, citing Greenfield’s relatively strong early fundraising numbers and a March Des Moines Register poll that showed Ernst’s approval rating at 47 percent, down 10 points from where it was a year prior.

Still, flipping Ernst’s seat is likely to be an uphill battle for Democrats. Ernst raised about $2.7 million in the first quarter of 2020, while Greenfield pulled in about $2.25 million. And the Iowa Republican has a nearly $3 million cash-on-hand advantage over Greenfield as of the end of March.

What’s more, the Des Moines Register poll from March showed that Greenfield and the four other Democrats vying for their party’s nomination to take on Ernst in November were unknown to at least 70 percent of Iowans, meaning that the eventual nominee will likely have to invest heavily in building up name recognition.

The Des Moines Register poll also found that a plurality of likely Iowa voters — 41 percent — said they would vote to reelect Ernst.

Greenfield is the favorite to win the Senate primary on June 2. She has a wide fundraising advantage over her opponents, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has already endorsed her bid for Ernst’s seat.

Public Policy Polling surveyed 1,222 Iowa voters from April 30 to May 1. It has a margin of error of 2.8 percentage points.
Click to expand...
 
Iowa, the second Georgia seat, a lot of bad poll news for bad people.
 
On a different note>

Today 5/4 is the 50th Anniversary of Kent State.

Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young wrote a song about it called "Ohio" The National Guard killed 4 and injured a number of other students protesting against the Vietnam War at Kent State University.

While I've forgotten the actual date; I've never forgotten the event and this song. :(
Try to parse where I was - HS yes as a senior, just what time of day. It was a searing experience!
A few weeks later at Jackson State University black students protesting racism were also injured and killed by the National Guard. :(

(not sure this will embed, we'll see) I don't know why. Mobile phone issue? I've embedded on my tablet.

https://youtu.be/GI7-m919ynU
 
Last edited:
I've been seeing a lot of ads for Theresa Greenfield here lately. I like what I've managed to read about her thus far, so if she can get Ernst out of here, that'd be wonderful.

Now if we could just get Steve King the fuck out of here, too...

mikal said:
Yes. Katie Johnson. And it was related to the Epstein case.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh, okay. That certainly explains it. Thanks.

Irvine511 said:
Hey. Did you guys know that Donald Trump has been treated even worse than Lincoln? It’s true. The press is just SO MUCH meaner to him, and it’s totally unfair. So many reporters with nasty, disgraceful questions about the 10s of 1000s of dead Americans piling up.

I know this because he said this while sitting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial while pointing at the statue to let us know how much easier it was for Lincoln.
Click to expand...

I would love it if Lincoln rose from the dead just to kick his whiny ass all over that memorial. For somebody who's all about fighting the "sensitive snowflakes" and is a supposed "bold leader", he sure loves to throw himself quite the pity party.
 
So just so we can put some things in perspective.
It seems that because of Biden's past touchy feeliness, we may see more of these political hitjobs. And unsettling to see the number of people willing to lie to try and legitimize the false claim.

The 14 year old whose breasts Biden was said to have complimented, is the niece of Christine O'Donnell, failed Tea Party candidate.

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1256981433589039104
 
womanfish said:
I'm sorry if you felt that me saying you having a lack of reading comprehension was condescending. But if its not that, then you are dismissing a huge amount of evidence and using that mind-frame to then twist my words into something that I'm not saying. You are picking out phrases, and then not actually taking in my explanation.



I'm not sure how you don't think it's condescending to call something I wrote "disgusting" or that me, as a survivor and person that has spent time listening to dozens of other survivors, is someone you can tell has no idea about victims of assault.



So this is your highlighted post of mine:



I'm not buying this line of argument at all. Women didn't have a voice before MeToo? Come on...

...Hell, Trump had wracked up 18 or so accusers by the end of 2016, a year before MeToo had taken off...



Is it not true that Trump had over a dozen accusations in 2016? MeToo came about (in it's current form) in October of 2017.



Reade claims that she submitted a report to the Senate office in 1993. One way her voice could have been heard, if a claim was actually made.



I'm not sure how you find fault in this statement. Isn't this the whole issue right now? Is there actually a report that was filed or not?



She claims the subject of going to the police came up, That was another way her voice could have been heard.





You act as though I'm pulling things out of the air. I'm only stating the options that she claimed to have thought about. As I then explained, the police may or may not have done anything with her claim. And as I've also said, if she decided not to go to the police or the press, then that's ok. It doesn't negate the fact that it was an option, and in no way am I inferring that it would have been effective.



She claims that the subject of going to the press came up, but didn't want to "out of respect" for the Senator in question. (You know, we all have the utmost respect for the person that sexually assaulted us).



I'm not sure why this shocks you so much. If you think that people that have been raped go around saying they have respect for their rapist, then sure, you go ahead and think that. If you think they go on Twitter and praise them and say "they speak the truth". That's your prerogative. Not something I've ever seen. The closest are very mixed and torn feeling about abuse from a family member.



Sounds again, much more in line with her "feeling uncomfortable" story. yet another way her voice could have been heard.



Addressed this above.



So her voice was heard. Unfortunately, as my lengthy post, and the article I posted yesterday lay out in great detail. Her "voice" has been an inconsistent mess.



You leave out the part where the "her voice was heard" is in relation to her doing a Newspaper interview and the podcast.

Was her voice not heard from these? We are currently having this discussion precisely because her voice was heard. But I guess these don't add up as "facts" to you.



She made her voice heard on twitter for 2 years with praise and likes for Biden. Then, suddenly as he was entering the race (against her guy Bernie)



Again, facts. The twitter posts and likes are there. Not my bias, not my conjecture. They are there, plain to see.

And was she not a strong Bernie supporter? Did she not go on a pro-Bernie podcast to make her latest claim? Again, if you can dispute that then please enlighten me.



I would never discount anyone's story because the length of time it took for them to come forward. That's pretty standard. But I absolutely would be suspicious if a changing story came out at a particular time that lined up with the accuser's known motives.



Again, not sure how this statement is shocking or disgusting to you. I know the majority of abuse victims take a long time to come forward. But they have one searing, concrete story that lives with them forever.

We know the facts here. Her story has changed. We know she had political stances that would be motive. That motive could be dismissed and I would normally not put that in the mix. BUT, then come the Twitter posts again. Multiple posts of her saying -

"Timing is everything. Tic Toc..." "It's all about timing. Tic Toc..."



And then after those posts, you get a newspaper interview about her feeling uncomfortable and harassed the SAME WEEK that Biden announced he was running.



And then, she does the podcast interview with new, wildly different claims right after Super Tuesday





You say you want facts. Facts have been given. You talk about "reasonable doubt". Well in a court of law, both facts are presented and circumstantial evidence is presented. Sometimes cases are only built on circumstantial evidence. The jury is asked to use their judgement and common sense to come to a decision.



So my question is - Can you point to anything in all of the facts and circumstantial evidence so far that you find supports Reade's claims of sexual assault? Not feeling uncomfortable, or that she was having problems in the workplace.



Next - What evidence would make up your mind on the matter, one way or the other?



Next - If this were in court, and you were a juror, what would you vote to do with the information we know now? What would you decide if there is no report? What if there is a report and it just says she felt that she was being treated poorly in the office due to sexism? Or that she felt she was uncomfortable with certain physical contact with Biden?



Facts we know:



Has her story changed - yes



Does she have a history of telling multiple stories about why she left DC - yes



Did she say she told people about the incident, but when asked have said that she didn't tell them - yes



Did she change her story of what was on the alleged complaint - yes



Did she post and like positive thing on Twitter for almost 2 years - yes



Did her brother's story about what was told to him change - yes



Do any of the over 24 staff members in the Senate office remember her making any claims of any kind about harassment or assault - No





Circumstantial:



Does she have a history of lying and exaggerating about other events and people in her life - yes



Does she have political bias or motive - yes



Did she threaten multiple times to drop a story that would harm a politician that ran counter to her political standing - yes



Have there been claims of her lying, stealing, defrauding in her past - yes (although these are just claims, and may not be true)



Does Reade have any witnesses that can corroborate her claim that her "life was shattered" and she "went into a downward spiral" - Not as of yet



Does the general area that she said the incident took place seem plausible - Not really, possible sure



Was there a strict dress-code for Senate employees at the time that would have made the incident nearly impossible - yes



Have multiple news agencies investigated this story in depth and found any verifiable evidence either way? None so far.



Has the accused ever had any other rape clam made against him - No



Was the accused stringently vetted for earlier political positions - yes



Is the accused being cooperative with there being an investigation into the claim - yes



Does the accused have a history of unwanted hugging, touching, kissing - yes





So I guess my larger point here is that from what has come out so far, I believe there is reasonable doubt to the allegation. Could it have happened? Yes. Is it likely from what we have seen so far? Not in my opinion.



I apologize if I came off condescending and if I have let my bias speak more than the facts. Which is why I'm trying to just list out all the evidence that we know so far and make my judgement from that.

The truth is when the story first hit, I believed her. I figured that it was possible with Biden's history of handsiness. But i took a lot of time to gather facts and circumstantial evidence because I still felt that it seemed out of character for what I have seen from Biden over the years. And so far, the evidence doesn't look good for Reade from what I've seen.

Yes, it's my opinion. I'm not stating 100%, and I apologize if I have given that impression.
Click to expand...



Apologies for my very short response here - I did read your post but I am like a week late on this Desert Island thing and owe lots of responses, and also have to like finish co-signing something, and a bazillion other things and just have too much on my plate to respond right now, but didn’t want to leave this unaddressed. I appreciate your apology and I apologize for my rather harsh condemnation and neglecting the fact that you’ve shared your stories and I should have been more sensitive to that.
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
Apologies for my very short response here - I did read your post but I am like a week late on this Desert Island thing and owe lots of responses, and also have to like finish co-signing something, and a bazillion other things and just have too much on my plate to respond right now, but didn’t want to leave this unaddressed. I appreciate your apology and I apologize for my rather harsh condemnation and neglecting the fact that you’ve shared your stories and I should have been more sensitive to that.
Click to expand...

eh, its all good. You made me think that I still need to sit back and wait to see how things play out, and not just get too stuck in one direction yet.

I am enjoying reading through the Desert Island posts. I didn't participate, but cool to see what people have come up with.

Good luck with all your work. I just always feel behind on everything right now. And completely unmotivated to get it done. :|

Thanks for the response. be safe
 
dazzledbylight said:
Forgiven, that was funny.
.


Good, serious, sad stuff there. That lincolnproject vid...
Also a possible word play - "There's mourning in America" with Reagan's "It's morning in America".
Click to expand...

It's a really good ad. Most definitely a play on Morning in America. It's an old style ad, even the video it's shot in looks more like 80's style quality, and older style voice. This is a direct play at middle age and older Americans, specifically republicans.
 
womanfish said:
It's a really good ad. Most definitely a play on Morning in America. It's an old style ad, even the video it's shot in looks more like 80's style quality, and older style voice. This is a direct play at middle age and older Americans, specifically republicans.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh it's more for swing voters than republicans. If you're still pulling red levers and nothing but red levers at this point there's nothing short term that is going to pull you back.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Ahhhh it's more for swing voters than republicans. If you're still pulling red levers and nothing but red levers at this point there's nothing short term that is going to pull you back.
Click to expand...

very good point. I'm guessing still older swing voters (which there actually seems to be this time around) since even middle agers probably don't have a real great recollection of Reagan at this point.

Good strategy for sure. Hearing that Biden is actually doing anywhere from 8-13 points better than Clinton with 60+ voters. Hello Florida...
 
What the hell?!

Republicans know from 2016 that a smear or accusation without any conclusive answer will let them play this out as long as they can.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257349499548286977

Unfortunately this pretty much gives the green light to Reade that she can now say anything she wants about the report, (that we now have no idea actually exists) with no accountability.
 
womanfish said:
What the hell?!

Republicans know from 2016 that a smear or accusation without any conclusive answer will let them play this out as long as they can.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257349499548286977

Unfortunately this pretty much gives the green light to Reade that she can now say anything she wants about the report, (that we now have no idea actually exists) with no accountability.
Click to expand...

if it's a nothingburger as you say, posting about it every day isn't going to make the story go away.
 
Anyone think that Trump trying to open things up again quickly, knowing that we will see a rise in deaths, is a much more cruel long play plan, of thinking if the virus is still bad enough into the fall, that it will be a low turnout election, rather than trying to get the economy back on track?

Just a thought.
 
womanfish said:
Anyone think that Trump trying to open things up again quickly, knowing that we will see a rise in deaths, is a much more cruel long play plan, of thinking if the virus is still bad enough into the fall, that it will be a low turnout election, rather than trying to get the economy back on track?

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
What election?
 
womanfish said:
Anyone think that Trump trying to open things up again quickly, knowing that we will see a rise in deaths, is a much more cruel long play plan, of thinking if the virus is still bad enough into the fall, that it will be a low turnout election, rather than trying to get the economy back on track?

Just a thought.
Click to expand...



First the Reade thing. It is a nothing burger. It’s a smear attempt and Joe has handled it with class. If there was some actual evidence I’d be concerned. Ignore it.

And Trump giving up is two things. One he isn’t getting positive ratings from it. His bleach comments kinda damaged him for once so no more briefings. He can’t control the virus. As much as he wants it to go away it won’t.

What he can control better are the stock markets. Every time he talks about opening up, the fucking stocks rise. Literally the stupidest game that gets played. He’s hedging his bets that the DOW can rise again and he’ll proclaim victory because it’s a positive gain again for people’s 401ks!!

The more sinister side of letting the virus wash over the country is that it’ll have a larger impact on minority groups. And you bet he’s hoping that more brown deaths mean lower turnouts in November.

He’s put so much pressure on the Governors. Eventually they’ll have no choice but to try and get people back to work. CA is very close to, if not already, out of its surplus. .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
lazarus
lazarus
Headache in a Suitcase
3 Irishmen and a Dutchman Walk Into A Sphere - General Discussion Thread Part III
52 53 54
Replies
2K
Views
64K
TinKnight
TinKnight
Janet H
  • Sticky
Forum Update - We're back! Ask your questions here.
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Popmartijn
Popmartijn
N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
11 12 13
Replies
385
Views
11K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
907
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom