MeToo era could get Joe Biden to withdraw

Hieronymus said:

With consent.
Get it right some time.

Click to expand...

Really? Quote for that?

rambot said:

Really? Quote for that?

Click to expand...

Listening and context will suffice.
Hint: boastful locker room talk.

Hieronymus said:

Listening and context will suffice.
Hint: boastful locker room talk.

Click to expand...

False made it clear it was nonconsensual.
Context indicated he was feeling comfortable speaking honestly.

Also "boastful locker room talk" does not mean false, untrue, or anything.
Did you want to put forward a cogent argument?

ZNP said:

If you are given a choice between two people who you feel are both guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, then I would recommend not voting for either.

Click to expand...

Don't worry, I'm voting for neither Clinton or Donald in the next election.

If less than 50% of the US votes for president, and the winner gets 51% of the vote, then the winner has received less than 25% of the registered voters votes, there is no mandate to lead and the claim to democracy is false. It is one form of passive resistance that Ghandi talked about.

Click to expand...

You know what it also leads to - people like Donald ending up in the White House. So thanks but no thanks on that one.

rambot said:

I think people should be voting for people's character and their platform.

Click to expand...

There are many people who prefer Trump's platform to Clinton's.
Platform
1. He was pro life, she was pro choice.

2. He was for renegotiating trade deals, it was her husband who signed NAFTA that caused many of these voters to lose their good paying jobs.

3. There are people who feel that border security is very important either because of the gang violence in their neighborhood which they feel is made worse with the influence of cartels or because they feel the illegal aliens are taking their jobs.

4. There are many people who applaud Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

Character
The American people have been deceived already with people claiming family values who later get shown to be hypocrites. If Trump had been running on a family values platform that tape of his comments would have had much greater impact. But Trump has not in any way pretended to be the family values candidate, so it had much less play.

It is hard for me to believe that Clinton could possibly win against anyone if the key issue is character. You make a big deal over Trump being crude and rude, but consider this, Bill Clinton blatantly used his position and power for sex, Hillary knew about it, but married him and stayed with him because it would be good for her career.

ZNP said:

There are many people who prefer Trump's platform to Clinton's.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't disagree.

Platform
1. He was pro life, she was pro choice.

2. He was for renegotiating trade deals, it was her husband who signed NAFTA that caused many of these voters to lose their good paying jobs.

Click to expand...

What is the most shocking to me in the current political environment is that in the 90s it tended to be left wingers who were VERY anti-globalization. We did NOT like NAFTA or any of the other subsequent trade deals that came in and we (and union leaders) saw, clear as day, the loss of jobs that came. The right wing pushed this stuff through HARD.
And now, 30 years later, it's the exact opposite scenario. It's so odd to me.
He did renegotiate NAFTA, but I'm pretty sure that everyone in the know has accepted that he did that JUST do do that and that the new NAFTA is almost no different from the old one.

3. There are people who feel that border security is very important either because of the gang violence in their neighborhood which they feel is made worse with the influence of cartels or because they feel the illegal aliens are taking their jobs.

Click to expand...

But are those feelings born out of facts or out of something more nefarious and unhelpful. I'm curious if those neighbourhoods have no seen less violence or if all those red blooded Americans have stepped up to start doing that 3D jobs that the illegal aliens did (hint: I don't think either of those things happenned). I get voting based on "feeling" but it doesn't change reality if all you got are feelings.

4. There are many people who applaud Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

Click to expand...

about 36% apparently.
Poll: Fewer than half of Americans support Jerusalem recognition


Character
The American people have been deceived already with people claiming family values who later get shown to be hypocrites. If Trump had been running on a family values platform that tape of his comments would have had much greater impact. But Trump has not in any way pretended to be the family values candidate, so it had much less play.

It is hard for me to believe that Clinton could possibly win against anyone if the key issue is character. You make a big deal over Trump being crude and rude, but consider this, Bill Clinton blatantly used his position and power for sex, Hillary knew about it, but married him and stayed with him because it would be good for her career.[/QUOTE]
1) I honestly don't know why you think I care even a tiny bit about billy clinton. I was 21. IT was more than 20 years ago. I felt he was a slimeball too. Not only that but he was STAUNCHLY (as evidence by his passage of NAFTA) pro corporate. I hold no respect for the man and don't really identify himself anywhere near my on the political spectrum. And when President at least clinton's forays were consensual, even if his earlier ones were not. But then again, I don't think comparing those two is honest either.
Trumps allegations are at, around 25 at this point. Clinton has 4.

Neither of us can say exactly why Hillary has decided to stay with Billy and while you are likely right, it is conjecture to assume that is correct.

2) There is more to Trump misanthropy than just his dishonest and hurtful (and likely illegal) sexual proclivities.

Mountainmanbob said:

Does having a terrible memory help with that?
Just don't think so.
M

Click to expand...

I actually think that having a weak memory helps with the other ...

"I don't remember warnings about coronavirus ... "
"I don't remember sending Giuliani to Ukraine ... "
"I don't remember meeting Lev Parnas ... "
Etc., etc., etc. ...

Per your judgement, we might not be able to tell the difference ... between a forgetful Biden ... and a lying Trump ..

Mountainmanbob said:

At least Trump knows what he's doing.
For the good of the Country.
Country first.
USA first.
M

Click to expand...

Whatever floats your boat ...

Mountainmanbob said:

I love my Country
just as much as Trump does
it floats our boats.
M

Click to expand...

So ... your ... and Trump's distinction ... is that you claim to love America ?

What about your 330 million American neighbors ?

Anybody can say that they love America.

Really loving America entails more than a slogan on a hat.

Really loving America would include making sure fellow Americans have what they need to get through this crisis ...

NotreDame said:

First, this is a bit of revisionist history. There was a chorus of Democrats asking for Trump to withdraw the nomination of Kavanaugh, with mere allegations at the time. A few Democrats, notably Feinstein, Harris, and Durbin, asked for an investigation.

Click to expand...

This is revisionist history. Democrats asked for either Kavanaughs nomination to be withdrawn OR for an FBI investigation; and this was at least a week into Republicans largely stonewalling on investigating -- beyond maybe calling Ford and one other person to testify before Congress. Yes, at this point Democrats got tired of Republicans not wanting an investigation so they said his nomination should be withdrawn if Republicans would not allow an investigation.

NotreDame said:

The Dems treatment of Franken, with mere allegations, amplifies how they have treated mere allegations. At least they were consistent, with their equation, of allegations against Franken, allegations against Kavanaugh, the sum is dismissal of the person in their capacity as a government official.

Click to expand...

Yes, and no. Franken resigned, he was not actually forced to. Yes, they wanted to have an investigation of him, and there were several in the #MeToo movement that wanted his resignation, but the resignation came as a surprise to most.

As others have pointed out, it does tend to show a lack of hypocrisy on the Democrats part, as they were willing to "sacrifice" a Senator.

NotreDame said:

It is of course easy to comprehend this approach. Franken occurred against the backdrop of the nascent Metoo movement, and Kavanaugh’s nomination transpiring in the midst of rapidly accelerating popularity with the movement. The idea of not being extremely deferential to accusers had the appearance impropriety. Which suddenly placed Dems and Repubs in separate corners, with Repubs taking the view allegations aren’t sufficient and tangentially questioning whether the Metoo Movement needed some guardrails so allegations didn’t ruin careers.

Click to expand...

I'll agree that allegations alone should not ruin careers. At the same time, there is a history of those in positions of power (such as the rich or politically powerful) being able to destroy the lives of women they may have abused, if the woman attempts to make allegations. The issue is you had one side that wanted the claims investigated and the other wanted to largely ignore them, to claim they were merely politically motivated (in many ways, business as usual). And while you can claim the Democrats tactic to "delay" was politically motivated, at the same time Republicans can't complain too much as they delayed a nomination for most of a year based on politics.

SimplyMe said:

This is revisionist history. Democrats asked for either Kavanaughs nomination to be withdrawn OR for an FBI investigation; and this was at least a week into Republicans largely stonewalling on investigating -- beyond maybe calling Ford and one other person to testify before Congress. Yes, at this point Democrats got tired of Republicans not wanting an investigation so they said his nomination should be withdrawn if Republicans would not allow an investigation.



Yes, and no. Franken resigned, he was not actually forced to. Yes, they wanted to have an investigation of him, and there were several in the #MeToo movement that wanted his resignation, but the resignation came as a surprise to most.

As others have pointed out, it does tend to show a lack of hypocrisy on the Democrats part, as they were willing to "sacrifice" a Senator.



I'll agree that allegations alone should not ruin careers. At the same time, there is a history of those in positions of power (such as the rich or politically powerful) being able to destroy the lives of women they may have abused, if the woman attempts to make allegations. The issue is you had one side that wanted the claims investigated and the other wanted to largely ignore them, to claim they were merely politically motivated (in many ways, business as usual). And while you can claim the Democrats tactic to "delay" was politically motivated, at the same time Republicans can't complain too much as they delayed a nomination for most of a year based on politics.

Click to expand...

It is not revisionist history as around the second or third allegation some leaders and other were calling for Kavanaugh to no longer be the nominee. Schumer, Gillibrand, Merkely, Jayapal, Markey, Mendez (wanting withdrawal and if no withdrawal, then an investigation), wanted him to resign as the nominee at some point, either at the point of 2 or 3 allegations, regardless of an investigation.

And there were a chorus of Dem Senators calling for Franken to resign on nothing more than allegations.

At the same time, there is a history of those in positions of power (such as the rich or politically powerful) being able to destroy the lives of women they may have abused

Click to expand...

So what? That history tells me absolutely nothing about the veracity of allegations made against a specific person.

And while you can claim the Democrats tactic to "delay" was politically motivated, at the same time Republicans can't complain too much as they delayed a nomination for most of a year based on politics

Click to expand...

Sure they can still complain and their complaints can still be valid.

NotreDame said:

It is not revisionist history as around the second or third allegation some leaders and other were calling for Kavanaugh to no longer be the nominee. Schumer, Gillibrand, Merkely, Jayapal, Markey, Mendez (wanting withdrawal and if no withdrawal, then an investigation), wanted him to resign as the nominee at some point, either at the point of 2 or 3 allegations, regardless of an investigation.

Click to expand...

Which does not refute anything I said. Again, they wanted investigations, the Republicans refused, so Democrats started to say (about the 2nd or 3rd allegation) that Kavanaugh should withdraw -- though most of them still qualified their call for withdrawal by saying withdraw or let's have an investigation.

This is Schumer's comment, “I strongly believe Judge Kavanaugh should withdraw from consideration. If he will not, at the very least, the hearing and vote should be postponed while the FBI investigates all of these allegations." Again, they called for investigations first and were stonewalled by Republicans. So, they then called for withdrawal but said they'd still settle for an investigation -- after it became clear that Republicans had no interest in having the allegations fully investigated, but just wanted to gloss over them on the way to approving Kavanaugh.

NotreDame said:

And there were a chorus of Dem Senators calling for Franken to resign on nothing more than allegations.

Click to expand...

Great, but still largely supports the idea that Democrats have largely not been hypocritical. With Biden they still might support that, as well. In this case, it is still almost 3 months until the convention, where the Democratic nominee will be officially decided.

NotreDame said:

So what? That history tells me absolutely nothing about the veracity of allegations made against a specific person.

Sure they can still complain and their complaints can still be valid.

Click to expand...

You seem to have missed (or ignored) my point. Regardless, in Franken's case, it was about 3 weeks before Senators called for his resignation on Dec 6. About 2 weeks after the initial allegation (which was made Nov 17), the complaint was sent to the Senate Ethics committee on recommendations by Senators of both parties, and this was done after several other women stepped forward accusing Franken of sexual misconduct. On Dec 6 there were two new allegations, at which point Democratic Senators started asking Franken to resign.

You see a very similar pattern in the Kavanaugh allegations, just compressed a bit more. On Sept 14 the matter was initially given by Sen. Feinstein to the FBI. On Sep 23 there were two new allegations. During this time, Republicans were trying to block any FBI investigation into the allegations, and were showing they weren't serious about investigating the claims in the Senate. On Sep 26, after multiple allegations, Democrats started calling for the nomination to be withdrawn, and in most statements they stated they had no issue with an FBI investigation rather than Kavanaugh resigning -- again, they'd been seeking that for almost two weeks, at that point.

In Biden's case, we still appear to have only a single accuser, at this point. The other calls for resignation/withdrawal came only after there were multiple allegations. Further, in Kavanaugh's case, they wanted an investigation and just needed for Republicans to delay the nomination process. Republicans refused, intent on "fast tracking" Kavanaugh's nomination -- so Democrats called for his withdrawal. In Biden's case, the Democrats have that "delay" -- they have almost three months for investigations. Regardless, neither time did calls for resignations begin after a single allegation.