Listening and context will suffice.Really? Quote for that?
False made it clear it was nonconsensual.Listening and context will suffice.
Hint: boastful locker room talk.
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.
You know what it also leads to - people like Donald ending up in the White House. So thanks but no thanks on that one.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.
There are many people who prefer Trump's platform to Clinton's.I think people should be voting for people's character and their platform.
Wouldn't disagree.There are many people who prefer Trump's platform to Clinton's.
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.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.
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.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.
about 36% apparently.4. There are many people who applaud Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
To tell the truth ...
I actually think that having a weak memory helps with the other ...Does having a terrible memory help with that?
Just don't think so.
M
At least Trump knows what he's doing.Per your judgement, we might not be able to tell the difference ... between a forgetful Biden ... and a lying Trump ..
Whatever floats your boat ...At least Trump knows what he's doing.
For the good of the Country.
Country first.
USA first.
M
Whatever floats your boat ...
So ... your ... and Trump's distinction ... is that you claim to love America ?I love my Country
just as much as Trump does
it floats our boats.
M
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?