Biden v. Trump Election Mega Thread
- Thread starter Shadyside
- Start date
- Status
He could be doing better. He could also be hopped up on drugs (prescribed or otherwise). Considering his and his administration's histories of lies, distortions, and "alternative facts", there really isn't any way of knowing for sure.
Well he could be forcibly restrained and have blood taken for analysis.
(but yes, as an average citizen, everything coming from these maniacs should be taken with an overdose of salt, tabasco and worcestershire sauce)
Really amazing how the liberal establishment's support of the Joe Biden campaign has utterly destroyed MeToo.
Huh, I thought they're would be more mental gymnastics involved in justifying the biden allegations. Little disappointing that it's just a lazy "fuck 'em". The onky good rapist's a blue one I guess. Oh well dems and libs go on claiming to be the good guys.
Alas, there's no position one can take in this particular election that won't end up benefiting a sexual predator somewhere.
And I include non-voting or protest-voting in that: as I've argued for quite a long time, abstention and protest-voting still benefits one of the two main candidates. It benefits the one who needs your vote least, whomever that is.
Hey yeah there's definitely an argument to be made for utilitarianism I get that. But I also think it means the dems will never be held accountable for what they do. Now Biden is the acceptable level to be a dem candidate. Do you think in 4 years we'll get a better one? Voting Trump could also be considered a utilitarian position. Twice elect the man that the dems thought could never beat them to show them that they need to have better standards if they want votes.
I mean because if the plan is "you get a dem who isn't a rapist as soon as the republicans nominate someone who respects women and minorities" then we're gonna get a lot of dem rapists.
Last edited:
Absolutely.
Though, I disagree with voting in Trump as a utilitarian position, because he's taking away people's ability to vote. Doesn't matter if the Dems really deserve your vote if they can't get it.
Again, absolutely. Though, really, there's lots of possible solutions to the US's political situation, just that none of them are actually going to be implemented.
Maybe, maybe not. We have it and we just ended up with 2 right wing parties who swore they wouldn't go into government together doubling up to freeze out the most popular party. The leader of the party that got less than 21% of the vote will be our next Taoiseach. The current Taoiseach (they're literally taking turns at it to hold onto power) is the leader of the party who propped up the previous minority government (led by that first guy) through confidence and supply. Trying to figure out the right way to do representative democracy is a waste of time. The system is designed by the people who control the capital in order to protect the people who control capital.
Fair point but when are the repubs not doing shady bullshit like gerrymandering or voter suppression?
When they're not in power.
Less flippantly, they seem to be significantly worse (or perhaps, more brazen) under Trump than last time.
When aren't the Democrats?
Something that a lot of the Never Trumpers forget or gloss over when they talk about how evil the Republicans are, and how the Dems "need" a complete takeover of the government, is that the Democrats are the party of graft, cronyism, and the political machine far more than they are the party of progressivism. The Republicans have just been more competent and united than their opposition for the last few decades (for all the complaints about REDMAP, that's the sort of thing that's in my field, and I'm telling you, anybody could have friggin' done it, the Democrats were just too incompetent to take up basic computer-driven geography). Biden isn't a compromise or a dissapointment, he is the face of the Democrats' business-as-usual.
I'm still voting for him, but it will be bitter, and I'm certainly not just going to vote the Democrat ticket all the way down.
Depends on the primaries. It requires a severe attitudinal shift, and then a realignment during a future primary season.
Yeah, I've seen that position touted, and I think it's hogwash. If the further right candidate wins, that doesn't teach the Democrats to shift left. It's just demonstrated that the country has an appetite for going right.
Abstention doesn't tell us a damn thing about why people don't vote, so Democrats aren't going to look at all those withheld votes and conclude they would have won them with a left-wing candidate. Abstainers are typically unengaged, less valuable targets.
Here's the issue about Redmap.
If the Democrats would have done it, I know for one I would not be pleased and I would speak out if my party deprived other Americans of their ability to be heard by tampering with voting districts.
The defense of "Hey, you could have robbed the bank, but we just got their first" doesn't pan out if I had no intention on robbing the bank at all. And I find it morally reprehensible.
Now you can argue that hey, the politicians aren't the same as the voters. That those democrats who were voted in would have done the same thing as the Republicans did. It's a point to consider. I have a general distrust for all politicians. And we can't say for surety how the Democratic Citizenry would act if the Democrats were found to committing such a heinous act.
But we can talk about the Republican response to these actions. At least on the forums and from everyone I explained Redmap to. That response was deflection, dismissal, and sometimes glee because that hurt people they politically disagreed with. Any time it was brought up, I haven't seen a single conservative in this Forum who responded to the Truth of Redmap express anything coming close to their reported American values. Again, just denial, stating it wasn't that important, or the democrats could do it as well.
In other words, ambivalence to citizenry being deprived the right to be counted for accurately. It's not just politicians who are screwing over America. It's the citizenry who are complicit as well.
USA
It isn't a matter of " if they are republican they are a rapist, if they are a dem they are not", Not at all. I don't think every single allegation against Trump was true, but I think the credible allegations against Trump are true. It is that Tara's allegation isn't credible. She outright told people repeatedly there was nothing sexual about her complaints against Biden. When no one wanted her story like that and saw that as non news, she changed her story later, and then she changed her story again. The problem with Tara that only one of her stories can be true, so which one did she lie about here? The only story she had that was the same repeatedly and documented as such said there was nothing sexual. There is no way to take what Tara has said and not see that she had to have lied somewhere, so before I am willing to call someone a rapist, I have to at least believe the person who is telling me this happened. I was raped, I do not think that this woman was due to what she herself has said and done. Completely non relate to Tara however, I think it is creepy how he randomly smells girl's hair, that is a weird, creepy quirk he has. That does not make him a rapist however.
This goes over it pretty well:
New Reporting Increases Doubts on Tara Reade’s Allegation Against Joe Biden
I used to consider Tara Reade’s allegation more likely true than false. Now it seems more likely false than true.
nymag.com
‘Manipulative, deceitful, user’: Tara Reade left a trail of aggrieved acquaintances
A number of those who crossed paths with Biden’s accuser say they remember two things: She spoke favorably about her time working for Biden, and she left them feeling duped.
www.politico.com
If someone out of the blue just started making up stuff about you, would you also want people to actually look at the credibility of that before just calling you a rapist? Being raped as a kid myself, I actually understand how important it is to believe the victims, but I also know that although rare, some people can also have said things like this without it actually being true, which in Tara's case seems to be what is actually happening here.
Tara has additional credibility issues with those who have known here know her to be manipulative, frequently lying, "a User", deceitful, unremorseful for malicious actions. Now, I am not saying that even someone with a dishonest past cannot be raped too, but that in combination with what she has said about the rape itself and other actions she has taken, it just adds up to not enough for me to be willing to call someone a rapist over. I am going to have to have more to go on here other than a constantly changing story from someone who has known issues with telling the truth before I can do so.
Trump OTOH, has a long list of women accusing him of such credible, women, including his own former wife and other of his children, former business partners, wealthy and well known people who have nothing to gain from doing so and a paper trail of court documents and pay offs of hush money to verify these things from women who do not have a pile of allegations of them lying here. These women give me no reason to doubt their claims, so it is not really comparable.
It isn't a matter of a double standard, it is different situations entirely.
Not at all. Me too isn't impacted by people like Tara, as false allegations like Tara's are a small amount of the actual true rape allegations made. Read the post above for clarification, including the links. We have no reason to actually believe Tara's story due to Tara's story itself and her actions here. Tara herself is not credible and everyone else is telling us it didn't happen, including the people Tara tried to manipulate into lying for her in the first place.
You certainly would hope that if someone made this accusation against you, people would at least look at the allegation itself to determine credibility before calling you a rapist wouldn't you? Tara is the reason why we don't believe her, not anything Biden has said or done. She destroyed her own credibility here on her own. The reason why she doesn't hurt Me too or Biden is that most people don't actually do what she did here.
Last edited:
I feel like that's only true if you look at the results of a single general election in a vacuum and ignore mountains of evidence. If the Democrats are ignoring that they lost votes every general election since 2008, ignore which candidates get the most grassroots support, ignore popular policy, and so on, then they can just look at Trump winning as "the country going right". But they ignore the context for why their voting is depressed at their own peril.
The right winning an election still does not inherently teach the Democrats to move left. They just assume they're not being centrist enough. Doesn't help that the donor class pays the establishment to think that way.
Which could also be explicable by a country shifting to the right, if further right-wing candidates continue to win.
Grassroots support in terms of an activist base doesn't really translate into a country-wide support or a national willingness to vote for somebody. I'm not saying there's necessarily a disconnect-- I believe Sanders would have commanded quite a lot of support on a national scale (quite possibly more than Biden). But the two don't always go together. Case in point would be Corbyn's tremendously strong, enthusiastic grassroots activist base.
Unfortunately, elections aren't decided on policy alone-- or the country at large doesn't ascribe the same importance to those areas of policy. It's easy to fall into patterns of thought which convince us that if only the parties did what we want them to, they'd win.
What if their candidates are shifting to the right and losing votes though? That's what happened in 2016 and revealed in 2012, 2012 in particular lost 5 million votes for Obama after his left wing image got trashed as a cover for right wing policy.
Meanwhile over here we have the Democrats throwing wrenches into their own primaries. One of the most prominent fuckups is Amy McGrath who the DSCC (Chuck Schumer's group of the DNC) endorsed early and poured funds into making sure she won the primary.
It has since become a debacle, with McGrath getting pounded by Mitch McConnell in a move that surprises literally nobody. Even now the best thing strategists can come up with is it's making Republicans waste time, and that's not even agreed on.
Long story short, McGrath isn't the only one, Democrats will overturn grassroot support if it means keeping right wing candidates running, even ones who say stupid shit like McConnell doesn't lick Trump's ass enough.
Well not following policy has caused their voterbase to shrink twice while successfully tricking people into believing you'll work left wing policy got the single largest turnout for a general election ever. And it's taking finance margins of 5 to 1 to win against left wing policy in primaries. I think there is substantial evidence that the Democrats focus on right wing policy to appeal to centrists isn't working.
Biden is the candidate for one primary issue:
"13 points. That’s the margin by which Biden leads senior voters in Pennsylvania (55%-42%), according to Monmouth’s poll, reflecting a national theme. Trump won senior voters by 10 points in the Keystone State in 2016, according to exit polls."
Today’s 2020 Election Polls: Trump’s Chances Of Winning Pennsylvania Fade
Biden holds a 12 point lead (54%-42%) among registered voters in Pennsylvania, a new poll finds.
www.forbes.com
Polls: Biden leads Trump among seniors by double digits
They're America's most reliable voting group.
www.axios.com
A senior warning sign for Trump: 'Go Biden' cry at Villages
THE VILLAGES, Fla. (AP) — Sara Branscome’s golf cart whizzed down the smooth asphalt path that winds through The Villages, the nation’s largest retirement community, an expanse of beautiful homes, shops and entertainment venues that bills itself as “Florida’s Friendliest Hometown.”
apnews.com
Biden being the candidate isn't about Cronyism or anything else but one primary issue, Senior citizens are who determine who wins the general election right now. They selected Biden because senior citizens wouldn't vote for any other Democratic option we had. Baby boomers still determine who wins in swing states, and we cannot win an election without them. They are the most reliable voters. The most absurd thing I have come to realize over time is that we have people willing to rant online, march in the streets, but then many of those same people then skip out on election day. Younger voters are unreliable, it was like Bernie's primary "youth" turn out, they just didn't. We can only win elections if they get off their arses and vote, no matter what they did the rest of the time matters if they missed the most critical part.
Until the demographics change, The elderly are who determine who is elected. Making it easier to vote can help change this, but that is only a small part of it, we have to actually educate people on how this works so they still don't wind up voting for republicans on their state and local levels and then wonder why they can't get a democrat elected to congress or the white house. Local elections are just as important. They have to work on WHO they elect for mayor, city council, state legislature, governor, congress, if they want to change who is on the ballot for the white house. Just getting people to look at voting records and understanding how that translated to the things that are effecting their daily lives seems like an impossible challenge because even the people protesting in the streets often refuse to do that too. Many just won't look at budgets, bills passed, candidate and party platforms, they generally just see something on twitter or listen to what someone else said and use that to make up their mind instead of actually doing their own research to dissect this. If we cannot even get people to do that, we can't expect this to change, at least not easily.
- Status