Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

[Kepler]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

You can ignore my posts or put me on ignore of this is bothering you. Again, I find the the discussion interesting since I agree with about 99% of everything else y’all write about on here. The difference in opinion or thought is where I learn a lot.

Why would I put you on Ignore? I'm fine with you being wrong -- heck I talk about movies with Handy all the time. The only people I put on Ignore are serial ad hom violators who have proven themselves to be bad actors. Up until The Incident I never even put Flaggy on Ignore.

The only accusation against Biden beyond his neck touching gross old man-ness of which I am aware is Reade's. That is as distinct from Kavanaugh who apparently couldn't go out for coffee without whipping it out and trying to stick it in the nearest girl's ear. The cases are not remotely similar.

 

[Rover]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

The difference is, y’all find the circumstantial evidence convincing that Reade must be lying. That’s fine. I read that evidence, and then Reade’s telling, and other journalists’ telling, her brother’s telling, etc., and conclude the evidence isn’t convincing. We’ll agree to disagree. I know Handy said if it turned out Reade was telling the truth, that would mean Biden is “scum.” I won’t disagree with that at all. Would that change if you voted for him or not? We’re already all agreeing to overlook his past history of inappropriately touching women by voting for him in November and not thinking twice about it. It doesn’t hurt that the other guy has like quadruple the number of women who have come forward and made as bad, if not worse, allegations against him, and that he’s admitted, on tape, to broadly doing them.

I'll reiterate, I don't believe a person would praise their rapist multiple times after the event for years and years. If you do, kindly explain why that sounds plausible? Ford was terrified of Kavanaugh and had no history of praising the man either in public or in private. Reade was saying what a great guy Biden was for the whole world to see until she flipped a switch sometime last year. That's not credible or believable.

To answer your final question, I would not vote for a proven rapist for President. If something proves these allegations against Biden to be true (a videotape from a security camera for example) then I would advocate he drop out of the race and decide the nominee at the convention. Dems have more pride than Republicans over matters like this, in case you haven't noticed...

 

[psych]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

I'll reiterate, I don't believe a person would praise their rapist multiple times after the event for years and years. If you do, kindly explain why that sounds plausible? Ford was terrified of Kavanaugh and had no history of praising the man either in public or in private. Reade was saying what a great guy Biden was for the whole world to see until she flipped a switch sometime last year. That's not credible or believable.

To answer your final question, I would not vote for a proven rapist for President. If something proves these allegations against Biden to be true (a videotape from a security camera for example) then I would advocate he drop out of the race and decide the nominee at the convention. Dems have more pride than Republicans over matters like this, in case you haven't noticed...

Fair enough. I’ll vote for Biden even if it’s true, unless the rest of the Democratic Party indicates they won’t. It’s not for me to decide such serious matters.

As for why she’d praised Biden on certain aspects of who he was or what he did, it’s really not that unbelievable for someone who was sexually assaulted to continue such behavior. It makes more sense in the minds of people who haven’t been sexually assaulted to act like how Blasey Ford did, based on how we think a victim would act toward their abuser. They all act differently, though. Reade explained why; at least, it appears to me she does. I would say many experts on sexual assault would explain why Reade’s “changing” story isn’t a change at all. Like this guy. I’m not sure what his motive is, other than explaining how this stuff works. I’m sure he’s aware of all of Tara Reade’s story before commenting. As always, I could be wrong.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.commondreams.org/views/2020/04/07/inconvenient-truth-rape?amp

Or, this person. Again, she may have some motive, or hasn’t read the full story.

https://newpol.org/a-therapists-perspective-on-rape-trauma-tara-reade-and-credibility/

 

[Rover]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

As for why she’d praised Biden on certain aspects of who he was or what he did, it’s really not that unbelievable for someone who was sexually assaulted to continue such behavior.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I absolutely don't buy that you'd keep praising your rapist. Especially given all the other inconsistencies in her story. Its not like she's been held captive and brainwashed over the last 25 years when she was saying what a great guy Biden was. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one, and I'll leave it to Reade herself to tell us her true motivation (money, fame, payback for being called a Russian agent, etc).

 

[Handyman]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

Something like 2-10% of sexual assault allegations turn out to be false. Reade could be one of those. If she is, I ask myself, what is she receiving in return for the public blowback she’s getting? The tarnishing of whatever reputation she may have had before? $130,000 under the table? A cabinet position in Trump’s White House if he wins in November? A position in Putin’s government? Maybe we’ll find out someday, but we haven’t yet. And, because I don’t know her personally, I attribute what she’s doing to what she tells me she’s doing this for. If she comes out tonight in a tweet and said it’s a lie, and she did it for a box of Twinkies, great, I’ll admit I was wrong in my believing her. No sweat off my back.
Biden has a long history of inappropriately touching women. Before now, none of those encounters apparently included digital penetration, but, clearly the man either doesn’t understand boundaries that well, or he’s justified in his mind that as long as he keeps his hands on shoulders, kisses on necks, etc., it’s okay, and he’ll get away with it. Many of y’all are giving him the benefit of the doubt. It’s confusing to me. It’s not like he’s been Barack Obama until now, and has never had a history of touching women inappropriately. Why he’s given a pass, based on very similar behavior, basically gateway behavior, but Reade isn’t, based on behavior that has nothing to do with sexual assault, like not paying someone some money for cleaning her horses or defrauding a charity or something, is confusing to me.
As it relates to the actual allegations of sexual assault, we have the same amount of hard evidence compiled in both the Blasey Ford allegation and Reade’s. None. Everything else is spin, and immaterial to the accusation at hand.

No it isnt. Credibility of the person matters. When there is zero evidence credibility is all we have. Even leaving aside that she changed her story (like 172 times!!) she flat out lied about the things her mother did, the people she told about each account of her story, that she filed a complain along with what was in said complaint amongst many other things. These arent mistakes or corrections, they are flat out lies. If she was under oath perjury would be in play. She would be completely impeached on her credibility and the cross-examination would be a disaster. Now, lying about one thing doesnt mean she is lying about everything, but if you are asking me to judge her story based on her word all we have to go on is whether her word is something we can trust. I dont trust her at all, because her lies make no sense, her story changes are inconsistent at best and she is definitely, even according to many who believe her, looking for more than just shining a light on what happened.

And what is she getting? Two years ago she was just some former Biden worker who disappeared from DC to take a job somewhere who would tweet her love of Veep Biden. Now look at her, she is a darling of the Far Left and the Trump Right. I am sure she will get a book deal, make the rounds as a paid talking head...etc. She also gets to stick it to a man that she holds responsible for ruining her career. Or, in the case of many con artists I know, there is no real gain it is just a compulsion.

Full disclosure: I have lots of con artists in my family. I am hyper sensitive to this type of stuff. The things that have been pointed out repeatedly are things that I have seen first hand as tells to a con being put on. Vagueness in details, massive changes in story and attitude, fishing for acceptance, overcompensating...easy tells from the outside. A decent con artist though picks something that is important to the mark and uses that to blind them to the tells. (Trump is great at this) Parents use their kids affection, friends use loyalty...etc. I dont know her motives, I dont know enough about her to go that in depth. But I smell a rat...the same way I did when Avenatti went beyond just representing the porn star. (I didnt think he was as stupid as he was though)

That is me though. And if Reade's second accusation is true Biden should drop out. I wont vote for him that is for ****ed sure. I am not a hypocrite. Sexual assault by Biden is not more acceptable than sexual assault by Trump. The first accusation, while still bad, I can still vote for.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

That ticket is so boring I fell asleep halfway through that sentence.

DA: Perhaps a bit boring is what America needs after the Dump Family Circus. A "return to normalcy" - wait, Harding sucked, bad example. How about "status quo ante Trumpum"?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

A point that I don't think is made often enough is that a lot depends upon the power and position of the accused.

If Reade made the exact same accusations against Handy to his college overlords, he'd likely be shown the door in a heartbeat.

You want to bring down a former VP and current candidate for POTUS, or a candidate for a SCOTUS position, you're going to need the heavy artillery. You're going to need a compelling story, with literally zero inconsistencies. You'll need corroboration, and a lot of it. You'll need completely innocent conduct on the part of the victim. And even then, you may not have enough.

 

[psych]

A point that I don't think is made often enough is that a lot depends upon the power and position of the accused.

If Reade made the exact same accusations against Handy to his college overlords, he'd likely be shown the door in a heartbeat.

You want to bring down a former VP and current candidate for POTUS, or a candidate for a SCOTUS position, you're going to need the heavy artillery. You're going to need a compelling story, with literally zero inconsistencies. You'll need corroboration, and a lot of it. You'll need completely innocent conduct on the part of the victim. And even then, you may not have enough.

I made clear my strong disagreement with you over your viewpoint(s) on the coronavirus, but, you couldn’t be more accurate with this post. You may think Reade doesn’t meet any of those qualifications, but, again, still accurate.

I’m sorry about your family, Handy. It’s hard having family who just want to use you or others for their own personal gain, more often than not. If it turns out Reade is a con artist, I’ll still post here and admit I was wrong. Until then, I hope I can say it’s still a respectful disagreement.

 

[Rover]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

DA: Perhaps a bit boring is what America needs after the Dump Family Circus. A "return to normalcy" - wait, Harding sucked, bad example. How about "status quo ante Trumpum"?

I think Biden himself gives you that himself. To his credit Uncle Joe has talked about being a transitional President to some new liberal world order in this country. His ticket would work better IMO if it reflects that transition to younger, non-male and progressive.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

Whether Ford was telling the truth or not (and I believe she was), Kavanuts DQ'd himself with his rambling, angry, politicized rant of a response. That was all I needed to know he was unfit for SCOTUS.

Biden may be handsy, but he doesn't give off the vibes of being capable of pushing a woman up against a wall and raping her. Kavanuts definitely gave off those vibes.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I absolutely don't buy that you'd keep praising your rapist. Especially given all the other inconsistencies in her story. Its not like she's been held captive and brainwashed over the last 25 years when she was saying what a great guy Biden was. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one, and I'll leave it to Reade herself to tell us her true motivation (money, fame, payback for being called a Russian agent, etc).

This

 

[geezer]

DA: Perhaps a bit boring is what America needs after the Dump Family Circus. A "return to normalcy" - wait, Harding sucked, bad example. How about "status quo ante Trumpum"?

As I’ve said to friends, I miss the days when it took me a second to remember who the current US president is. I really do.

 

[Handyman]

Whether Ford was telling the truth or not (and I believe she was), Kavanuts DQ'd himself with his rambling, angry, politicized rant of a response. That was all I needed to know he was unfit for SCOTUS.

Biden may be handsy, but he doesn't give off the vibes of being capable of pushing a woman up against a wall and raping her. Kavanuts definitely gave off those vibes.

Bingo. If Rapey McBeerface had acted with any sort of empathy (ya know say young men are scum but he isn't that way anymore) he has his rep in tact. People are flawed, admitting it helps way more than it hurts.

And yeah if a student accused me I would have to prove my innocence and it would be difficult. Happened to a friend of mine (not a teacher a restaurant manager) and just the accusation got the cops involved. Very scary.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The president's tax returns could not immediately be reached for comment <a href="https://t.co/u8Rf9E1YRv">https://t.co/u8Rf9E1YRv</a></p>— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1260578250587279368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

I believe this. Keep it going you dumb **** republicans
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Probably the singje most decisive factor in 2020 election will be non-white turnout. It declined for first time in 20 years in 2016. By attacking President Obama, Trump is doing everything he can to put Obama back on the ballot in 2020. Nothing he could do would help Dems more.</p>— stuart stevens (@stuartpstevens) <a href="https://twitter.com/stuartpstevens/status/1260588174138576897?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Jimjamesak]

I believe this. Keep it going you dumb **** republicans
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Probably the singje most decisive factor in 2020 election will be non-white turnout. It declined for first time in 20 years in 2016. By attacking President Obama, Trump is doing everything he can to put Obama back on the ballot in 2020. Nothing he could do would help Dems more.</p>— stuart stevens (@stuartpstevens) <a href="https://twitter.com/stuartpstevens/status/1260588174138576897?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Was thinking the exact same thing. Nothing would drive up vote totals, in spite of coordinated efforts to suppress votes, like going after Obama.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Was thinking the exact same thing. Nothing would drive up vote totals, in spite of coordinated efforts to suppress votes, like going after Obama.

Wasn’t that basically what 2016 was, though? Hillary ran on being a third term of Obama.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

Wasn’t that basically what 2016 was, though? Hillary ran on being a third term of Obama.

Not exactly... Obama ran under the "Change" banner. Hillary was seen as a step back in the old by a fair amount of people (looking at Bernie Bros). Most Hillary voters voted for Obama. Obama voters didn't necessarily vote for Clinton.

 

[Rover]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

I also think enough voters get exhausted after 8 years that they either stay home or vote for the party that's been out of power for whatever reason. Since FDR/Truman's 5 terms we've only seen one instance where one party kept the WH for 12 years, even though some of the Presidents who were leaving office after 8 years were still pretty popular (Eisenhower, Clinton).

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Biden v Dump 1: If not now, when? If not us, who?

"It is happening, again"