Originally posted by Surtur
Manchester Democrat resigns House seat after tweet about Biden accuserLol, the tweet:
😆 😆
Originally posted by Surtur
Manchester Democrat resigns House seat after tweet about Biden accuserLol, the tweet:
😆 😆
USA Today opinion piece.
It's very honest, not sure I can fault her.
The article basically says this:
Whether people like it or not, it’s now a zero-sum game: Trump versus Biden. Even if you believe the accusation against Biden, Trump far outstrips him in the sexual assault accusation department. Yes, it's a terrible place to be where that sentence can even be written. That said, if sexual assault allegations are the most important issue to you, then there is still no contest.
Pretty much she's saying if one of them is Harvey Wenstein, and the other is Bill Clinton, what can you do? One of these terrible people is getting elected, so choise your poison.
Of course, there's always third rail. But one of those two are getting elected.
Originally posted by cdtm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/05/01/2020-choice-trump-outstrips-biden-sexual-assault-accusations-column/3056601001/USA Today opinion piece.
It's very honest, not sure I can fault her.
The article basically says this:
Pretty much she's saying if one of them is Harvey Wenstein, and the other is Bill Clinton, what can you do? One of these terrible people is getting elected, so choise your poison.
Of course, there's always third rail. But one of those two are getting elected.
Man, it's so so hard up on this really high hill of morality. It's difficult to accept the fact that I am morally superior to tens of millions of voters who are going to vote for 1 of 2 sexual predators in November. It will be SUPER difficult for me to exercise my great morality by NOT voting for Biden or Trump in November.
So so very difficult to have such moral power.
pained
Originally posted by cdtm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/05/01/2020-choice-trump-outstrips-biden-sexual-assault-accusations-column/3056601001/USA Today opinion piece.
It's very honest, not sure I can fault her.
The article basically says this:
Pretty much she's saying if one of them is Harvey Wenstein, and the other is Bill Clinton, what can you do? One of these terrible people is getting elected, so choise your poison.
Of course, there's always third rail. But one of those two are getting elected.
Oh, so they argued "Trump has more accusations" did they? Surtradamus at your service:
Originally posted by Surtur
The case for Kavanaugh was weak, but they got an investigation anyways. I don't think the damage has been done because most people who were going to vote for him will either believe him or say "it doesn't matter, Trump has been accused by more women".
Anyways, yeaah...no. I don't buy this argument. It's gas lighting. It seems to suggest that, for those who believe the Biden accusation, the only thing stopping them from casting a vote for Trump is that Trump has been accused even more.
Nope. Nooope. Do not buy it. I do not buy for one single solitary second these people would ever vote for Trump under any circumstance other than the democrat nominee somehow turning out to be Trump Jr. So I say nay thee to these shitty arguments pushed by people with no principles. I say: I wish they would just say "this is about politics, Biden is my guy so even if 23 other women came out and accused him I'd vote for him anyways". That would be an honest thing to say. Anything else is just a bad faith argument. They don't care if it turned out Biden was guilty of these things and Trump was innocent. They really and truly do not lol.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Man, it's so so hard up on this really high hill of morality. It's difficult to accept the fact that I am morally superior to tens of millions of voters who are going to vote for 1 of 2 sexual predators in November. It will be SUPER difficult for me to exercise my great morality by NOT voting for Biden or Trump in November.So so very difficult to have such moral power.
pained
I'm honestly loving this dynamic that has been set up. Back in 2016 for Democrats it was "well, yeah our nominee has lied quite a bit, but Trump has lied waaay more!".
Now it's "Yeah, our nominee might have dabbled a little bit in sexual assault, but Trump majored in it!".
I love this lol. I love how quickly they abandon their principles cuz Trump and cuz power. And Biden probably regrets his virtue signaling like a chump and saying he will choose a female VP nom. Cuz whoever it is...is gonna have to defend(repeatedly) why she doesn't believe women all of a sudden. Especially if the pick turns out to be one of those people who were dumb enough to actually say, out loud, "I believe women" cuz you can't walk that back. Abrams tried and failed.
Just good stuff, good stuff happening. What was the argument democrats used for Kavanaugh? "Republicans could have set him aside and just chosen someone less controversial". Yeah, Democrats had like 18,000 potential nominees. They ended up with a potential rapist and a guy who just loves to write rape fantasies, both over the age of 75. Giggle.
Originally posted by jaden_2.0
If you can't separate the candidates via their rapiness you have to do it some other way... like by their mental illness. So you can choose narcissistic personality disorder or Alzheimer's.
You know Tulsi hasn't raped anyone. And I don't think Yang put his wang in anyone against their will either.
Technically there still are other choices...
Top House Dem Hakeem Jeffries says Tara Reade's Biden allegation 'serious,' deserves investigation
Wall is beginning to crumble.
Originally posted by Surtur
Top House Dem Hakeem Jeffries says Tara Reade's Biden allegation 'serious,' deserves investigationWall is beginning to crumble.
What do you call a Dem in name only?
For Republicans, it's RINO. So for Dems that makes it...
DINO?
Damn. I like Rhinos as much as the next guy, but a Flintstones reference is a much cooler acronym.
Trigger warning, Tim Pool video:
Democrat ADMITS They Think Biden Is Guilty, Says They Will Vote For Him Anyway In Severe TDS Case
LOL
For those who don't wanna watch that video, enjoy:
Here is a link to it, the responses are...well lol. It didn't go well for her:
Secretary Of Senate Rejects Biden Request To Release Docs On Tara Reade
I wonder if they knew in advance this would be rejected and that is why they called for it. Or were they just that ignorant? Hasn't Biden been in government for decades now?
I was ready to give props the NYT for calling for an investigation. Then I found out the article contains this:
”The investigation, the Times’ editors specify, “should be strictly limited to information about Ms. Reade and conducted by an unbiased, apolitical panel, put together by the D.N.C. and chosen to foster as much trust in its findings as possible.”
An apolitical panel put together by the DNC.
I laughed.