Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[cubby]

OMG, you're such a rape apologist for posting this! /s

It's amazing how closed this issue has become, given the almost inherently subjective nature of the topic. I wonder if we'll ever find out who put her up to it?

- - - Updated - - -

Abrams would be the best choice, make trump fight to keep Georgia and give Biden more support in Wisconsin.

I like Abrams and Warren, along with Klobuchar. Harris not so much. Whitmer seems to have some issues with her husband, which fucking sucks, but we need the VP candidate to come on with as little baggage as possible.

[Canpinter]

It's amazing how closed this issue has become, given the almost inherently subjective nature of the topic. I wonder if we'll ever find out who put her up to it?

- - - Updated - - -



I like Abrams and Warren, along with Klobuchar. Harris not so much. Whitmer seems to have some issues with her husband, which fucking sucks, but we need the VP candidate to come on with as little baggage as possible.

Warrens sadly to high profile for this election, the trumpers have had to long to paint her as an evil socialist bogyman.

[beanman12345]

Unconfirmed short list for Biden's VP picks:

1. Gretchen Whitmer (Michigan Governor)
2. Kamala Harris (California Senator)
3. Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota Senator)
4. Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts Senator)
5. Stacey Abrams (Georgia House Rep - former, Georgia gubernatorial candidate)

There has been talk, even from the Biden camp, that Biden, if he wins, will only stick around for one term - making his VP choice a natural frontrunner as the Democratic nominee for the 2024 election.

I don't think that's a very accurate list, considering one of the two people that are confirmed to be currently being vetted by Joe is Val Demings and she isn't even on that last. Amy Klobuchar is the other known one being vetted.

[JohnBrown1917]

Ha, have you met the internet? Nothing is ever "over."

Always those darn interneters not bootlicking the democrats and victim blaming Tara like a good little boy!

[cubby]

Warrens sadly to high profile for this election, the trumpers have had to long to paint her as an evil socialist bogyman.

Sadly, I agree. Warren is the obvious choice for President, and therefore in our misogynist society, Vice-President - but yeah, the GOP has started their hate campaign against her, much as they did so long ago with Hillary.

She would make a fantastic Secretary of Treasury, however. I mean - LOOK OUT!

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think that's a very accurate list, considering one of the two people that are confirmed to be currently being vetted by Joe is Val Demings and she isn't even on that last. Amy Klobuchar is the other known one being vetted.

Shit - you're right. It was independently confirmed Rep Demings was being vetted. Crap.

And she would really fuck shit up in the EC math. Putting FL not just a "we hope so" but "come and take it away from us" for the DNC. Can you imagine the GOP fighting to keep FL?

[Elegiac]

Unconfirmed short list for Biden's VP picks:

1. Gretchen Whitmer (Michigan Governor)
2. Kamala Harris (California Senator)
3. Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota Senator)
4. Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts Senator)
5. Stacey Abrams (Georgia House Rep - former, Georgia gubernatorial candidate)

There has been talk, even from the Biden camp, that Biden, if he wins, will only stick around for one term - making his VP choice a natural frontrunner as the Democratic nominee for the 2024 election.

Ah yes, what historians like to call the Nerva Compromise.

[cubby]

Always those darn interneters not bootlicking the democrats and victim blaming Tara like a good little boy!

I love that you're so out of touch with reality you think commenting on Reade's current status is "victim blaming". Actually, it's also independently possible that you don't know what that phrase means.

[Elegiac]

Shit - you're right. It was independently confirmed Rep Demings was being vetted. Crap.

And she would really fuck shit up in the EC math. Putting FL not just a "we hope so" but "come and take it away from us" for the DNC. Can you imagine the GOP fighting to keep FL?

The same also holds true for Georgia with Stacey Abrams, considering that she came within a hairs breadth of winning her election (assuming she didn't actually do so but, GOP voter suppression and electoral fraud).

As difficult as it is to accept that such a diverse field of Presidential candidates came down to a contest between two old white men, it is heartening to see that there's such a good selection of candidates for the first female Vice President. These women are certainly a hell of a lot more professional and competent than Miss Pence.

[Louisa Bannon]

It's amazing how closed this issue has become, given the almost inherently subjective nature of the topic. I wonder if we'll ever find out who put her up to it?

This changes almost nothing, and you aren't looking at this very intelligently.

It is possible that Reade is lying and that her story is entirely fabricated. At the same time, the factual elements of the story go back literally decades. The Larry King segment with Reade's mother is quite old. The smell of it all is still there.

And what do we really know of it today? Nothing.

Is it possible the current investigation is brought by Democratic party insiders in California? Almost certainly. The focus seems like it may be her testimony at various trials and nothing to do with her allegations about Biden.

Yes, it's possible if she lied under oath even once, she lies consistently. But that's not how people actually lie. They lie about some things and not others. The type of lying she did under oath may have been a kind of payback for her, for the shabby treatment she received from Biden and his campaign. I am not justifying it, just explaining how shit really works in the real world.

And none of this changes the hypocrisy of the Democratic party on important issues like Me Too. FWIW, those Identity politics concerns are not my big thing. At the same time, I passionately disagree with using those issues for the sake of political expediency, that's just immoral as fuck.

And yeah, you're an apologist and you know you are one. You froth at the mouth to support anything so long as Biden is elected. You'd boil and eat babies with Biden if it would get him elected. We all see it, be assured.

[cubby]

Ah yes, what historians like to call the Nerva Compromise.

Oh sure, make us all go look something up and learning something new.

Interesting analogy.

[Elegiac]

And none of this changes the hypocrisy of the Democratic party on important issues like Me Too.

Hypocrisy implies that there is some sort of concrete standard when the reality is that #MeToo is a highly convoluted situation that is evolving constantly.

And let's be real here and not pretend there isn't a faction of the progressive wing that isn't averse to spreading misinformation for the sake of an agenda. Like, I'm not saying that Shaun King and Nina Turner are ridiculous hacks that really should stick to posting bad takes on Reddit, but...

FWIW, those Identity politics concerns are not my big thing. At the same time, I passionately disagree with using those issues for the sake of political expediency, that's just immoral as fuck.

You do realise that this is an infantilization of the demographics that are the subject of "identity politics", yes? This is assuming that they have no agency or awareness.

Once again, this is the problem that white progressives have with building a broad coalition in the United States; reduction of every issue to a function of class.

[beanman12345]

Sadly, I agree. Warren is the obvious choice for President, and therefore in our misogynist society, Vice-President - but yeah, the GOP has started their hate campaign against her, much as they did so long ago with Hillary.

She would make a fantastic Secretary of Treasury, however. I mean - LOOK OUT!

- - - Updated - - -



Shit - you're right. It was independently confirmed Rep Demings was being vetted. Crap.

And she would really fuck shit up in the EC math. Putting FL not just a "we hope so" but "come and take it away from us" for the DNC. Can you imagine the GOP fighting to keep FL?

In that scenario, at the very least, it would put Florida in a "we gotta cause a lot of fuckery like we did in 2000 so we can win it" from the GOP. But even then it might not be enough, especially with Arizona and possibly north Carolina likely going to Biden as well. They are in for a possible real rough ride.

[Elegiac]

Oh sure, make us all go look something up and learning something new.

Interesting analogy.

For folks more Google averse, quick summary.

After Domitian, the last Emperor of the Flavian Dynasty was assassinated for being autocratic, there was a bit of a power vacuum where the Senate and the Legions jockeyed for who would get to select his successor. A compromise was reached whereby the Senate would select a preferred candidate that was relatively old (i.e. would die quickly), but in turn would go on to adopt Trajan who was the Legions' preferred candidate as his heir.

[Milchshake]

Yes, it's possible if she lied under oath even once, she lies consistently. But that's not how people actually lie. They lie about some things and not others. The type of lying she did under oath may have been a kind of payback for her, for the shabby treatment she received from Biden and his campaign. I am not justifying it, just explaining how shit really works in the real world.

Your ability to quantify lies is as bad as your medical advice. Just stop.

Reade has been lying about everything since day one.

• In her resume to the DA, she claimed to have worked in Biden's office for 3 years. In reality it was barely 9 months.
• Her resume also claimed to be a special online professor for Seattle U for 5 years. In reality she did hours worth of work over 3 years.
• On Tara’s website, she claims she worked for the King County prosecutor as a victim advocate for three years. King County claims it was for a little over one year.

Someone aggrandizing their expertise to win over some goobers on the internet.

Sounds familiar.

[Endus]

This changes almost nothing, and you aren't looking at this very intelligently.

It is possible that Reade is lying and that her story is entirely fabricated. At the same time, the factual elements of the story go back literally decades. The Larry King segment with Reade's mother is quite old. The smell of it all is still there.

And what do we really know of it today? Nothing.

Is it possible the current investigation is brought by Democratic party insiders in California? Almost certainly. The focus seems like it may be her testimony at various trials and nothing to do with her allegations about Biden.

Yes, it's possible if she lied under oath even once, she lies consistently. But that's not how people actually lie. They lie about some things and not others. The type of lying she did under oath may have been a kind of payback for her, for the shabby treatment she received from Biden and his campaign. I am not justifying it, just explaining how shit really works in the real world.

Literally the only evidence of Reade's accusations against Biden is Reade's own words. Her credibility as a witness is her entire case, in that matter. She's made multiple claims of documentary support, but nobody's been able to actually turn up any of those documents she claims would back her up.

So yeah; her credibility matters. It's literally all she's got to support her claims.

And none of this changes the hypocrisy of the Democratic party on important issues like Me Too. FWIW, those Identity politics concerns are not my big thing. At the same time, I passionately disagree with using those issues for the sake of political expediency, that's just immoral as fuck.

No such hypocrisy exists. You're making it up. And the Reade case doesn't demonstrate any "hypocrisy". #MeToo was never "blindly believe all claims absent any evidence and without engaging in any scrutiny whatsoever, just presume all men automatically guilty always and forever". The only way there's "hypocrisy" is if you think that's what #MeToo was ever about.

And yeah, you're an apologist and you know you are one. You froth at the mouth to support anything so long as Biden is elected. You'd boil and eat babies with Biden if it would get him elected. We all see it, be assured.

This just comes off as projection. Nothing cubby's said suggests he's a slavish ideologue who blindly follows one political actor. In fact, his posts indicate otherwise; https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post52260566

So you're just lying to engage in bullshit slander, and we have to wonder what well you dragged the particulars out of. Generally, it's a well close to home.

[Felya]

Yes, it's possible if she lied under oath even once, she lies consistently. But that's not how people actually lie. They lie about some things and not others. The type of lying she did under oath may have been a kind of payback for her, for the shabby treatment she received from Biden and his campaign. I am not justifying it, just explaining how shit really works in the real world.

Can you elaborate on the bold? How is sending two people to jail based on a lie, getting back at Biden? Wouldn’t using the funding allocated in Biden sponsored violence against women act, to persecute Biden, be a far more justifiable and poetic way to get back at him?

[Draco-Onis]

Can you elaborate on the bold? How is sending two people to jail based on a lie, getting back at Biden? Wouldn’t using the funding allocated in Biden sponsored violence against women act, to persecute Biden, be a far more justifiable and poetic way to get back at him?

It's clear that Biden just came up with this new law that lying under oath is a crime /s

[Felya]

It's clear that Biden just came up with this new law that lying under oath is a crime /s

The part I am trying to emphasize, is that she could have used the very bill Biden sponsored, to fund her persecution of Biden. How poetic would that have been? Until March of last year when GOP refused to bring it for a vote, she could have used Biden, to get Biden.

[cubby]

Let's briefly review how Lil Louisa's response is entirely fucked up. Strap in kids, should be a fun ride.

It is possible that Reade is lying and that her story is entirely fabricated. At the same time, the factual elements of the story go back literally decades. The Larry King segment with Reade's mother is quite old. The smell of it all is still there.

The smell of what, again? Or did you forget that the Larry King segment "...does not mention sexual assault or harassment, nor does [the caller] describe in any detail what "problems" she might be referring to. Her daughter's name and Biden are also not mentioned." Did you also forget that Tara's mother died previous to these events, so we have nothing to corroborate this story is actually true?

And let's not forget, as you pointed out:

it's possible if she lied under oath even once, she lies consistently.

So Tara lies under oath, but not about something that no one alive can even substantiate? Why again? Oh, right - more of your deep analysis:

But that's not how people actually lie. They lie about some things and not others.

I mean, wow, just...WOW. How fucking asinine can you be to try an push this desperately stupid narrative. And there's more!

The type of lying she did under oath may have been a kind of payback for her, for the shabby treatment she received from Biden and his campaign. I am not justifying it, just explaining how shit really works in the real world.

Speaking of apologists - you're now literally making things up to fit what is almost now certainly a lie. Because, as you said:

And what do we really know of it today? Nothing.

We actually know a lot. Apologists like you are just choosing to ignore it. We know Reade is a serial liar. We know her claims cannot be substantiated by anyone. We know she has lied before. And we know that she lies under oath. But you just can't let your stream-of-conscience diatribe stop, can you? For instance:

Is it possible the current investigation is brought by Democratic party insiders in California? Almost certainly. The focus seems like it may be her testimony at various trials and nothing to do with her allegations about Biden.

So they are focusing on something she did wrong? Oh Gods - how could they try and right a wrong like that - get 'em! Do you really think they just did that as "payback" or that they have some other indicators? Or could it be that in at least two trials over the past two years, Reade stated she had earned a degree from Antioch University in Seattle, when in fact she did not.. Lying under oath. Objectively. Whoops.

If you had spent even two seconds researching your stream-of-conscience diatribe, you'd know that they have objective and independent proof that she lied under oath. And despite your "thoughts", liars are known for...lying. A lot.

And yeah, you're an apologist and you know you are one. You froth at the mouth to support anything so long as Biden is elected. You'd boil and eat babies with Biden if it would get him elected. We all see it, be assured.

I mean, holy shit, that is some fucked up analysis from you. And you call me an apologist, how adorable.

Your apologist diatribe continues to fall to pieces. And unless you can point to me saying I back Biden no matter what he did or does, well then, you're just as much a liar as Tara, aren't you. We'll wait for that response - I'm sure it won't be long in coming.

This changes almost nothing, and you aren't looking at this very intelligently.

It's pretty clear that the only one not looking at this intelligently is you. And it's desperately clear from your own words. Which is sad, because the MeToo movement is important, and victims need to be heard and believed. But when they turn out to be proven liars, we cannot allow their false accusations to go unrecognized. And before little head explodes, no, I'm not talking about punishing the "victim" - I'm just advocating that when an accuser is found to have been lying, it's important to the new victim that the lie get as much publicity as the accusation, because the new victim is the person formerly accused.

[Jakexe]

You do all notice Trump moving money around? It's to avert the evidence that he bought AND sold little south american children for rape?

This is from the internet, so it's allowed here.