Biden for President?

[TurkeysGhost]

That's one of the articles I saw. Glass half-full/half-empty reading of the same article?


So I said one time, they say two, neither of which are sourced. And it says the news media ran with the story more than Biden repeated the claim.

I agree Biden should have dispelled the news accounts.

Still, I can't find a clip (I'm sure the alt-right will dig one up). And I don't see that Biden repeated it multiple times.

here's another, from the perspective of the Mr. Dunn's surviving daughter.

According to her, Biden called her once the story hit the news and apologized, but balked about making a public apology for fear of negative press.

https://apnews.com/e5a1e70314eb44219448eeb850c65f1e

I don't really see any point in doubting that Biden is the source of the drunk driving rumor that slandered Dunn's reputation after he was dead. Biden's dropping of the story and private apology is a pretty clear tell.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Stupid Democrats. We could have had someone besides Biden or Sanders. Instead we are stuck with the lesser (but not as lesser than it could have been) of two evils.

The problem is that the candidates who might have had more potential than Biden for being a very good president might not have been electable. Unfortunately, everything starts with name recognition. Would Trump have gotten elected, or even won the Republican nomination, if he wasn't a TV celebrity?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Okay, so they're not your words. Does that mean you wouldn't describe those things as "horrible things"? Do you not agree with that description? What words would you use in their place?

Meaning no snark, perhaps I wasn't clear. My point is that the electorate (never mind the Obama campaign team) deemed the "things" insufficiently "horrible" to affect Biden being on the ticket.

 

[wareyin]

Okay. I guess posting in one thread on one message board equals "constant criticisms", making me a fearsome warrior bringing down the delicate Biden apparatus. If I make a face when voting for him will he feel a stab of pain in his soul?

When one performs the same action over and over again, it is fair to say they do it constantly. What is it with the semantic quibbles lately?

He looks bad because of his faults, whether I say anything or not. You just want to blame the messenger for it. If you believe a given criticism is invalid you are free to ignore it, and the person who aired it. If you believe it's valid but the person mentioning it should shut up for the good of the "side" then tough cheese. Some people think that sort of thing is dishonest, un-American, and ethically corrosive.

Huh, not attacking the candidate that you need to beat Trump is un-American and corrosive? What a self-defeating strategy.

I don't expect to accomplish anything. Why should I? I didn't know we were only permitted to speak if we expected to accomplish something. That must be a part of the new speech codes, after the bit about stifling dissent.

I didn't know you spoke so much without thinking it through then. Apologies for thinking you were in the "normal adult who understands cause and effect" category. Do you wish me to treat your utterances as preschool level tantrums rather than that of an adult who grasps that words and actions have consequences?

 

[Dr. Keith]

TBF, he's not giving the ammo, the right-wing blogosphere is full of these stories. I appreciate hearing about them now so they don't come as an Oct surprise.

But I agree, the hate being spewed about Biden is more palpable than is helpful.

If it is hurtful for us to hash out Biden's issue in this virtual safe space, then Biden is well and truly ******.

We are dealing with second hand accounts while the GOP has already stockpiled the video evidence of everything from his weird hairline to his groping to his fail-son's investments and career to whatever it is that we stumble across next week that they've been investigating for decades. We are looking around while the GOP has been building a file on this man his whole career.

I have a feeling Biden will fail for the very same reason Obama succeeded in getting elected: history. Obama didn't have much of a history compared to most presidential candidates, he came out of left field and the GOP wasn't sufficiently prepared to attack him. Biden is the exact opposite. They've been preparing for this day for decades.

So electable, so ******* electable.

 

[wareyin]

If it is hurtful for us to hash out Biden's issue in this virtual safe space, then Biden is well and truly ******.

We are dealing with second hand accounts while the GOP has already stockpiled the video evidence of everything from his weird hairline to his groping to his fail-son's investments and career to whatever it is that we stumble across next week that they've been investigating for decades. We are looking around while the GOP has been building a file on this man his whole career.

I have a feeling Biden will fail for the very same reason Obama succeeded in getting elected: history. Obama didn't have much of a history compared to most presidential candidates, he came out of left field and the GOP wasn't sufficiently prepared to attack him. Biden is the exact opposite. They've been preparing for this day for decades.

So electable, so ******* electable.

We aren't hashing anything out here. On the one hand we have several far lefties who either still think they can get Sanders on the ticket or are still upset at yet another spectacular loss by Sanders, throwing everything they can at the wall to see what sticks wrt Biden. That's not talking anything out to form an agreement, that's a childish temper tantrum that if they can't have their guy they'll do what they can to make everyone have more Trump. On the other hand we have a bunch of people saying to knock it off, we don't want more Trump and you don't either.

 

[Bob001]

Biden slandered Mr. Dunn for over a decade. He told the story multiple times over the years. The alcohol allegation came solely from Biden, the police never suspected any recklessness on the part of Mr. Dunn at any time. He made it up.
....

Dunn killed Biden's family. I don't think it should be a surprise that Biden believes the worst about him. He has a lot ot answer for. But disparaging the guy who killed his family isn't one of them.

 

[theprestige]

Dunn killed Biden's family. I don't think it should be a surprise that Biden believes the worst about him. He has a lot ot answer for. But disparaging the guy who killed his family isn't one of them.

Apparently Biden's family was at fault. Disparaging an innocent victim of his own family's negligence, rather than acknowledge the truth, seems like a lot to answer for.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Dunn killed Biden's family. I don't think it should be a surprise that Biden believes the worst about him. He has a lot ot answer for. But disparaging the guy who killed his family isn't one of them.

Dunn was the not-at-fault party in a fatal traffic accident. He wasn't drunk or reckless in any way, and by all accounts was traumatized by the event and had a lot of unearned grief about the two deaths.

Mrs. Biden failed to stop at a stop sign and got hit by a semi truck.

30 years later, after Dunn had died, Biden decided he could punch up his story of personal tragedy by saying Dunn was a drunk-driver.

 

[Bob001]

Thought experiment: How is Biden supposed to prove he did not assault Tara Reade? He can't prove he was somewhere else, because she claims she can't remember the day, time or place. She claims it was a public place, but no witnesses have been identified. If no copy of her (alleged) complaint turns up, it might only mean that it was lost or hidden. If she can't produce a copy herself, it might just mean she's disorganized. We can acknowledge that she apparently had some unspecified problems at her job; so do most young junior Capitol Hill staffers, which is why the turnover rate is high. But if her allegation is false, what can he do to prove it?

 

[theprestige]

The only difference between Trump and Biden is that the singularity of Trump's corrupt ineptitude isn't hidden behind the event horizon of the political establishment.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Thought experiment: How is Biden supposed to prove he did not assault Tara Reade? He can't prove he was somewhere else, because she claims she can't remember the day, time or place. She claims it was a public place, but no witnesses have been identified. If no copy of her (alleged) complaint turns up, it might only mean that it was lost or hidden. If she can't produce a copy herself, it might just mean she's disorganized. We can acknowledge that she apparently had some unspecified problems at her job; so do most young junior Capitol Hill staffers, which is why the turnover rate is high. But if her allegation is false, what can he do to prove it?

Nothing, just like Kavanaugh.

 

[theprestige]

Thought experiment: How is Biden supposed to prove he did not assault Tara Reade? He can't prove he was somewhere else, because she claims she can't remember the day, time or place. She claims it was a public place, but no witnesses have been identified. If no copy of her (alleged) complaint turns up, it might only mean that it was lost or hidden. If she can't produce a copy herself, it might just mean she's disorganized. We can acknowledge that she apparently had some unspecified problems at her job; so do most young junior Capitol Hill staffers, which is why the turnover rate is high. But if her allegation is false, what can he do to prove it?

This is a good point. I'm more than willing to set aside Reade's allegations as unproven, on this basis.

The only potential drawback I see is that this resets us to the general rule that rape claims don't count unless the claimant can prove them.

 

[TragicMonkey]

This is a good point. I'm more than willing to set aside Reade's allegations as unproven, on this basis.

The only potential drawback I see is that this resets us to the general rule that rape claims don't count unless the claimant can prove them.

Is there any arena in which claims "count" if they cannot be proven?

 

[varwoche]

This is a good point. I'm more than willing to set aside Reade's allegations as unproven, on this basis.

The only potential drawback I see is that this resets us to the general rule that rape claims don't count unless the claimant can prove them.

How very magnanimous. The allegations are no where near proven by any semi reasonable standard.

 

[Bob001]

Nothing, just like Kavanaugh.

Ford has nothing in common with Reade. For one thing, Ford didn't publicly praise Kavanaugh multiple times throughout her career, as Reade did Biden. But Kavanaugh gave up plenty about himself in his red-faced raging rants at his hearings, even threatening payback to his "enemies" and attempting to intimidate a U.S. Senator. Nobody had any trouble seeing a privileged teen-aged party boy refusing to take no for an answer. If he had been more restrained it would have been easier to say "Maybe she's wrong."

 

[theprestige]

Ford didn't publicly praise Kavanaugh multiple times throughout her career, as Reade did Biden.

Q. How do you know a rape victim is lying?

A. She doesn't immediately and forcefully condemn her rapist afterwards.

 

[Bob001]

This is a good point. I'm more than willing to set aside Reade's allegations as unproven, on this basis.

The only potential drawback I see is that this resets us to the general rule that rape claims don't count unless the claimant can prove them.

I don't think proof requires videos, fingerprints and DNA. If it's a pattern of behavior, if other victims report similar conduct, if both parties were known to be in the same place at the same time, if they actually had sex and the question is about consent, if there were contemporaneous accounts to others, if there were communications between the parties, certainly if there were medical or psychiatric records, the circumstantial evidence could pile up pretty quickly. But if it's just "You did this!" "No I didn't!," it most likely won't go much farther.

 

[Bob001]

Q. How do you know a rape victim is lying?

A. She doesn't immediately and forcefully condemn her rapist afterwards.

She doesn't have to do that. Ford just kept quiet. But Reade praised her alleged attacker to the skies. That's a little hard to understand.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

She doesn't have to do that. Ford just kept quiet. But Reade praised her alleged attacker to the skies. That's a little hard to understand.

I don't rate my armchair psychology expertise high enough to make such conclusions based on how I perceive alleged victims to react to being victimized.

How many cases of sexual assault and rape victims keeping up relationships with their abusers does there need to be before we put this idea of the "perfect victim" to bed?

Weinsteins own lawyers had a strategy of showing the all the lovey dovey emails his victims sent him after the rapes.

I have no idea if Reade is telling the truth. I also have no idea if Ford was telling the truth. I'm not going to comb their twitter accounts looking for personal tics to inform that decision either.