Cont: Biden for President? Pt 2

[TragicMonkey]

I fear several posters are in danger of losing their credibility here!

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP, despite the chances of Biden dying and leaving her as president. I think VP needs to be someone much younger than Biden, and if they do a good job they could be a presidential candidate themselves some day.

 

[wareyin]

This isn't a court of law. You're not a trial lawyer. I'm not a jury. The claim is either supported by evidence or it isn't.

Credibility is important to me, just not in this particular context. Reade could be the most trustworthy person in the world, and I wouldn't convict Biden of raping her based on her say-so alone.

It's weird how much effort you've put in, over weeks, developing a point that's not even in contention, and doesn't actually make any difference here.

No, it demonstrably isn't. You voted Trump. You've argued for weeks that Reade's credibility isn't important. You've ignored legal and social precedent. No, you have done everything in your power to argue for weeks that despite legal and social norms, credibility is not important.

 

[wareyin]

I fear several posters are in danger of losing their credibility here!

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP, despite the chances of Biden dying and leaving her as president. I think VP needs to be someone much younger than Biden, and if they do a good job they could be a presidential candidate themselves some day.

Hmm, I haven't seen any stories that Warren was the VP. Amy Klobuchar was the most recent "definitely the VP" story I've seen. I agree, we don't want to risk any more Senate seats, so Warren should stay where she is.

What do you think of Stacey Abrams as a VP pick? She did lose GA as governor, but she seems to tick off a lot of boxes that Biden may be weak in. I'm also pointedly ignoring the "hopefully the candidate that the majority of voters chose dies" speculation as being both bad form and self-defeating.

 

[tyr_13]

I fear several posters are in danger of losing their credibility here!

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP, despite the chances of Biden dying and leaving her as president. I think VP needs to be someone much younger than Biden, and if they do a good job they could be a presidential candidate themselves some day.

I can see the validity of the points you raise and share some of those concerns, however there are the benefits, apart from her competence, of setting up a buffer/bridge for the 'moderates' to ease into giving the 'progressives' more political capital within the party, if not to the general public. Having a progressive in a high-visibility office for four years without progressive policies casting the US down into a miscegenation socialist orgy (sadly), could do a lot for the long term acceptance of progressive ideas.

This is to say nothing about the cred with the very angry and hurting progressive wing without alienating the moderates for the actual election such a pick would generate. Er...could. A lot of the 'progressives' are not for compromise and are going to stay very angry and hurt.

Still not my first pick for a VP, despite my belief no one could do more with the office since Cheney than Warren, but also not what I'd consider a huge miscalculation.

 

[tyr_13]

Hmm, I haven't seen any stories that Warren was the VP. Amy Klobuchar was the most recent "definitely the VP" story I've seen. I agree, we don't want to risk any more Senate seats, so Warren should stay where she is.

What do you think of Stacey Abrams as a VP pick? She did lose GA as governor, but she seems to tick off a lot of boxes that Biden may be weak in. I'm also pointedly ignoring the "hopefully the candidate that the majority of voters chose dies" speculation as being both bad form and self-defeating.

I also intrigued by the suggestion of Pete for SecState. At first I was highly skeptical of it, but he does seem to have quite a bit of international good will which is important to the job, but scuttlebutt is that he has a ton of credibility with the intelligence community in the US too.

 

[Segnosaur]

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP...

I remember seeing someone here mentioning that Massachusetts has a republican gov. So if Warren gives up her seat to become VP, he will get to appoint someone to fill her seat (at least until a special election is called.) Granted, it will only be for a short period of time, but still, that will be during a critical time when the Senate will be considering cabinet nominees.

The only thing she would have going for her is a supposed ability to 'unite' the far-left/progressives in the party behind Biden. But given how detached from reality they are, he could make her the VP candidate, and the BernieBros will still sit out the election (or vote 3rd party/vote Trump) because they still won't consider it enough.

 

[Stacyhs]

f) Character is also different from credibility: The character of a person (how they are likely to behave) is rarely in issue; the credibility of a witness (how likely they are to be completely truthful) is always in issue. Evidence that a witness lacks credibility obviously also impugns that person's character, but is independently admissible under the Impeachment Rules -- 607,608, 609 and 616 -- covered later in the course.

3. Character of victim. The accused may offer evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim that is material to the crime. After the accused places the victim's character in issue, the prosecutor may offer rebuttal evidence on that same trait. The state may rebut only as to the victim's character, not the defendant's.

https://www.law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/b723/06char/T06.pdf

The majority of US jurisdictions permit parties to impeach witnesses by demonstrating their "bad" character regarding truthfulness. Under the Federal Rules a party may demonstrate that by reputation or opinion testimony.[6] That is, a witness's credibility cannot be bolstered, only impeached.

([6]F.R.E. 405(a), Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute)

 

[TragicMonkey]

What do you think of Stacey Abrams as a VP pick? She did lose GA as governor, but she seems to tick off a lot of boxes that Biden may be weak in.

I think she may be my favorite of the bunch. I don't care for Klobuchar or Buttigieg for the role (or any other). Yang wouldn't be my first choice, but I wouldn't hate the idea. Cory Booker I wouldn't mind either but that would be the same Senate problem as with Warren. I think the other Democratic candidates aren't the best field from which to choose a VP this time, despite there having been so many of them.

Whatever happened to that guy from San Antonio? I forget his name, but even my oooooold school Republican grandmother liked him.

 

[xjx388]

https://www.law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/b723/06char/T06.pdf



([6]F.R.E. 405(a), Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute)

If it’s material to the crime. You missed that part. An expunged record of a bad check, horse charity shenanigans, some guy who felt manipulated...these things are not material to the crime.

A prior false allegation of rape is material.

You also missed the part in your second citation where it said “when evidence of a person’s character...is admissible.” Guess when it’s admissible...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What do you mean by "C-change"? Do you mean "sea-change" which refers to a massive shift in the surrounding environment, or something else?

When I heard it I thought it meant the wrong thing.

When you go from C to the next C on a piano, the tone changes but all the keys repeat.

As illustrated here.

So I always thought it meant a big change such as occurs when going up or down from C to the next C on a piano.

But looking it up it appears I've always had a misunderstanding about it.

Thanks for asking.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why don’t you take it up with Mumbles as he is the one who suggested it was a joke?

My point in that exchange was that apologists will write it off as a joke (as Mumbles did) or a gaffe (as others have).

Maybe you should berate the people who made the statement instead of the guy who responded to it.

OK.

 

[Ziggurat]

What do you mean by "C-change"? Do you mean "sea-change" which refers to a massive shift in the surrounding environment, or something else?

A sea change is not a change in the surrounding environment. It's a total transformation of the thing itself. Taken from Shakespeare's The Tempest:

Full fathom five thy father lies,
Of his bones are coral made,
Those are pearls that were his eyes,
Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change,
into something rich and strange,
Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell,
Ding-dong.
Hark! now I hear them, ding-dong, bell.​

 

[Puppycow]

It’s so much of a stretch that it’s actually inadmissible to introduce prior bad acts to impeach a witness.

Evidence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment

The majority of US jurisdictions permit parties to impeach witnesses by demonstrating their "bad" character regarding truthfulness.

In any case, this is the court of public opinion, not a court of law. Each voter may make up his or her own mind based on the facts in evidence, and to me, a history of lying is information about the credibility of the witness. If it's true that she actually misrepresented her qualifications as an expert witness in a court of law, that would be relevant information to me.

 

[Puppycow]

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP, despite the chances of Biden dying and leaving her as president. I think VP needs to be someone much younger than Biden, and if they do a good job they could be a presidential candidate themselves some day.

I wouldn't put much stock in the speculation. That's a good point though. I sort of think he would prefer to pick an African American woman, but I don't know.

I thought he might have already promised the job to Klobuchar if she would drop out before Super Tuesday, which she did. Warren was more of a thorn in the side of Bernie. Her staying in the race hurt him more than Biden. If that's the case and he already promised Klobuchar the job, this could all be just Kabuki theater.

 

[TragicMonkey]

this could all be just Kabuki theater.

I'd love love love to have Vice President Kabuki, in full makeup, for an entire four years.

 

[Lurch]

I think she may be my favorite of the bunch. I don't care for Klobuchar or Buttigieg for the role (or any other). Yang wouldn't be my first choice, but I wouldn't hate the idea. Cory Booker I wouldn't mind either but that would be the same Senate problem as with Warren. I think the other Democratic candidates aren't the best field from which to choose a VP this time, despite there having been so many of them.

Whatever happened to that guy from San Antonio? I forget his name, but even my oooooold school Republican grandmother liked him.

In case you weren't being sarcastic ..... Beto O'Rourke?

 

[xjx388]

Evidence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment

Oddly enough, the evidence has been quoted a few times now, just selectively.

In any case, this is the court of public opinion, not a court of law. Each voter may make up his or her own mind based on the facts in evidence, and to me, a history of lying is information about the credibility of the witness. If it's true that she actually misrepresented her qualifications as an expert witness in a court of law, that would be relevant information to me.

I understand that. I just think it's wrong.

 

[Mumbles]

Why don’t you take it up with Mumbles as he is the one who suggested it was a joke?

My point in that exchange was that apologists will write it off as a joke (as Mumbles did) or a gaffe (as others have).

Maybe you should berate the people who made the statement instead of the guy who responded to it.

Well, I said it was a joke because...it was. Again, it's rather popular to slap black republicans, though it's generally more "Man, can't you see they don't respect you?" than ""you're a coon." among the more serious types. When Michael Steele became RNC Chair, the GOP put an incredible number of restrictions on what he could do, what he could spend, etc. without the approval of Moscow Mitch and the like - and when he raised a record sum of money for campaigns anyway, they immediately kicked him out.

Then wre have clowns and grifters like Candace Owens, who just a couple of weeks ago all but stated outright that Ahmaud Arbery deserved to be murdered, now trying to make something out of this - these folks tend to attract the outright insults, mostly because they happily tell white audiences about how lazy/stupid/violent/docile the vast majority of black people are, for money. It's not really Biden's place to say that these folks aren't really black...but on the other hand, I doubt they're respected in any major black community.

(And I see Dolt 45's campaign has an ad and shirts with this, which the Bernie Stans are calling "devastating!" Yeah sure, those shirts will be all the rage with Dolt 45's white racist base.)

 

[TragicMonkey]

In case you weren't being sarcastic ..... Beto O'Rourke?

No, I was thinking of Julian Castro, I guess.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I fear several posters are in danger of losing their credibility here!

If it's allowed to discuss Biden presidential candidacy topics other than Reade's accusation, what's with the recent stories about maybe him picking Warren as VP candidate? I'm against it: despite her being my preferred presidential candidate, I don't see her being VP as being a win for the country. Losing her in the Senate would be a distinct negative not balanced out by her as a VP, despite the chances of Biden dying and leaving her as president. I think VP needs to be someone much younger than Biden, and if they do a good job they could be a presidential candidate themselves some day.

I'm not sure what factors would be influencing a VP selection. Warren seems like a poor choice to me. Her continued backpedaling on M4A and zombie campaign to undermine Sanders soured her popularity among the progressives. She's from MA, which is a guaranteed D victory, so brings no home-state advantage to a swing state. She's also old, Harvard-prof white lady, which isn't exactly a demographic that needs shoring up by the Biden ticket. I don't see her addition as bringing many undecided votes to the Biden ticket.

I am enjoying her completely backpedal on her firm positions in order to court the VP slot, but I think it's unlikely it will pay off. I hope she remains in the Senate and resumes taking an adversarial role to the policies that Biden has advocated in the past. She had been one of the clearest voices for regulations favoring ordinary people. It remains unclear if she will resume such a stance if it means opposing the Biden administration.

I have no idea who is actually going to get the nod. I would bet it's someone younger and not-white, with a bit more charisma. If not, perhaps a selection from a swing state, or preferably someone that is all of the above.