US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2257

On April 12 2020 08:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I definitely second the impression that biden's age is showing, been feeling that since he announced his candidacy.

I'd still vote for him against Trump without a second's hesitation or ill feeling about it, though. Trump wants everything to be about himself and his gut feeling is the primary motor behind his decision making process - I'd expect Biden to have a far more delegatory nature and his mental decline to be less of a big deal in how he performs his presidential duties. To me, it's more worrisome in terms of how likely he is to win the general election - when Biden was attacked for bis apparent senility in one of the debates, it seemed to play very poorly with the crowd, but Trump and the people surrounding him aren't gonna pull any punches at all.

On April 13 2020 03:59 GreenHorizons wrote:


This is Neb's point about agency. Democrats are helpless to prevent nominating a child caging, racist, probable rapist and/or just think that's better than social democratic policy.

On April 13 2020 05:40 ChristianS wrote:

But there was photographic evidence with Franken, no?

As I said to Mohdoo a few months ago, I always blink when people say without a qualifier “#BelieveWomen,” because I don’t think it takes much analysis to see that “any man accused of anything by a woman should immediately be cancelled unless the accusations can be incontrovertibly disproven” isn’t a very workable system. If the only choices are “she’s a filthy liar who should be mocked and shunned” or “he’s a filthy rapist who should be imprisoned or, at least, shunned and unemployable” a lot of lives will be ruined on either side. Of course, that conversation was in the context of Warren being called (paraphrase) “a greater enemy to women than sexists because false accusations make other women less likely to be believed,” so in that context, I didn’t get a ton of pushback on the idea that #BelieveWomen needs some qualifiers.

The trouble is that the public is desperately uncomfortable with uncertainty, but the situation is fundamentally uncertain. So they look for some way to collapse on either “she’s a liar” or “he’s the devil” and use that as the answer to every question about how to treat both of them.

The question of whether we should treat the allegations as true or not really needs to depend on for what purpose. If a girl confides her story in a friend, they should be understanding and not interrogate her for “proof.” If she’s asking for criminal charges, we should expect some proof. Our present situation is in between: she’s not calling for imprisonment, but she’s clearly interested in ending his career.

How credible is the claim? If I’m not mistaken, she says she told a friend and a family member at the time; both of them confirm. To my knowledge there’s no physical proof, either of the assault or that she told people. Iirc Christina Blasey Ford had therapist notes long predating Kavanaugh’s nomination; no such proof exists here.

As I understand it, she had come forward previously last year, and specifically did not describe anything like what she now alleges; at the time it was more the kind of “hair-sniffing”/invasion of personal space stuff that several other women also described. On the one hand, it’s not unusual for victims of sexual assault to downplay what happened to them out of shame/fear of what people will think of them; on the other hand it’s often considered a sign of invented rather than factual stories that the story changes substantially over time.

In terms of motivation, Tara Reade is apparently a big Bernie fan (and, bizarrely, a big Putin fan); that obviously doesn’t disprove her allegations, and it certainly wouldn’t be surprising that she wouldn’t support Biden if her allegations are true. But it does offer a pretty decent answer to “why would she make this up (and choose the moment she did to come forward)?” If I’m not mistaken (and someone please correct me if I am) she first revealed these new allegations on a pro-Bernie politics podcast, which would be pretty consistent with the “desperate Bernie supporter tries desperate tactic” narrative.

So where does that leave us? Obviously YMMV, but to me, the allegations rest entirely on the word of Tara Reade (and to a lesser extent, that of her friend and family member); and we can’t rule out that this allegation was invented to influence the Democratic nomination. That leaves a lot of uncertainty about what actually happened, enough so that I don’t think “cancelling”/ending the career of the accused is warranted.

If I’ve misrepresented the facts anywhere, I promise it was unintentional and I invite someone to correct me. Otherwise, I’m sure some of you disagree with me, but I’ve tried to approach the subject carefully and compassionately; I hope you guys will do the same.