|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On February 10 2024 09:53 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 08:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 10 2024 07:48 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 23:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 19:02 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 18:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On February 09 2024 12:34 Introvert wrote:
Meanwhile, Special Counsel Robert Hur's report on Biden's improper handling of classified documents came out. Among the reasons he declined to charge is because he thought Biden would play up the sympathetic old man defense, and that it might work because Biden has serious mental acuity issues, regularly forgetting basic things like when he was Vice President. Today when talking about the report he called Sisi, the president of Egypt, the President of Mexico. This follows on after recently saying both that he had spoken Helmut Kohl and Mitterrand in the past few years. I've been pointing out Biden's mental decline is obvious but it's still getting worse. Just overall a good day for Trump.
Maybe he can win again, I wonder what it's like to live a life blessed with having all the worst, least scrupulous, and most incompetent people as your enemies. I mean, the election is likely to be between the well-meaning grandpa that is trying to make things better for the American people and the nasty reactionary grandpa that only wants to become president for personal gain. Neither of them is anywhere near their prime, they both confuse other heads of state/political opponents, they both give shitty, meandering speeches and neither of them should be anywhere near having this amount of responsibility at their age. I'll take the well-meaning, trying-his-best grandpa over the reactionary, nasty grandpa that is only in it for personal gain. Agreed. Also, spinning the fact that Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did as "Just overall a good day for Trump" is bizarre to me. The report found that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified documents while he was a private citizen. They found he shared classified documents with the ghostwriter of his novel which I presume does not have the necessary credentials to access classified documents. Your interpretation that "Biden didn't do illegal things" here is bizarre, though I suspect you'll find hearty agreement with Trump's lawyers for that take. That's not what I wrote. "Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did" is what I wrote, and that's a fact. You wrote that I said "Biden didn't do illegal things", which is not true. Biden did do some illegal things: He didn't securely store all his classified documents, and he shared classified information with his ghostwriter (who did not have clearance). Trump did so much more (which Biden didn't do), so they're not a fair comparison. Anyways, let's move past the semantics and on to the substance: The report reveals that there's a lot more context to Biden's situation, which explains why he won't be charged (or else you'd need to charge many previous presidents and vice presidents, since they generally do the same things Biden did) and why Trump's situation is uniquely bad: - The report states that Biden did not ignore or resist FBI communication or warrants, he complied and was transparent with searches, and he cooperated with the overall investigation (very different from Trump). - The quantity and sensitivity of the classified content was not considered sufficiently extreme enough to investigate further (very different from Trump). - Biden never lied about declassifying information as a way to try to dodge accountability (very different from Trump). - Biden never tried to undermine the investigation in the public eye, such as calling it a witch hunt or persecution (very different from Trump). - The report specifically acknowledges that Reagan had done what Biden did, with a precedent that this level of negligence does not rise to the level of criminality to warrant any charges, and here is an article explaining how what Biden did is essentially par for the course (except for Trump's outlier): https://nypost.com/2023/05/17/every-president-since-reagan-has-mishandled-classified-documents-national-archivesIn other words, Biden illegally mishandled classified information, and a thorough investigation concluded that his level of mishandling is considered typical enough for a vice president or president to be excused (as opposed to Trump's extreme level of mishandling classified information). And that's why the report's final conclusion was "we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Also, while the report does mention that Biden presents himself as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" - and that's the type of remark that will definitely circulate - it's unfair for anyone to suggest that he (or even a younger person) should be able to recollect every single moment from informal conversations 5+ years ago. He was able to recall most relevant details, as shown in the report, and he definitely wasn't the only one interviewed who had imperfect memory, as the report also clearly lays out. Also, those occasional remarks are a very small part of the entire report. For anyone interested, this is the report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf A more accurate statement then would be “Biden only did some of the illegal shit Trump did.” I would love to read a substantive response about my post, if you have a chance to write one. Sounds like your argument is essentially both are guilty of the same crime of retaining and disclosing classified documents but Trump is also guilty of obstruction. These are two different crimes, not two elements of the same crime that need to be fulfilled so I’m not sure how that would be a difference maker. If two people stole a car and one pulled over when he was caught and the other led police on a high speed pursuit they would still both get charged for the first crime of stealing a car. Cooperating with authorities after committing a crime doesn’t magically make you not culpable for the crime. We were having a discussion a few weeks ago and I was making the argument that there would probably be tremendous leeway given to not prosecute ex-Presidents for certain crimes. The general consensus of the thread was a more idealistic “everyone should be prosecuted for any crime they commit no matter how small and no matter how important they are.” Funny how quickly that energy got replaced with “Biden did illegal things but all the Presidents since Reagan also did the same so he shouldn’t be prosecuted for it.” You can’t abandon your principled stand when your guy is in the hot seat.
I'm assuming the "you" in your last sentence is the general "you", as I'm not personally abandoning a previous perspective (and the "replaced energy" is merely the view of the investigator who wrote the report and doesn't believe that Biden or Reagan should be charged). Also, I reiterate that in addition to obstruction, Trump's mishandling of documents was apparently more severe than Biden's, based on the sensitivities of their respective classified information that they each kept and shared, and not just a matter of Trump more recently having the same level of negligence as Biden.
|
Northern Ireland26036 Posts
On February 10 2024 09:53 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 08:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 10 2024 07:48 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 23:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 19:02 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 18:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On February 09 2024 12:34 Introvert wrote:
Meanwhile, Special Counsel Robert Hur's report on Biden's improper handling of classified documents came out. Among the reasons he declined to charge is because he thought Biden would play up the sympathetic old man defense, and that it might work because Biden has serious mental acuity issues, regularly forgetting basic things like when he was Vice President. Today when talking about the report he called Sisi, the president of Egypt, the President of Mexico. This follows on after recently saying both that he had spoken Helmut Kohl and Mitterrand in the past few years. I've been pointing out Biden's mental decline is obvious but it's still getting worse. Just overall a good day for Trump.
Maybe he can win again, I wonder what it's like to live a life blessed with having all the worst, least scrupulous, and most incompetent people as your enemies. I mean, the election is likely to be between the well-meaning grandpa that is trying to make things better for the American people and the nasty reactionary grandpa that only wants to become president for personal gain. Neither of them is anywhere near their prime, they both confuse other heads of state/political opponents, they both give shitty, meandering speeches and neither of them should be anywhere near having this amount of responsibility at their age. I'll take the well-meaning, trying-his-best grandpa over the reactionary, nasty grandpa that is only in it for personal gain. Agreed. Also, spinning the fact that Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did as "Just overall a good day for Trump" is bizarre to me. The report found that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified documents while he was a private citizen. They found he shared classified documents with the ghostwriter of his novel which I presume does not have the necessary credentials to access classified documents. Your interpretation that "Biden didn't do illegal things" here is bizarre, though I suspect you'll find hearty agreement with Trump's lawyers for that take. That's not what I wrote. "Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did" is what I wrote, and that's a fact. You wrote that I said "Biden didn't do illegal things", which is not true. Biden did do some illegal things: He didn't securely store all his classified documents, and he shared classified information with his ghostwriter (who did not have clearance). Trump did so much more (which Biden didn't do), so they're not a fair comparison. Anyways, let's move past the semantics and on to the substance: The report reveals that there's a lot more context to Biden's situation, which explains why he won't be charged (or else you'd need to charge many previous presidents and vice presidents, since they generally do the same things Biden did) and why Trump's situation is uniquely bad: - The report states that Biden did not ignore or resist FBI communication or warrants, he complied and was transparent with searches, and he cooperated with the overall investigation (very different from Trump). - The quantity and sensitivity of the classified content was not considered sufficiently extreme enough to investigate further (very different from Trump). - Biden never lied about declassifying information as a way to try to dodge accountability (very different from Trump). - Biden never tried to undermine the investigation in the public eye, such as calling it a witch hunt or persecution (very different from Trump). - The report specifically acknowledges that Reagan had done what Biden did, with a precedent that this level of negligence does not rise to the level of criminality to warrant any charges, and here is an article explaining how what Biden did is essentially par for the course (except for Trump's outlier): https://nypost.com/2023/05/17/every-president-since-reagan-has-mishandled-classified-documents-national-archivesIn other words, Biden illegally mishandled classified information, and a thorough investigation concluded that his level of mishandling is considered typical enough for a vice president or president to be excused (as opposed to Trump's extreme level of mishandling classified information). And that's why the report's final conclusion was "we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Also, while the report does mention that Biden presents himself as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" - and that's the type of remark that will definitely circulate - it's unfair for anyone to suggest that he (or even a younger person) should be able to recollect every single moment from informal conversations 5+ years ago. He was able to recall most relevant details, as shown in the report, and he definitely wasn't the only one interviewed who had imperfect memory, as the report also clearly lays out. Also, those occasional remarks are a very small part of the entire report. For anyone interested, this is the report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf A more accurate statement then would be “Biden only did some of the illegal shit Trump did.” I would love to read a substantive response about my post, if you have a chance to write one. Sounds like your argument is essentially both are guilty of the same crime of retaining and disclosing classified documents but Trump is also guilty of obstruction. These are two different crimes, not two elements of the same crime that need to be fulfilled so I’m not sure how that would be a difference maker. If two people stole a car and one pulled over when he was caught and the other led police on a high speed pursuit they would still both get charged for the first crime of stealing a car. Cooperating with authorities after committing a crime doesn’t magically make you not culpable for the crime. We were having a discussion a few weeks ago and I was making the argument that there would probably be tremendous leeway given to not prosecute ex-Presidents for certain crimes. The general consensus of the thread was a more idealistic “everyone should be prosecuted for any crime they commit no matter how small and no matter how important they are.” Funny how quickly that energy got replaced with “Biden did illegal things but all the Presidents since Reagan also did the same so he shouldn’t be prosecuted for it.” You can’t abandon your principled stand when your guy is in the hot seat.
Do we know what the documents were pertaining to? I assume given the whole ‘classified’ malarkey no? Just curious, not all classified documents are created and all that.
It’s difficult to think of an appropriate punishment in cases where:
A - They weren’t docs of the utmost sensitivity, pertaining to national security or what have you.
B - They weren’t being deliberately wielded for some self-aggrandising purpose. Be it for financial gain, or containing sensitive information about a rival that was intended for leverage through blackmail.
There should be some kind of censure for more ‘benign’ mishandling or storage, or failure to return said documents. I’m just unsure what that is. A fine is probably meaningless unless it’s borderline ruinous, removal from office or jail time, feel too harsh. Although I’m only really skimming summations in here so I’ll have a lot of gaps.
Feels like Hillary’s emails all over again! There was bad practice and wrongdoing there, but sufficient to ‘lock her up’? I suppose there was the indirect punishment of reputational damage and some contribution to her failing to become President ultimately.
|
Yes, it was a general “you” as I don’t recall you personally making that argument
|
On February 10 2024 10:37 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 09:53 BlackJack wrote:On February 10 2024 08:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 10 2024 07:48 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 23:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 19:02 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 18:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On February 09 2024 12:34 Introvert wrote:
Meanwhile, Special Counsel Robert Hur's report on Biden's improper handling of classified documents came out. Among the reasons he declined to charge is because he thought Biden would play up the sympathetic old man defense, and that it might work because Biden has serious mental acuity issues, regularly forgetting basic things like when he was Vice President. Today when talking about the report he called Sisi, the president of Egypt, the President of Mexico. This follows on after recently saying both that he had spoken Helmut Kohl and Mitterrand in the past few years. I've been pointing out Biden's mental decline is obvious but it's still getting worse. Just overall a good day for Trump.
Maybe he can win again, I wonder what it's like to live a life blessed with having all the worst, least scrupulous, and most incompetent people as your enemies. I mean, the election is likely to be between the well-meaning grandpa that is trying to make things better for the American people and the nasty reactionary grandpa that only wants to become president for personal gain. Neither of them is anywhere near their prime, they both confuse other heads of state/political opponents, they both give shitty, meandering speeches and neither of them should be anywhere near having this amount of responsibility at their age. I'll take the well-meaning, trying-his-best grandpa over the reactionary, nasty grandpa that is only in it for personal gain. Agreed. Also, spinning the fact that Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did as "Just overall a good day for Trump" is bizarre to me. The report found that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified documents while he was a private citizen. They found he shared classified documents with the ghostwriter of his novel which I presume does not have the necessary credentials to access classified documents. Your interpretation that "Biden didn't do illegal things" here is bizarre, though I suspect you'll find hearty agreement with Trump's lawyers for that take. That's not what I wrote. "Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did" is what I wrote, and that's a fact. You wrote that I said "Biden didn't do illegal things", which is not true. Biden did do some illegal things: He didn't securely store all his classified documents, and he shared classified information with his ghostwriter (who did not have clearance). Trump did so much more (which Biden didn't do), so they're not a fair comparison. Anyways, let's move past the semantics and on to the substance: The report reveals that there's a lot more context to Biden's situation, which explains why he won't be charged (or else you'd need to charge many previous presidents and vice presidents, since they generally do the same things Biden did) and why Trump's situation is uniquely bad: - The report states that Biden did not ignore or resist FBI communication or warrants, he complied and was transparent with searches, and he cooperated with the overall investigation (very different from Trump). - The quantity and sensitivity of the classified content was not considered sufficiently extreme enough to investigate further (very different from Trump). - Biden never lied about declassifying information as a way to try to dodge accountability (very different from Trump). - Biden never tried to undermine the investigation in the public eye, such as calling it a witch hunt or persecution (very different from Trump). - The report specifically acknowledges that Reagan had done what Biden did, with a precedent that this level of negligence does not rise to the level of criminality to warrant any charges, and here is an article explaining how what Biden did is essentially par for the course (except for Trump's outlier): https://nypost.com/2023/05/17/every-president-since-reagan-has-mishandled-classified-documents-national-archivesIn other words, Biden illegally mishandled classified information, and a thorough investigation concluded that his level of mishandling is considered typical enough for a vice president or president to be excused (as opposed to Trump's extreme level of mishandling classified information). And that's why the report's final conclusion was "we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Also, while the report does mention that Biden presents himself as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" - and that's the type of remark that will definitely circulate - it's unfair for anyone to suggest that he (or even a younger person) should be able to recollect every single moment from informal conversations 5+ years ago. He was able to recall most relevant details, as shown in the report, and he definitely wasn't the only one interviewed who had imperfect memory, as the report also clearly lays out. Also, those occasional remarks are a very small part of the entire report. For anyone interested, this is the report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf A more accurate statement then would be “Biden only did some of the illegal shit Trump did.” I would love to read a substantive response about my post, if you have a chance to write one. Sounds like your argument is essentially both are guilty of the same crime of retaining and disclosing classified documents but Trump is also guilty of obstruction. These are two different crimes, not two elements of the same crime that need to be fulfilled so I’m not sure how that would be a difference maker. If two people stole a car and one pulled over when he was caught and the other led police on a high speed pursuit they would still both get charged for the first crime of stealing a car. Cooperating with authorities after committing a crime doesn’t magically make you not culpable for the crime. We were having a discussion a few weeks ago and I was making the argument that there would probably be tremendous leeway given to not prosecute ex-Presidents for certain crimes. The general consensus of the thread was a more idealistic “everyone should be prosecuted for any crime they commit no matter how small and no matter how important they are.” Funny how quickly that energy got replaced with “Biden did illegal things but all the Presidents since Reagan also did the same so he shouldn’t be prosecuted for it.” You can’t abandon your principled stand when your guy is in the hot seat. Do we know what the documents were pertaining to? I assume given the whole ‘classified’ malarkey no? Just curious, not all classified documents are created and all that. It’s difficult to think of an appropriate punishment in cases where: A - They weren’t docs of the utmost sensitivity, pertaining to national security or what have you. B - They weren’t being deliberately wielded for some self-aggrandising purpose. Be it for financial gain, or containing sensitive information about a rival that was intended for leverage through blackmail. There should be some kind of censure for more ‘benign’ mishandling or storage, or failure to return said documents. I’m just unsure what that is. A fine is probably meaningless unless it’s borderline ruinous, removal from office or jail time, feel too harsh. Although I’m only really skimming summations in here so I’ll have a lot of gaps. Feels like Hillary’s emails all over again! There was bad practice and wrongdoing there, but sufficient to ‘lock her up’? I suppose there was the indirect punishment of reputational damage and some contribution to her failing to become President ultimately.
Most of Biden's stuff was related to Afghanistan, such as notes about situation room meetings and private conversations with Obama (like how Biden "labored to dissuade President Obama from escalating America's involvement there and repeating what Mr. Biden believed was a mistake akin to Vietnam", on page 2 of the report).
With Biden sharing some classified information to help contextualize stories with his ghostwriter, one could argue that there is a link between him sharing classified information and him financially profiting (through book sales), which is your point B, although obviously that's very different than what Trump did: "A number of incidents in which [Donald Trump] disclosed classified information to foreign powers and private individuals have become publicly known, sometimes with distinct national security and diplomatic consequences.[1]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump's_disclosures_of_classified_information
|
On February 10 2024 09:53 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2024 08:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 10 2024 07:48 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 23:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 19:02 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2024 18:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 09 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On February 09 2024 12:34 Introvert wrote:
Meanwhile, Special Counsel Robert Hur's report on Biden's improper handling of classified documents came out. Among the reasons he declined to charge is because he thought Biden would play up the sympathetic old man defense, and that it might work because Biden has serious mental acuity issues, regularly forgetting basic things like when he was Vice President. Today when talking about the report he called Sisi, the president of Egypt, the President of Mexico. This follows on after recently saying both that he had spoken Helmut Kohl and Mitterrand in the past few years. I've been pointing out Biden's mental decline is obvious but it's still getting worse. Just overall a good day for Trump.
Maybe he can win again, I wonder what it's like to live a life blessed with having all the worst, least scrupulous, and most incompetent people as your enemies. I mean, the election is likely to be between the well-meaning grandpa that is trying to make things better for the American people and the nasty reactionary grandpa that only wants to become president for personal gain. Neither of them is anywhere near their prime, they both confuse other heads of state/political opponents, they both give shitty, meandering speeches and neither of them should be anywhere near having this amount of responsibility at their age. I'll take the well-meaning, trying-his-best grandpa over the reactionary, nasty grandpa that is only in it for personal gain. Agreed. Also, spinning the fact that Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did as "Just overall a good day for Trump" is bizarre to me. The report found that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified documents while he was a private citizen. They found he shared classified documents with the ghostwriter of his novel which I presume does not have the necessary credentials to access classified documents. Your interpretation that "Biden didn't do illegal things" here is bizarre, though I suspect you'll find hearty agreement with Trump's lawyers for that take. That's not what I wrote. "Biden didn't do the illegal things that Trump did" is what I wrote, and that's a fact. You wrote that I said "Biden didn't do illegal things", which is not true. Biden did do some illegal things: He didn't securely store all his classified documents, and he shared classified information with his ghostwriter (who did not have clearance). Trump did so much more (which Biden didn't do), so they're not a fair comparison. Anyways, let's move past the semantics and on to the substance: The report reveals that there's a lot more context to Biden's situation, which explains why he won't be charged (or else you'd need to charge many previous presidents and vice presidents, since they generally do the same things Biden did) and why Trump's situation is uniquely bad: - The report states that Biden did not ignore or resist FBI communication or warrants, he complied and was transparent with searches, and he cooperated with the overall investigation (very different from Trump). - The quantity and sensitivity of the classified content was not considered sufficiently extreme enough to investigate further (very different from Trump). - Biden never lied about declassifying information as a way to try to dodge accountability (very different from Trump). - Biden never tried to undermine the investigation in the public eye, such as calling it a witch hunt or persecution (very different from Trump). - The report specifically acknowledges that Reagan had done what Biden did, with a precedent that this level of negligence does not rise to the level of criminality to warrant any charges, and here is an article explaining how what Biden did is essentially par for the course (except for Trump's outlier): https://nypost.com/2023/05/17/every-president-since-reagan-has-mishandled-classified-documents-national-archivesIn other words, Biden illegally mishandled classified information, and a thorough investigation concluded that his level of mishandling is considered typical enough for a vice president or president to be excused (as opposed to Trump's extreme level of mishandling classified information). And that's why the report's final conclusion was "we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Also, while the report does mention that Biden presents himself as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" - and that's the type of remark that will definitely circulate - it's unfair for anyone to suggest that he (or even a younger person) should be able to recollect every single moment from informal conversations 5+ years ago. He was able to recall most relevant details, as shown in the report, and he definitely wasn't the only one interviewed who had imperfect memory, as the report also clearly lays out. Also, those occasional remarks are a very small part of the entire report. For anyone interested, this is the report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf A more accurate statement then would be “Biden only did some of the illegal shit Trump did.” I would love to read a substantive response about my post, if you have a chance to write one. Sounds like your argument is essentially both are guilty of the same crime of retaining and disclosing classified documents but Trump is also guilty of obstruction. These are two different crimes, not two elements of the same crime that need to be fulfilled so I’m not sure how that would be a difference maker. If two people stole a car and one pulled over when he was caught and the other led police on a high speed pursuit they would still both get charged for the first crime of stealing a car. Cooperating with authorities after committing a crime doesn’t magically make you not culpable for the crime. We were having a discussion a few weeks ago and I was making the argument that there would probably be tremendous leeway given to not prosecute ex-Presidents for certain crimes. The general consensus of the thread was a more idealistic “everyone should be prosecuted for any crime they commit no matter how small and no matter how important they are.” Funny how quickly that energy got replaced with “Biden did illegal things but all the Presidents since Reagan also did the same so he shouldn’t be prosecuted for it.” You can’t abandon your principled stand when your guy is in the hot seat.
Of course the two cases get treated differently. If you steal a car and when the police knocks on the door you say "oh shit, you're right, I'm guilty. Here are the keys and the car is in the garage," you will be found guilty of stealing the car, but then probably get away with a relatively.minor punishment. On the case of Biden's classified documents, this is not an acquittal. The report finds that he did mishandle classified information. But nothing that happened rose above the standard of "mishandling* needed to prosecute anybody for this, president or not: if Biden had retired instead of running for office, I highly doubt the findings would have been any different (except maybe minus the amateur psychology nonsense).
On the other hand, if when the police knocks on your door, you jump in said car and lead them on a high speed chase, they will throw the book at you. That is because one of the goals of the justice system is rehabilitation, and clearly instead of helping the law along, you are not only a car thief, but also going to great lengths, including other crimes, to escape justice, and need a more thorough punishment to make you repent and conform to what society needs and expects from individuals. I think we can all agree that Trump did the car thief equivalent of a high speed chase, and is therefore being charged with the original crime as well as obstruction and whatever else they can manage. Whereas if he had just immediately returned the documents would probably have amounted to a similar nothingburger as Biden's, assuming he was only showing documents about how big his hands were to a ghostwriter, and wasn't sharing nuclear secrets with Russian golf buddies and other obvious enemies of the state: obviously the nature of the documents is also a factor here, just as stealing a busted up Volkswagen Polo is not treated the same as stealing a brand new Lamborghini.
|
This is bad news for Biden. ~Half of Biden's 2020 voters believe Israel is committing genocide and only ~20% are confident they aren't.
|
Isn't it only bad news for Biden if it's a disqualifying factor and if they don't care about Biden's accomplishments or the lesser of two evils? What percent of those voters have the same voting philosophy as you?
|
Biden has also been steadily upping his reaction and recently called Israel's response over the top.
|
On February 11 2024 03:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Isn't it only bad news for Biden if it's a disqualifying factor and if they don't care about Biden's accomplishments or the lesser of two evils? What percent of those voters have the same voting philosophy as you?
Well it's bad news on a bunch of fronts, but he's got the worst disapproval rating in history, and no president has won reelection with it so bad.
It could be as little as 1% with "the same voting philosophy" (I'd just call it not supporting genocide/ethnic cleansing) and that'd be too much for him to lose, but could be a lot more for which his aiding and abetting genocide is just "the last straw" rather than disqualifying in and of itself.
On February 11 2024 03:49 Gorsameth wrote:
Biden has also been steadily upping his reaction and recently called Israel's response over the top.
Those crumbs were quickly swept away
Karine Jean-Pierre elaborated later Friday, saying "nothing has changed" in Biden's and the administration's messaging around the war.
www.axios.com
|
On February 11 2024 03:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Isn't it only bad news for Biden if it's a disqualifying factor and if they don't care about Biden's accomplishments or the lesser of two evils? What percent of those voters have the same voting philosophy as you?
Its not like Biden is being put up against a good candidate that doesn't have "disqualifying factors" Trump has just as happy to tell everyone that he took away roe and says insane senile shit at every rally these days. People are going to look at the guy who wants to crash the economy with tariffs on all goods it seems leaving the continent and is more focused on saving the name Pennsylvania than any actual policy point.
Plus I got to think that the local candidates and state level organizations have an outsize impact on national elections. The state GOP in Minnesota is more worried about the new flag that they couldn't aford to buy if they wanted to. Michigan is in a state of chaos like no one knows and arizona has an ongoing blackmail scandal that hasn't been resolved. The moderates who get their news on tv have ever only known republicans inability to govern this entire cycle and will be a hard sell for them to get anything done.
If anything the genocide going on in Ukraine should cancel out the genocide in Isreal. Ukraine might be older in peoples memories but its got a lot better PR than Hamas does.
|
I think most people get that Biden is "barely there" and clearly lacking the acumen to perform his duties. Even the hardcore party loyalists that choose to remain blind to that fact also probably realize he won't make it another 4 years on his current trajectory. I just don't think it really matters. As long as you agree with the policies that come from the Biden White House does it matter if the policies are coming from Joe himself or from a team of staffers/advisors/handlers or whatever. Similar to when Diane Feinstein returned to the Senate and a staff had to tell her "Just say aye" to cast a vote, as long as she keeps voting the way you want it's probably not the end of the world to carry on the Weekend at Bernies charade.
I think a bigger issue for Democrats right now is they are hemorrhaging voters from two of their largest voting coalitions, blacks and hispanics. I think they are down something like 20 points among black voters since 2020. That's a pretty big swing. I think there's a multitude of reasons for that that I won't get into right now. But in general the Republican base seems to be a lot more monolithic, whereas the Democrat base is much more fractured and may have groups with opposite goals so taking credit for something one group supports might cause blowback from another group.
|
On February 11 2024 16:54 BlackJack wrote:
I think most people get that Biden is "barely there" and clearly lacking the acumen to perform his duties. Even the hardcore party loyalists that choose to remain blind to that fact also probably realize he won't make it another 4 years on his current trajectory. I just don't think it really matters. As long as you agree with the policies that come from the Biden White House does it matter if the policies are coming from Joe himself or from a team of staffers/advisors/handlers or whatever. Similar to when Diane Feinstein returned to the Senate and a staff had to tell her "Just say aye" to cast a vote, as long as she keeps voting the way you want it's probably not the end of the world to carry on the Weekend at Bernies charade.
I think a bigger issue for Democrats right now is they are hemorrhaging voters from two of their largest voting coalitions, blacks and hispanics. I think they are down something like 20 points among black voters since 2020. That's a pretty big swing. I think there's a multitude of reasons for that that I won't get into right now. But in general the Republican base seems to be a lot more monolithic, whereas the Democrat base is much more fractured and may have groups with opposite goals so taking credit for something one group supports might cause blowback from another group.
You pull a whole lot of "statistics" and "insider knowledge" out of thin air. All the while using influential and authoritative language. Are you a real person, or just an opinion making bot?
|
It's easy for Trump to look better in terms of memory and general capabilities. He can't forget what he didn't know in the first place and nobody actually expects him to be able to govern effectively. The bar is just different for democrats and republicans.
|
Here's my spicy take.
Trump will win in a landslide in November. It won't be close. And then there will be massive recriminations among the Democrats about what went wrong.
|
I really don't see it. Trump is more incoherent than ever and has promised to crash the economy with massive tariffs. He's all but promised that he will leave nato and wants Russia to attack nato countries.
The gop base is wildly fractured between the maga die hard and the rest of the party who doesn't want project 2025 to turn the country into a dictatorship.
By going by any evidence we have at all dems will win huge in the fall. Dems have wildly out preformed polls for a number of elections now and the gop hasn't put out a single new thing to change those numbers. Abortion alone is deeply important to the moderate woman college educated and not which has been the defining demographic for presidential elections. Financially biden is doing way better than trump even before he has to take out money for his number of legal cases and payouts.
I just don't see how anyone sees biden being worse health wise than trump. Just looking at any of their appearances side by side should tell any good faith actor who's still there.
It's not a spicy take to say trump will win in a landslide it's what they day every election while at the same time saying that the dems will steal it. It's clear as day facist propaganda that gets old after time and when it's always proven false.
|
On February 11 2024 18:36 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2024 16:54 BlackJack wrote:
I think most people get that Biden is "barely there" and clearly lacking the acumen to perform his duties. Even the hardcore party loyalists that choose to remain blind to that fact also probably realize he won't make it another 4 years on his current trajectory. I just don't think it really matters. As long as you agree with the policies that come from the Biden White House does it matter if the policies are coming from Joe himself or from a team of staffers/advisors/handlers or whatever. Similar to when Diane Feinstein returned to the Senate and a staff had to tell her "Just say aye" to cast a vote, as long as she keeps voting the way you want it's probably not the end of the world to carry on the Weekend at Bernies charade.
I think a bigger issue for Democrats right now is they are hemorrhaging voters from two of their largest voting coalitions, blacks and hispanics. I think they are down something like 20 points among black voters since 2020. That's a pretty big swing. I think there's a multitude of reasons for that that I won't get into right now. But in general the Republican base seems to be a lot more monolithic, whereas the Democrat base is much more fractured and may have groups with opposite goals so taking credit for something one group supports might cause blowback from another group. You pull a whole lot of "statistics" and "insider knowledge" out of thin air. All the while using influential and authoritative language. Are you a real person, or just an opinion making bot?
This article appears to support BJ's assertion of a 20-point drop among black voters: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/shows/meetthepress/blog/rcna126124
But I agree with you that posting the sources alongside the initial claims would be nice.
|
On February 11 2024 23:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2024 18:36 Branch.AUT wrote:On February 11 2024 16:54 BlackJack wrote:
I think most people get that Biden is "barely there" and clearly lacking the acumen to perform his duties. Even the hardcore party loyalists that choose to remain blind to that fact also probably realize he won't make it another 4 years on his current trajectory. I just don't think it really matters. As long as you agree with the policies that come from the Biden White House does it matter if the policies are coming from Joe himself or from a team of staffers/advisors/handlers or whatever. Similar to when Diane Feinstein returned to the Senate and a staff had to tell her "Just say aye" to cast a vote, as long as she keeps voting the way you want it's probably not the end of the world to carry on the Weekend at Bernies charade.
I think a bigger issue for Democrats right now is they are hemorrhaging voters from two of their largest voting coalitions, blacks and hispanics. I think they are down something like 20 points among black voters since 2020. That's a pretty big swing. I think there's a multitude of reasons for that that I won't get into right now. But in general the Republican base seems to be a lot more monolithic, whereas the Democrat base is much more fractured and may have groups with opposite goals so taking credit for something one group supports might cause blowback from another group. You pull a whole lot of "statistics" and "insider knowledge" out of thin air. All the while using influential and authoritative language. Are you a real person, or just an opinion making bot? This article appears to support BJ's assertion of a 20-point drop among black voters: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/shows/meetthepress/blog/rcna126124 But I agree with you that posting the sources alongside the initial claims would be nice.
Thats a blog.
The 20 percent drop is in approval rating - a made up stat that has no meaning.
In literally the next paragraph this blog says 69% would vote biden. No mention of any change since last election.
Neither of these two claims are sourced in this blog.
Did you even click the link before pasting a link to this blog?
|
On February 11 2024 23:59 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2024 23:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 11 2024 18:36 Branch.AUT wrote:On February 11 2024 16:54 BlackJack wrote:
I think most people get that Biden is "barely there" and clearly lacking the acumen to perform his duties. Even the hardcore party loyalists that choose to remain blind to that fact also probably realize he won't make it another 4 years on his current trajectory. I just don't think it really matters. As long as you agree with the policies that come from the Biden White House does it matter if the policies are coming from Joe himself or from a team of staffers/advisors/handlers or whatever. Similar to when Diane Feinstein returned to the Senate and a staff had to tell her "Just say aye" to cast a vote, as long as she keeps voting the way you want it's probably not the end of the world to carry on the Weekend at Bernies charade.
I think a bigger issue for Democrats right now is they are hemorrhaging voters from two of their largest voting coalitions, blacks and hispanics. I think they are down something like 20 points among black voters since 2020. That's a pretty big swing. I think there's a multitude of reasons for that that I won't get into right now. But in general the Republican base seems to be a lot more monolithic, whereas the Democrat base is much more fractured and may have groups with opposite goals so taking credit for something one group supports might cause blowback from another group. You pull a whole lot of "statistics" and "insider knowledge" out of thin air. All the while using influential and authoritative language. Are you a real person, or just an opinion making bot? This article appears to support BJ's assertion of a 20-point drop among black voters: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/shows/meetthepress/blog/rcna126124 But I agree with you that posting the sources alongside the initial claims would be nice. Thats a blog. The 20 percent drop is in approval rating - a made up stat that has no meaning. In literally the next paragraph this blog says 69% would vote biden. No mention of any change since last election. Neither of these two claims are sourced in this blog. Did you even click the link before pasting a link to this blog?
That's an NBC news article from an NBC poll lol. For someone who wrote "blog" four times, you apparently didn't realize that the sources are actual news articles and polls. Now, you may think that NBC isn't reputable, or that polls aren't reputable, but at least read the reference and information before making a response like that.
The site I linked was this: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/shows/meetthepress/blog/rcna126124
And the first two paragraphs say this:
"Support from Black voters helped President Joe Biden secure the Democratic nomination and the presidency in 2020, but the latest NBC News poll shows Biden’s support among Black voters is waning.
NBC News polling has found Biden’s net-approval rating among Black voters has dropped nearly 20 points over the course of this year, from plus-46 points throughout the year to plus-27 points this month. The latest survey finds 61% of Black voters approve of Biden, versus 34% who say they disapprove of the president."
The first paragraph - where it says "the latest NBC News poll" - shows the actual poll. Click it and read what's given to you, especially since you asked for it: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/poll-bidens-standing-hits-new-lows-israel-hamas-war-rcna125251
If you don't believe one's approval rating has any practical use whatsoever, then okay. You can probably start a productive conversation that BJ's claim doesn't represent the big picture (e.g., one could ask if lack of approval always translates to an equal lack of votes), or maybe that BJ's statements lack context, but you seem pretty aggressive at the moment, calling people bots and whatnot. I'm not interested in further engagement, right now.
|
Northern Ireland26036 Posts
I’d be interested as to what’s causing that waning,
In the longer-term one would only expect that bleed to happen eventually. It’s not like there aren’t plenty of conservative black folks who are only really kept away from voting as such by the racism that still afflicts the GOP.
But that’s quite a swing in quite a short period of time.
|
On February 12 2024 00:44 WombaT wrote:
I’d be interested as to what’s causing that waning,
In the longer-term one would only expect that bleed to happen eventually. It’s not like there aren’t plenty of conservative black folks who are only really kept away from voting as such by the racism that still afflicts the GOP.
But that’s quite a swing in quite a short period of time.
I'd be interested in hearing what's causing that waning too. I read some articles recently, where I tried to find specifics, but the best I could find was a general cooling attitude like this:
"But for Woodbury, whose work focuses on Black Americans who are cynical about voting, the generation gap is the major concern. While younger Democrats of all races are more progressive and critical of Biden than their elders are, Woodbury says he's seen polling that shows it's "much more concentrated among Black voters." Part of the steep decline in young Black Americans' approval of Biden stems from the fact that their approval started out so high — it's "a higher bar to drop from," as Woodbury put it. "When I sit in focus groups with young Black voters and ask what [Democrats have] done to make their lives better, they're hard pressed to come up with an answer, despite this administration delivering on much of the Black agenda," Woodbury said. "That's the communication challenge that we have a year to overcome.""
https://abcnews.go.com/538/biden-losing-support-people-color/story?id=105272263
That's just a focus group, so less useful than broader data, but articles like the above one make me think two general things:
1. Black support probably started artificially higher than usual, because Trump and conservatives were (are) so transparently, vocally racist (not caring about cops murdering Black victims, against kneeling for the National Anthem, denying that criminal justice inequity exists, trying to remove voting rights that disproportionately affect Black communities, etc.), and Biden's support has naturally decreased over time, now that the Black community is realizing that simply having Biden in the White House isn't enough to fix systemic racism in our country;
2. Biden either hasn't followed through on key issues for Black voters (in their opinion), or hasn't sufficiently communicated his accomplishments to Black voters to keep their support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
