NationStates

Vassenor wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Sorry, what? I am only getting bits of this XD

It's OK If You're A Republican.

Ahhh.

Myrensis wrote:Yeah, the whole "She didn't say anything out of respect for him." bit is...really weird. It tracks with her original story that he had rubbed her neck and shoulders uncomfortably, but "She didn't want to tell anyone that he sexually assaulted her because she knew he was a busy man and didn't want to make things difficult for him." is kind of...odd.

That kind of odd behavior makes sense for someone taken advantage of by a high-status person they respect. It also makes sense for someone wanting to exaggerate an event after the fact to hurt someone they dislike. So it's hard to say.

Gormwood wrote:

Celritannia wrote:If Sexual Assault didn't stop trump from becoming President, what makes anyone think it will stop Biden?

IOKIYAR.

It's also okay if you're a Democrat.

It's also never okay no matter who you are.

These are three different opinions on the idea that different people have.

Corrian wrote:

San Lumen wrote:who would you like?

I'd be fine with like, almost anyone else being flaunted over Harris.

Biden could go to Sing Sing and pick an inmate number out of a hat and make a better pick than Harris.

Telconi wrote:

Corrian wrote:I'd be fine with like, almost anyone else being flaunted over Harris.

Biden could go to Sing Sing and pick an inmate number out of a hat and make a better pick than Harris.

Would be much cooler to collect a pool of inmate numbers of people incarcerated by Harris and draw from that instead.

Telconi wrote:

Corrian wrote:I'd be fine with like, almost anyone else being flaunted over Harris.

Biden could go to Sing Sing and pick an inmate number out of a hat and make a better pick than Harris.

Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

Inhorto wrote:

Telconi wrote:
Biden could go to Sing Sing and pick an inmate number out of a hat and make a better pick than Harris.

Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Valrifell wrote:

Inhorto wrote:Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Imagine going from "that little girl was me" to being Biden's VP.

Inhorto wrote:

Telconi wrote:
Biden could go to Sing Sing and pick an inmate number out of a hat and make a better pick than Harris.

Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

She's a tyrant in waiting.

Valrifell wrote:

Inhorto wrote:Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Northern Davincia wrote:

Inhorto wrote:Why? She's African American, passionate, a woman, has a relatively good record (Republicans aren't going to come after someone for being a tough prosecutor; that's what they like), and young. She has a lot of the energy that Biden struggles to capture. I'd agree that she isn't the best, but she's a solid pick.

She's a tyrant in waiting.

To both of these: in what way? I'm asking you to divorce your political leanings for a moment and consider her potential as a candidate. I believe it's objectively a good choice.

Duvniask wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Imagine going from "that little girl was me" to being Biden's VP.

Anything to prevent the social democratic wing of the Democratic Party from gaining any influence.

Inhorto wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Northern Davincia wrote:She's a tyrant in waiting.

To both of these: in what way? I'm asking you to divorce your political leanings for a moment and consider her potential as a candidate. I believe it's objectively a good choice.

Oh sure, from a surface-layer optics perspective she's not the worst choice, and you can definitely argue that those matter more than the deeper issues we're miffed about.

But generally one should not take joy in their role as prosecutor, withholding evidence to the defense, and generally being extraordinarily vindictive against the accused. Those aren't attributes I like in politicians.

Inhorto wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Northern Davincia wrote:She's a tyrant in waiting.

To both of these: in what way? I'm asking you to divorce your political leanings for a moment and consider her potential as a candidate. I believe it's objectively a good choice.

Her record includes the delightful action of locking people up for their kid's truancy, and standing against criminal justice reform, these are not good things.

Diahon wrote:We Are Living in a Failed State

Excellent, I can begin my Ancap warband now.

Inhorto wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Northern Davincia wrote:She's a tyrant in waiting.

To both of these: in what way? I'm asking you to divorce your political leanings for a moment and consider her potential as a candidate. I believe it's objectively a good choice.

She is perfectly qualified, but her record will dissuade many independents and some Democrats, maybe. We cannot separate our political leanings in evaluating a candidate.

Duvniask wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
She's more or less ethically compromised so blatantly to a degree that's hard to find even in Washington.

Imagine going from "that little girl was me" to being Biden's VP.

Team of rivals.

Post War America wrote:

Inhorto wrote:

To both of these: in what way? I'm asking you to divorce your political leanings for a moment and consider her potential as a candidate. I believe it's objectively a good choice.

Her record includes the delightful action of locking people up for their kid's truancy, and standing against criminal justice reform, these are not good things.

But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

Inhorto wrote:

Post War America wrote:
Her record includes the delightful action of locking people up for their kid's truancy, and standing against criminal justice reform, these are not good things.

But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

Will the amount of voters brought on board by Kamala outweigh the number of voters turned off of a Biden/Harris ticket?

Kannap wrote:

Inhorto wrote:But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

Will the amount of voters brought on board by Kamala outweigh the number of voters turned off of a Biden/Harris ticket?

"Is zero less than any number ever?"

Kannap wrote:

Inhorto wrote:But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

Will the amount of voters brought on board by Kamala outweigh the number of voters turned off of a Biden/Harris ticket?

Definitively. The people who would be turned off by a Biden/Harris ticket are the same types of people that would be turned off by Biden himself. Biden doesn't actually have to appeal to young, progressive voters, which is why Warren will certainly not be his pick. They don't vote. And if you don't vote, you don't matter. That's really it.

Kamala is passionate and establishment. She can rile people up and balance out Biden's fumbles. It's literally the perfect mix. It's going to either be her or Whitmer. My bet is on the latter, though.

Inhorto wrote:

Post War America wrote:
Her record includes the delightful action of locking people up for their kid's truancy, and standing against criminal justice reform, these are not good things.

But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

I'm pretty sure the people you're talking about would care more about a prosecutorial record than issues of identity. Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if being a black woman turned off a not insubstantial chunk. Really insisting on, for lack of a better term, diversity picks is done to shore up liberal and leftist support than anything else.

Myrensis wrote:

Zurkerx wrote:
Indeed though we should note it doesn't specifically reference that incident. As Corrian said, if Reade was sexually assaulted like she was, why would the mother "she didn't want to ruin the senator's credibility"? This case is baffling and there are so many loops to jump through that her case is just weak. Now, I think there's a good chance that Biden didn't respect his space and it likely creep her out. After all, she didn't mention the grotesque details until about a year after she made the allegation. As I (and Reagan) would say: Trust, but verify.

Yeah, the whole "She didn't say anything out of respect for him." bit is...really weird. It tracks with her original story that he had rubbed her neck and shoulders uncomfortably, but "She didn't want to tell anyone that he sexually assaulted her because she knew he was a busy man and didn't want to make things difficult for him." is kind of...odd.

Indeed, there's just so many conflicting things here. It just doesn't make sense. That's not to say that Biden did something, it's possible he violated her personal space but her account went from that and rapidly evolved to "he penetrated me". Maybe the investigation can clear things up and I'll trust her, but I'm skeptical.

Post War America wrote:

Inhorto wrote:But the people that care about stuff like this, the people who are preoccupied with judicial reform, aren't the ones that really matter here. To win, Biden needs to shore up support among the blue-collar workers in states like Michigan that Obama won but Clinton lost. Those people don't really care that Harris was a particularly harsh prosecutor. What Biden does need is a young, enthusiastic, well-spoken woman with national name recognition. Kamala Harris is one of few in that field.

Plus, anything can be given a spin. She was just a strong prosecutor with a history of bringing criminals to justice or what have you. Her being an aggressive prosecutor is just going to turn off progressives who won't really be that important a demographic come election. African Americans and other minorities will, however.

I'm pretty sure the people you're talking about would care more about a prosecutorial record than issues of identity. Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if being a black woman turned off a not insubstantial chunk. Really insisting on, for lack of a better term, diversity picks is done to shore up liberal and leftist support than anything else.

If those same working-class, blue-collar voters voted for Obama, a black man, in '08 and '12, they'll vote for a black woman as VP in '20. Also note that elderly African Americans, those who vote the most, are rather socially conservative. A tough on crime black woman isn't going to deter them.

Kannap wrote:

Gormwood wrote:IOKIYAR.

It's also okay if you're a Democrat.

It's also never okay no matter who you are.

These are three different opinions on the idea that different people have.

So why are leftists throwing a fit about Biden allegedly heing a rapist then?

Inhorto wrote:

Kannap wrote:
Will the amount of voters brought on board by Kamala outweigh the number of voters turned off of a Biden/Harris ticket?

Definitively. The people who would be turned off by a Biden/Harris ticket are the same types of people that would be turned off by Biden himself. Biden doesn't actually have to appeal to young, progressive voters, which is why Warren will certainly not be his pick. They don't vote. And if you don't vote, you don't matter. That's really it.

Kamala is passionate and establishment. She can rile people up and balance out Biden's fumbles. It's literally the perfect mix. It's going to either be her or Whitmer. My bet is on the latter, though.

To counter this, Trump will double his efforts to appear as the candidate of criminal justice reform, endearing himself to African Americans.