Official Everybody Edits Forums

Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?

You are not logged in.

Advertisement

Hello, visitor! These forums are run off of the revenue generated from these ads. If you'd like to support us, please whitelist us or consider donating:

#76 2018-11-19 00:24:31

Master1
Campaign Team
From: Crait
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,396

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Koto wrote:
Master1 wrote:

@koto, in a normal job interview, you wouldn't have half the country screaming at you. Normally the employer would bring something up, and it would be between the two of you to talk. In this case, there's an audience that is constantly attacking him during the whole process, even going as far as to make death threats towards him and his family.  Any man that's going to sit there and take that doesn't deserve the spot, shows a lot of weakness imo. I would pick the one who has a strong back and stands up for himself and his own family any day. I personally don't care if he got aggressive or not. The aggression started elsewhere first.

I mean, there's a difference between standing up for yourself, and...


That's just his opening statement.  Also, to be fair, Kavanaugh was only questioned for a couple hours.  Hillary Clinton was questioned for 12 straight hours over Benghazi in a similar manner, without once getting a temperment.  The funny part is that Trump supporters are still calling for an investigation after that, and several other investigations have been done on her for that.  That's extremely hypocritical.

I mean, you can't judge me for an argument I'm making based on what other republicans are doing. I haven't said once that I want Hillary Clinton to be investigated more than she already was. I can agree with you that other republicans are being hypocritical for doing that, but don't phrase it in a way that seems like you think I'm doing the same thing.

(I would reply to your video but it's showing unavailable for me.)


nicktoot.pngnicktoot.pngnicktoot.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#77 2018-11-19 00:29:36

N1KF
Wiki Mod
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 9,994

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

XxAtillaxX wrote:
poopdublio wrote:

Hey just popping in to remind everyone that this is how they're spending their valuable free time.

it's not valuable if you're not valued

We are already valued.

Offline

Wooted by:

#78 2018-11-19 00:37:51

Koto
Member
Joined: 2015-02-18
Posts: 3,267

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

You're right, that last sentence is worded bad.  Hopefully the sentance before that let you know that I don't mean you specifically, as I don't know the entirety of your views.  I have been paying attention to politics for a long time, and one thing that I can tell you is that this Kavanaugh guy is extremely unprofessional and temperamental.  Frankly, I don't see what the problem is in selecting another guy on the short list that Trump came up with.  I actually totally blame the Democrats for politicizing Dr. Ford's accusations, and well frankly, blowing it.  However, if Republicans had decided to push for someone else because of the negative media surrounding him, and the same thing kept happening to each candidate they pushed forward, then it would be easier to make the claim that the Democrats are creating flase these accusations.  However, Republicans dug their feet into the ground over this Kavanaugh guy.  Why?


Loading...
________________________________________________________
DVNTehT.png

Offline

Wooted by: (2)

#79 2018-11-19 00:38:08

XxAtillaxX
Member
From: Canada
Joined: 2015-11-28
Posts: 3,818

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

N1KF wrote:
XxAtillaxX wrote:
poopdublio wrote:

Hey just popping in to remind everyone that this is how they're spending their valuable free time.

it's not valuable if you're not valued

We are already valued.

some more than others


i love every edit
qFZguAb.png

Offline

Wooted by:

HG

#80 2018-11-26 01:07:03

azurepudding
Member
Joined: 2016-11-18
Posts: 663

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Master1 wrote:
azurepudding wrote:

oof.. I did.. I responded to that point in the very quote your just responded to.. https://wiki.everybodyedits.com/images/5/52/052_sigh  You're projecting onto me because I called you out on not reading- I responded to your point, if you missed it, it's you not reading it, not me. 

If you had reeeead, they were limited on who they could question and what questions could be asked.  And as you even mentioned yourself, it was a week long.  This wasn't even a criminal trial, just an interview, and there was clearly enough to raise some suspicion.

Tears.. when?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn3_3kpkJwE
Here are some time stamps, take your pick.
12:34
13:00
26:16
26:34
28:45
31:50

azurepudding wrote:

I'll go your path and say it was a stunt too, sure.

If that was a stunt, then I agree he should resign from judging... so that he can become an actor, because that would be some damn good acting if you ask me.

azurepudding wrote:

Everyone in politics gets death threats.  Some even get bombs sent to them, too.  Inciting violence tends to bring out some very violent people.

What a weak argument that is. "Everyone in politics gets death threats" - is that supposed to mean everyone is also supposed to take said death threats the same way? Not buying that one. Also stop with the inciting violence stuff, you still haven't been able to give any valid proof of it despite being asked several times. If you can't back up your own statements then don't bother making them.

azurepudding wrote:

And hey, you mentioned political acts and stunts, so I listed two of them from the repubs.  Two that are objectively stunts too.  You calling this accusation a stunt is entirely subjective, as you have no clue if it happened or not.  That was the whole point of having a proper investigation, to find the truth.  But you seem to have very low standards of what counts as a "proper" investigation.  One week, rushed, and restricted, does not fall under "proper" for me, nor does it for the majority of the country.  Due to this gimped investigation, he will be considered a supreme justice with an asterisk to his name for decades to come.  Unless it does come to an actual criminal trial.  This could have been avoided with a proper investigation.

I don't know how many times I have to say this, they interviewed enough people, absolutely NOTHING was found. If they continued, it would essentially be a witch hunt at that point. The democrats aim was not to dig to find the truth, they want to dig to find that he's guilty. You know as well as I do that it would not have stopped at another investigation if they still couldn't find any proof. They could dig and investigate all they wanted to and unless they found something to convict him with, it would never be enough.

His accuser got teary-eyed too.  I don't know how that shows his innocence tho, but it doesn't show guiltiness either.  The lies, and questionable frat party is enough to rise reasonable suspicion.

People can fake tears, and even if they were real, it could be self pity.  Maybe he was thinking of his wife and kids and how they won't see him the same way again.  Which, if he's innocent, is terrible, don't get me wrong there.  But the investigation was rushed and limited, so his name was never cleared.

You think it was enough, but what other investigation of similar accusation lasted only a week long?  Just because nothing was found, doesn't mean nothing happened.  The reason it was rushed was to prevent any chance of anything being found.  While they got the seat, the guy will forever be seen guilty by most americans due to this illegitimate investigation.  This is more than just my opinion.  I don't see why anyone could have been opposed to a longer, more thorough investigation, other than to avoid any chance of finding out what he did was true.  Sexual assault accusations are VERY hard to prove, so a week was not enough to find out the truth.

It is entirely possible that a longer investigation would not have been enough to a lot of people.  But one so rushed and limited, isn't enough for most people.  Conversely I could also say a week, a day, or no investigation, would have been enough for anyone who believes him, as many repubs were strongly against any investigation at all. 

Adding onto that, any amount of proof of Trump inciting violence also isn't enough to many republicans as well.  Even when something clear as day is provided, it is still dismissed.  That is what I was referring to brainwash awhile back, which I understand is a harsh term to use, and probably does me a disservice as it only further locks you into your views.  It's tribalism, which is present on both- or all sides, to some degree.  Whether someone is D or R, one is more likely to believe them depending on what your politic ideologies are.  You dismissed the video I shared earlier about that proud boy leader inciting violence, taking it as a point against Trump inciting violence directly, but it was a point to make about the brainwash effect Trump has on severely violent people.  And with him inciting violence, it gives them the OK to perform violent acts, as seen when that Trump protester got slugged in the face at a Trump rally.  Every action should be the person's fault obviously, but given that tribalism is a very real and powerful thing, there is fault for those who incite it as well.  You aren't seeing it, but when Trump tells his audience to punch a protester in the face, and then someone punches a protester in the face.. well.. take that as you will.  But if we're being objective here, that seems like textbook definition inciting of violence.

Online

#81 2018-11-26 02:03:57

Master1
Campaign Team
From: Crait
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,396

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

I thought this was conversation was finished, but whatever, I'm down for round 2.

azurepudding wrote:

His accuser got teary-eyed too.  I don't know how that shows his innocence tho, but it doesn't show guiltiness either.  The lies, and questionable frat party is enough to rise reasonable suspicion.]

Of course it doesn't show his innocence, showing innocence is not needed. It's guiltiness that needs to be shown. There is no concrete proof that he's guilty, therefor he is assumed to be innocent. Period.

azurepudding wrote:

People can fake tears, and even if they were real, it could be self pity.  Maybe he was thinking of his wife and kids and how they won't see him the same way again.  Which, if he's innocent, is terrible, don't get me wrong there.  But the investigation was rushed and limited, so his name was never cleared.

His name was cleared the moment his accuser decided to not provide any proof.

azurepudding wrote:

You think it was enough, but what other investigation of similar accusation lasted only a week long?  Just because nothing was found, doesn't mean nothing happened. The reason it was rushed was to prevent any chance of anything being found.

That or they didn't find anything to warrant a deeper investigation.

azurepudding wrote:

While they got the seat, the guy will forever be seen guilty by most americans due to this illegitimate investigation.  This is more than just my opinion.

A short investigation does not make it illegitimate, it makes it a short investigation.

azurepudding wrote:

I don't see why anyone could have been opposed to a longer, more thorough investigation, other than to avoid any chance of finding out what he did was true.  Sexual assault accusations are VERY hard to prove, so a week was not enough to find out the truth.

Simple, they were tired of being delayed. Also I disagree, a week is was plenty of time. If they wanted more time, why is nobody talking about it now? Just because he's on the supreme court now it doesn't mean he can't be investigated again. Why has Dr. Ford seemingly vanished into thin air? The fact that literally nobody is talking about him anymore just makes it seem to be more of a political move from the democrats. Nobody cares to ask for more investigations after he gets the job. This was purely to keep him from getting the position. If Dr. Ford really cared about her accusation that she made, she wouldn't just shut up about it after Kavanaugh got his job. If anything, that would infuriate her even more and we'd still be hearing from her.

For the record, even though I think another investigation is useless, I'm down if anyone wants to do it. Good luck getting anyone on either side to care enough though.

azurepudding wrote:

Adding onto that, any amount of proof of Trump inciting violence also isn't enough to many republicans as well.

Probably because we disagree with your definition of inciting violence. The legal definition of inciting violence is "when one person counsels, procures or commands another to commit violence, whether or not that person commits violence."

If he's not specifically telling someone to do something violent, which I admit he did ONCE in the video zoey linked previously, then legally he is not inciting violence. If you want to base all your arguments off of that one situation then okay - sure, he incited violence once. But to say "LOL I'd knock that guy out xD" is inciting violence is absolutely ridiculous.

You can't make up your own definitions for words and then claim that someone is doing something wrong because of it. Saying I'd punch someone is not the same as telling someone else to do it.

azurepudding wrote:

Even when something clear as day is provided, it is still dismissed.  That is what I was referring to brainwash awhile back, which I understand is a harsh term to use, and probably does me a disservice as it only further locks you into your views.

Something clear to you may not be clear to others, that's okay. That's why they're called opinions.

Everything I've said so far is clear as hell to me, yet I don't call your opinions brainwashing. I am able to understand that we have different ones.


azurepudding wrote:

It's tribalism, which is present on both- or all sides, to some degree.  Whether someone is D or R, one is more likely to believe them depending on what your politic ideologies are.

I agree, people should be watching things from both sides while keeping an open mind.

azurepudding wrote:

You dismissed the video I shared earlier about that proud boy leader inciting violence, taking it as a point against Trump inciting violence directly, but it was a point to make about the brainwash effect Trump has on severely violent people.  And with him inciting violence, it gives them the OK to perform violent acts, as seen when that Trump protester got slugged in the face at a Trump rally.  Every action should be the person's fault obviously, but given that tribalism is a very real and powerful thing, there is fault for those who incite it as well.

Trump isn't brainwashing anybody, those are just stupid people. Don't blame trump for another persons idiocy. He never specifically told those guys to do anything wrong, it's ALL their fault, not his at all.

azurepudding wrote:

You aren't seeing it, but when Trump tells his audience to punch a protester in the face, and then someone punches a protester in the face.. well.. take that as you will.  But if we're being objective here, that seems like textbook definition inciting of violence.

Read above for my opinions on this one.


nicktoot.pngnicktoot.pngnicktoot.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#82 2018-11-26 03:17:54

azurepudding
Member
Joined: 2016-11-18
Posts: 663

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

It was thanksgiving week so work was busy, and politics is exhausting and draining.

You keep ignoring the fact this kind of claim is very hard to prove.  Someone can sexually assault or rape someone, with absolutely no proof to show it happened.  That's why more time was needed, to find any tiny little thing that could help lead to some proof.  It's not fair to blame her for not providing proof for this, as a crime can occur without proof.  She was able to answer every question though, none of which were shown as lies, whereas Kavanaugh was caught lying several times, and refused to answer like half the questions. 

It's illegitimate if it's rushed and limited.  A week is not enough for a crime that's very hard to prove.  A week is too short for pretty much any investigation- let alone a hard to prove one.

Tired of being delayed.  Why is it they were fine delaying Obama's pick for over a year to steal it from him, but they couldn't delay a month or so for a fair investigation?

I don't know what happened to her, but I do know she received countless death threats to her and her family.  Knowing this, it makes me doubt she'd endanger her family just to delay/block his confirmation.  This didn't happen with Gorsuch.

He commands his fans to punch and hit others and then says he'll pay their legal fees if they get in trouble.  That's inciting of violence by that very definition you provided.  I don't know why you're XD'ing here.  I don't know why you admit to him doing it one time and not the others, but fine, at least you admit to one time, and one time is all that's needed to state someone incites violence.  I'm tired of arguing what is so blatantly obvious, what's shown on camera of him telling others to follow through with violence to anti-Trump people, and that he'll pay legal fees or defend them in court.  It boggles my mind why you and others can't see how this is inciting violence.

You found the NPC video amusing when its entire point is painting anti-Trump people as brainwashed NPCs.  You don't have to directly say brainwash, but if you like something that calls brainwash, then I think that means you believe it too.  But hey, Trump himself thinks you're brainwashed also.

He brainwashes, and openly admits his fans are.  He suggests you and his other fans are brainwashed and stupid.  It's amazing how he still has any followers at all.

Online

#83 2018-11-26 07:19:15

Master1
Campaign Team
From: Crait
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,396

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

azurepudding wrote:

It was thanksgiving week so work was busy, and politics is exhausting and draining.

If politics drains you that much, maybe you should find a better way to spend your time.

azurepudding wrote:

You keep ignoring the fact this kind of claim is very hard to prove.  Someone can sexually assault or rape someone, with absolutely no proof to show it happened.

That's why you come forward as soon as possible so your body can be tested for traces of someone else's DNA, waiting 30 years isn't going to help anyone's case if they actually care about their sexual assault/rape. If she cared about the situation she should have come forward when it happened, not "conveniently" waited until he was about to get a job, and then "conveniently" disappearing after he got it. Yeah it's hard to prove, but if you want it proved you need to do it when it's easiest to get the proof. Blaming others for "not investigating enough" is absurd when she should have worked harder to to provide proof herself.

azurepudding wrote:

That's why more time was needed, to find any tiny little thing that could help lead to some proof.  It's not fair to blame her for not providing proof for this, as a crime can occur without proof.

She couldn't remember anything that happened, she is certainly to blame for that. As I said above it should have been reported when it first happened, when it was fresh in her mind. She gave no details. That does not help her case.

I am aware that crime can occur without proof, however, one should at least be able to give a full explanation in thorough detail as to what happened. She clearly could not do this as she waited too long - her fault.

azurepudding wrote:

She was able to answer every question though, none of which were shown as lies, whereas Kavanaugh was caught lying several times, and refused to answer like half the questions.

answering with "I don't know" or "It happened at a party" isn't very helpful either. Can you explain where Kavanaugh was caught lying?

azurepudding wrote:

It's illegitimate if it's rushed and limited.  A week is not enough for a crime that's very hard to prove.  A week is too short for pretty much any investigation- let alone a hard to prove one.

I've tried to explain why I disagree but you just keep saying this over and over so I'll just leave you with this: //forums.everybodyedits.com/img/smilies/cool

azurepudding wrote:

Tired of being delayed.  Why is it they were fine delaying Obama's pick for over a year to steal it from him, but they couldn't delay a month or so for a fair investigation?

Because it was Obama? I'm not saying they should have delayed him, and I'm not saying the democrats shouldn't want to delay Trump as well. It's the opposite side, clearly they're both going to want to delay each other. It's not wrong for the republicans to try and put an end to it before it gets out of hand, just like it wouldn't have been wrong for the democrats to put an end to their side quicker, but they didn't.

azurepudding wrote:

I don't know what happened to her, but I do know she received countless death threats to her and her family.  Knowing this, it makes me doubt she'd endanger her family just to delay/block his confirmation.  This didn't happen with Gorsuch.

I'm sorry for her if she received death threats, but she shouldn't back down from something this huge if it really happened. Backing off just makes it seem like more of a lie to me.

azurepudding wrote:

He commands his fans to punch and hit others and then says he'll pay their legal fees if they get in trouble.

He never commanded anyone to do anything.

azurepudding wrote:

That's inciting of violence by that very definition you provided.

If he did, I would agree. 

azurepudding wrote:

I don't know why you're XD'ing here.  I don't know why you admit to him doing it one time and not the others, but fine, at least you admit to one time, and one time is all that's needed to state someone incites violence.

Not exactly. One time would mean "He incited violence" You can't say he incites violence (As if it's happened on multiple occasions) when there's one documented offense.

azurepudding wrote:

I'm tired of arguing what is so blatantly obvious

It's not obvious to those who actually know and understand the definition.

azurepudding wrote:

what's shown on camera of him telling others to follow through with violence to anti-Trump people, and that he'll pay legal fees or defend them in court.

Telling someone to do something vs saying you'll pay legal fees is a huge difference. Unless he actually says "Go do this" he isn't telling anyone to do it- therefor not inciting violence.

azurepudding wrote:

It boggles my mind why you and others can't see how this is inciting violence.

It boggles my mind why you and others can't see how this isn't inciting violence.

azurepudding wrote:

You found the NPC video amusing when its entire point is painting anti-Trump people as brainwashed NPCs.  You don't have to directly say brainwash, but if you like something that calls brainwash, then I think that means you believe it too.  But hey, Trump himself thinks you're brainwashed also.

Its point is not painting anti-Trump people as brainwashed, it's painting anti-Trump people who chant the same phrases over and over as brainwashed. I would not consider anyone having a logical discussion (Like we're having) to be brainwashed. If you're going to sit there and chant something, and refuse to have a discussion, then yeah I can see calling that both brainwash and NPC behavior. There's a huge difference between the two.

azurepudding wrote:

He brainwashes, and openly admits his fans are.  He suggests you and his other fans are brainwashed and stupid.  It's amazing how he still has any followers at all.

Link to where he "admitted that" - honestly sounds like a joke he made I'll let you prove me wrong if you desire.


nicktoot.pngnicktoot.pngnicktoot.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#84 2018-11-26 07:20:05

Tipocarlos
Banned
Joined: 2017-03-18
Posts: 11

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

.

Last edited by Different55 (2018-11-26 14:08:26)


mntESTWQ.jpg

Offline

Wooted by: (2)

#85 2018-11-26 13:38:16

azurepudding
Member
Joined: 2016-11-18
Posts: 663

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Have you ever been sexually assaulted or raped?  It's not something you go around telling others.  Especially when we still live in a day where accusers are shamed and mocked without being listened to, as what happened to Dr. Ford by Trump and his fanatics.  You are victim shaming now which is honestly pretty shameful.  I've experienced something when I was younger where I wasn't sure if someone did something to me or not, I'll just say I woke up and found a substance on me.  I understand it's not something you can easily go racing to someone to tell about.  As for Ford's case, being groped or pinned down wouldn't provide any proof via DNA anyway.  DNA does not prove lack of consent.  As I said, something like this is very hard to prove, and is why more time should have been permitted.  Short time and hard to prove do not total a proper investigation.  If it was caught on camera, then a lot of time wouldn't be needed, but since it wasn't and it's a hard to prove case, one week doesn't cut it.

Except she answered all of the questions she was asked.  Trump made it seem like she couldn't recall anything when he mocked her.  He listed several questions, ending each with "I don't remember" as if answering for her, but she actually answered every question he mocked her with.  Truth and honesty, as well as decency (mocking a victim, yikes), aren't the guy's strong suits.

Kavanaugh lied about things like the meaning behind devil's triangle to cover up the things he did as it'd look badly on him.  Devil's triangle now has a new entry under urban dictionary, maybe you should check it out.

The democrats couldn't do anything about the unfair delay because the republicans cheated and changed the rules.  They were in the minority so they couldn't do anything.  It was the republicans who changed and bent rules in their favor, and then act like it's an outrage that the dems wanted to delay Kavanaugh because of the accusations.  In one case it was entirely political- repubs felt entitled to Obama's pick, the other had a valid reason to delay- needing to find out if Kavanaugh did it or not.

I hope she doesn't back down.  She's probably in hiding now because of all the threats.  For her own safety as well as her family's.  I can't imagine why someone would ruin their life like that if it didn't actually happen. 

He.. did.. it's.. on camera, you just don't want to accept it.  I'm showing you an apple and calling it an apple, but you go "Nah, that's a banana."  He did it, it's right there.  He's done both, telling supporters to go punch a protester, as well as promising to pay the legal fees.   He's done BOTH.  I am done arguing this point.  It's there on camera, man.  Go and watch the unedited version if you really need to.  There's also the congressman who body slammed a reporter who Trump gloated about the crime he committed, as his fans roar in approval..

Chanting's a thing done in protests, don't know what to tell you.  If you want to go up to one and start a discussion then go ahead.  But this video's meant to paint anti-Trump people as brainwashed and emotionless.  You think we're having a civilized debate right now?  Well I've been called an NPC by a few already on youtube.  The NPC meme is an attack to anyone against Trump.  You make it seem like it's claiming protest is mindless or something.  It's specifically targeting anti-Trumpers.

He starts off calling his fans smart, then this happens https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTACH1eVIaA

He calls them so loyal, he could shoot someone and not lose any supporters.  The implied conclusion is that he can do anything and his supporters will still love him.  That's blind loyalty, which leads to brainwash.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7b8XvfnEB8

Tipocarlos wrote:

snip

If that's you in your sig, it's drippin' on ya

Online

#86 2018-11-26 17:26:47

Koto
Member
Joined: 2015-02-18
Posts: 3,267

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Master1 wrote:
azurepudding wrote:

You keep ignoring the fact this kind of claim is very hard to prove.  Someone can sexually assault or rape someone, with absolutely no proof to show it happened.

That's why you come forward as soon as possible so your body can be tested for traces of someone else's DNA, waiting 30 years isn't going to help anyone's case if they actually care about their sexual assault/rape. If she cared about the situation she should have come forward when it happened, not "conveniently" waited until he was about to get a job, and then "conveniently" disappearing after he got it.

Something tells me you've never been the victim of any sort of non-petty crime.


Loading...
________________________________________________________
DVNTehT.png

Offline

Wooted by: (2)

#87 2018-11-26 22:40:08

Master1
Campaign Team
From: Crait
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,396

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Just because I haven't been a victim myself, doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter. I can think freely without being a victim as can everyone else. I think waiting as long as she did was a stupid move if she truly wanted the matter resolved.

Also Azure you mention "victim shaming" - how do you know she's the victim and not kavanaugh? Are you victim shaming kavanaugh by believing her instead of him? Sorry, no proof, no victim.


nicktoot.pngnicktoot.pngnicktoot.png

Offline

Wooted by:

#88 2018-11-27 02:30:18

azurepudding
Member
Joined: 2016-11-18
Posts: 663

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

Master1 wrote:

Just because I haven't been a victim myself, doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter. I can think freely without being a victim as can everyone else. I think waiting as long as she did was a stupid move if she truly wanted the matter resolved.

Also Azure you mention "victim shaming" - how do you know she's the victim and not kavanaugh? Are you victim shaming kavanaugh by believing her instead of him? Sorry, no proof, no victim.

Just going to ignore the point where he was caught lying I see.  And how DNA doesn't prove unconsent.  And a few others.. I had like a dozen points and you respond to just two.  There's still that other post you entirely bypassed, but whatever.

Of course that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion, but you do lack empathy or the understanding of how it's like to be sexually assaulted.  You think it's something easy to do- it's not.  A whole lot I can counter this post, is what I mentioned in the post you didn't really counter.  I really hate repeating myself, but you keep dodging things.

You're arguing innocent until proven guilty which I am not arguing against, but I am arguing all accusers deserve to be heard.  With him lying, and her not making any apparent lies, as well as his shady past, leads me leaning in Ford's favor.  Too bad we can't know for sure what happened, with the gimped investigation.  You can't properly investigate a difficult to prove accusation with a rushed and limited investigation.  I don't know what else to tell you.  Your bias is abundantly clear.  A week is too short for any investigation unless there is absolute certain evidence such as something caught on camera or recorded.  I have already conceded that a month or more would not have been enough for some, but a week is a laughably short amount of time.  You think his name is cleared, but it's not cleared by most americans.  Had the investigation persisted longer, and if it were not limited in who and what they could ask, Kavanaugh's confirmation would not be as controversial as it is now.  The fact that no investigation was planned originally, then when it did occur, how limited it was, leads me to believe that even the republicans in congress think something is up- they just wanted his confirmation before anything else could come out.  There was no need to rush other than political reasons, and the supreme court is one of the most important and life-effecting jobs in the country, so it is utmost important for the right people to be confirmed.  He was confirmed without knowing the truth, as the truth was of no interest by Trump and his followers.  It's a common thing with Trump- being right or wrong doesn't matter, only winning and not losing does.

Last edited by azurepudding (2018-11-27 14:08:39)

Online

#89 2018-11-28 03:12:20

Master1
Campaign Team
From: Crait
Joined: 2015-02-15
Posts: 4,396

Re: US 2018 Mid-term election discussion

azurepudding wrote:
Master1 wrote:

Just because I haven't been a victim myself, doesn't mean I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter. I can think freely without being a victim as can everyone else. I think waiting as long as she did was a stupid move if she truly wanted the matter resolved.

Also Azure you mention "victim shaming" - how do you know she's the victim and not kavanaugh? Are you victim shaming kavanaugh by believing her instead of him? Sorry, no proof, no victim.

Just going to ignore the point where he was caught lying I see.  And how DNA doesn't prove unconsent.  And a few others.. I had like a dozen points and you respond to just two.  There's still that other post you entirely bypassed, but whatever.

Of course that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion, but you do lack empathy or the understanding of how it's like to be sexually assaulted.  You think it's something easy to do- it's not.  A whole lot I can counter this post, is what I mentioned in the post you didn't really counter.  I really hate repeating myself, but you keep dodging things.

You're arguing innocent until proven guilty which I am not arguing against, but I am arguing all accusers deserve to be heard.  With him lying, and her not making any apparent lies, as well as his shady past, leads me leaning in Ford's favor.  Too bad we can't know for sure what happened, with the gimped investigation.  You can't properly investigate a difficult to prove accusation with a rushed and limited investigation.  I don't know what else to tell you.  Your bias is abundantly clear.  A week is too short for any investigation unless there is absolute certain evidence such as something caught on camera or recorded.  I have already conceded that a month or more would not have been enough for some, but a week is a laughably short amount of time.  You think his name is cleared, but it's not cleared by most americans.  Had the investigation persisted longer, and if it were not limited in who and what they could ask, Kavanaugh's confirmation would not be as controversial as it is now.  The fact that no investigation was planned originally, then when it did occur, how limited it was, leads me to believe that even the republicans in congress think something is up- they just wanted his confirmation before anything else could come out.  There was no need to rush other than political reasons, and the supreme court is one of the most important and life-effecting jobs in the country, so it is utmost important for the right people to be confirmed.  He was confirmed without knowing the truth, as the truth was of no interest by Trump and his followers.  It's a common thing with Trump- being right or wrong doesn't matter, only winning and not losing does.

Alright, let's clear his name then. Who wants to do another investigation? Oh wait. Not the democrats. Don't pretend this whole thing was about them wanting true justice for whoever was guilty. If that was the case, they'd still be asking for an investigation. Literally nobody cares anymore because they already failed at their mission to obstruct and delay.

Also I have no bias over the matter, I honestly don't care who's right. I just think it's absurd to have people kicking this guy around, who may not have even done anything wrong, JUST to satisfy their own selfish political desires.


nicktoot.pngnicktoot.pngnicktoot.png

Offline

Wooted by:
Master11543371140733530

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

[ Started around 1544450406.8466 - Generated in 0.134 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.54 MiB (Peak: 1.81 MiB) ]