Jump to content

Things seem to be going quite well for Joe Biden

Parliament

By Parliament
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52342

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, mdmost said:

 

It is a great ad to highlight the president’s failings on this issue. But what has Biden been saying the past 10 weeks?  He went dark for a couple weeks until recently, and now he’s talking about what he would have done and when he would have done it. Was he on camera or at rallies saying things in the moment?  If so, why not juxtapose trump in the ad with clips of joe saying things at similar dates that show he would have handled it differently/better?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Thatguy
Thatguy

Alright T-tom. I am going to address this post because I am the best one for the job. I will address it number by number. 1) I am assuming that marginalized group you are talking about is us, Bla

Chooky
Chooky

Somebody should write a song about the privileged fortunes of being a senator's son because this is a totally new phenomenon.  Somebody with musical talent, because it ain't me.  

Dahobbs
Dahobbs

As you continue to ponder hypocrisy, please also refuse to address the following: T-Mobile spending over $195,000 at Trump Hotel while it lobbied for approval of its merger with Sprint, despite

Posted Images

Saint Tacky

Saint Tacky 1610

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

It is a great ad to highlight the president’s failings on this issue. But what has Biden been saying the past 10 weeks?  He went dark for a couple weeks until recently, and now he’s talking about what he would have done and when he would have done it. Was he on camera or at rallies saying things in the moment?  If so, why not juxtapose trump in the ad with clips of joe saying things at similar dates that show he would have handled it differently/better?

He didn't need to do anything but step back and let Trump trip all over his own dick. It was as easy as stepping-aside and watching the free-fall and subsequent finger pointing like the rest of us.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22600

Posted
Posted
On 3/25/2020 at 2:32 PM, bad_teammate said:

"C'mon, man, I heard you liked me!"

A woman accusing Biden of pushing her against a wall and fingering her in 1993 when she was a Senate aid.

So, uh, 36+ hours later and no credible site has picked this up?  The only place I even see it being discussed is Bernie reddit.

For anyone reporting credible sexual assault allegations, I wouldn't recommend including a political hashtag with your allegations if you want the general public to take them seriously.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zombie

Zombie 284

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The smarter political play is to just ignore it, not actively attack the credibility and character of a woman claiming sexual assault with zero evidence.

In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recently expressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Zombie said:

In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recently expressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?

What does anything you just said have to do with the credibility of the claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

So, uh, 36+ hours later and no credible site has picked this up?  The only place I even see it being discussed is Bernie reddit.

For anyone reporting credible sexual assault allegations, I wouldn't recommend including a political hashtag with your allegations if you want the general public to take them seriously.

You sound like a FNC Grandpa defending Trump.  It's disgusting.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

dude

Yes?

34 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

You sound like a FNC Grandpa defending Trump.  It's disgusting.  

It's always enjoyable to hear the psychological profiling of female sexual abuse victims from guys who spent their teens and 20s as bootstraps libertarians memorizing FBI crime statistics.

Zombie's post makes zero sense unless the reader is fully captured by some kind of MSNBC-induced brain disease. None of that shit has anything to do with whether or not she was sexually abused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22600

Posted
Posted
You sound like a FNC Grandpa defending Trump.  It's disgusting.  

In no way did I attack her credibility, defend Biden, or say the allegations shouldn’t be listened to and investigated. I merely stated that including a political hashtag is a really quick way for the general public to assume you have ulterior motives. Any further conclusions that you’ve made from my post are on you.

(I understand that you’re a troll, but it’s important that I make this point.)
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

In no way did I attack her credibility, defend Biden, or say the allegations shouldn’t be listened to and investigated. I merely stated that including a political hashtag is a really quick way for the general public to assume you have ulterior motives. Any further conclusions that you’ve made from my post are on you.

You are not an expert in these things. You don't know the psychology of abuse victims or the general public reaction to them. You are not a disinterested party, you're pretending to be. This is concern trolling.

You do not speak for the general public, so this kind of bullshit warning is just you telling on yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
On 3/25/2020 at 8:58 AM, bad_teammate said:

Yay!

 

Gross.  When he said he was going to have a woman as his running mate, I assumed he knew who, and was doing sort of a teaser roll-out of the announcement.  Now it just looks like that was the qualifying criteria. It has a wisp of tokenism to it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Gross.  When he said he was going to have a woman as his running mate, I assumed he knew who, and was doing sort of a teaser roll-out of the announcement.  Now it just looks like that was the qualifying criteria. It has a wisp of tokenism to it.  

The binder will be ready any day now, chill.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, mdmost said:

It's cute that b_t finally gives a shit about that when it might benefit his candidate. 

What is "that"? Sexual assault allegations?

Was I ever dismissive of them in any direction?

22 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

remember that 72 hour period where he was ultra concerned about biden being mean to people who asked him questions in public?

I still think Biden threatening to physically assault someone who challenges him is yet another thing that makes him unfit to be president. In fact, it makes this woman's allegations all the more credible (along with his long-documented history of treating people's bodies however he feels even despite their obvious revulsion).

From the woman's account:
He just like pointed at me and he said, “You’re nothing to me!” And then he just looked at me and said, “You’re nothing. Nothing.” … I must’ve reacted because that’s when he took me by the shoulders and he said, “You’re okay. You’re fine. You’re okay.”

That's completely believable.

Edited by bad_teammate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29176

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What is "that"? Sexual assault allegations?

Was I ever dismissive of them in any direction?

I still think Biden threatening to physically assault someone who challenges him is yet another thing that makes him unfit to be president. In fact, it makes this woman's allegations all the more credible (along with his long-documented history of treating people's bodies however he feels even despite their obvious revulsion).

From the woman's account:
He just like pointed at me and he said, “You’re nothing to me!” And then he just looked at me and said, “You’re nothing. Nothing.” … I must’ve reacted because that’s when he took me by the shoulders and he said, “You’re okay. You’re fine. You’re okay.”

That's completely believable.

not sure who you've been arguing against, but i haven't seen anyone doubt the validity of her story.

in fact, i don't see much pro-biden chatter around here at all, despite your constant claims that everyone suddenly has abandoned their beliefs to jump on the bandwagon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

not sure who you've been arguing against, but i haven't seen anyone doubt the validity of her story.

 

Are you going to try and argue that he isn't casting doubt on the credibility of her story?

I know you love nothing more than to fight with me, henry, but choose a better route than attacking the credibility of woman claiming sexual assault or, in your case, outright lying to cover those who do.

It's beneath you... or at least I thought it was.

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

in fact, i don't see much pro-biden chatter around here at all, despite your constant claims that everyone suddenly has abandoned their beliefs to jump on the bandwagon.

What is the functional difference between a passionate advocate for Joe and a troll who attacks his critics (and accusers)? Tell yourself what you want, henry, you're doing the exact same job, whether it is out of love for Joe or hatred for the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 42865

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I know you love nothing more than to fight with me, henry, but choose a better route than attacking the credibility of woman claiming sexual assault or, in your case, outright lying to cover those who do.

It's beneath you... or at least I thought it was.

Ha. This is so intellectually dishonest, even for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Show me where gandorf attacked the credibility of the woman claiming sexual assault.

What immediately follows your selective bolding is "or, in your case."

I'm not sure if that was written above your reading comprehension level, but "or" is a conjunction used to differentiate between items in a list and "in your case" is a prepositional phrase inside of that list indicating which item applies to henry.

Read entire sentences, buddy, it'll help your overall understanding even if it's challenging. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29176

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Are you going to try and argue that he isn't casting doubt on the credibility of her story?

I know you love nothing more than to fight with me, henry, but choose a better route than attacking the credibility of woman claiming sexual assault or, in your case, outright lying to cover those who do.

where am i attacking her credibility and where am i outright lying?  stop making logic leaps to try to make someone else look bad.

i hadn't really followed the story because all i saw was the tweet.  and i 100% agree that if this is the tweet first revealing this awful story, then she shouldn't have included bernie hashtags in it.  she unintentionally harmed her own credibility by doing this, and you know this is true.  twitter politics is what it is, and there are right ways and smart ways to get your important story out there.  as a bernie-bro, you know how the game is played, and how fucking juvenile and repugnant it can get.

a couple other posters pointed this out, saying it harms her credibility (which is accurate) and saying that big news outlets haven't picked this up (i googled her name and details, and the first article that came up was from a publication called "redstate")  the pretend and over-dramatized outrage from left twitter is so fucking tired, please do not drag it onto this website anymore than absolutely necessary.

33 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What is the functional difference between a passionate advocate for Joe and a troll who attacks his critics (and accusers)? Tell yourself what you want, henry, you're doing the exact same job, whether it is out of love for Joe or hatred for the left.

considering i'm personally doing neither?  hmm. 

my fight isn't against the left, it's against trump.  just because the left is attacking joe doesn't mean dems are all attacking the left.  most have shifted focus onto trump, because he's the bad guy here.  most posters have been complimentary of bernie and have come to terms with biden being the candidate we all have to rally around to defeat trump.  that said, i can only comment on what i see on here, not on twitter, where i'm sure it's ugly and stupid.

you can keep shadow-boxing if you want.  whatever keeps you busy.

Edited by henrygandorf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
Just now, henrygandorf said:

where am i attacking her credibility and where am i outright lying?

"i haven't seen anyone doubt the validity of her story."

This is a lie. Zombie attacked the credibility of her story directly. You read that. You know that. You lied about that in your never-ending crusade against a guy you don't like on the Internet.

Here is Zombie's post, that you read and that I re-posted and you re-read:

In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recentlyexpressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?

That last part in italics. Is he attacking the credibility of her accusation or not? Answer honestly, please.

Quote

i hadn't really followed the story because all i saw was the tweet.  and i 100% agree that if this is the tweet first revealing this awful story, then she shouldn't have included bernie hashtags in it.  she unintentionally harmed her own credibility by doing this, and you know this is true.  twitter politics is what it is, and there are right ways and smart ways to get your important story out there.  as a bernie-bro, you know how the game is played, and how fucking juvenile and repugnant it can get.

I don't think it means anything that she mentions Bernie or Putin or Santa Claus. Your concern about how juvenile and repugnant it can get is bullshit because instead of going after the people who are questioning her credibility you're just doing your usual bullshit of attacking me. Playing referee again and a very biased and shitty one, at that.

Who the fuck are you to tell potential victims of sexual assault what is "right" and "smart"? Fuck off.

Quote

my fight isn't against the left, it's against trump.  just because the left is attacking joe doesn't mean dems are all attacking the left.  most have shifted focus onto trump, because he's the bad guy here.  most posters have been complimentary of bernie and have come to terms with biden being the candidate we all have to rally around to defeat trump.

What the fuck does Bernie have to do with ANY of this? You guys are obsessed and it makes you incapable of dealing with anything.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29176

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"i haven't seen anyone doubt the validity of her story."

This is a lie. Zombie attacked the credibility of her story directly. You read that. You know that. You lied about that in your never-ending crusade against a guy you don't like on the Internet.

Here is Zombie's post, that you read and that I re-posted and you re-read:

In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recentlyexpressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?

That last part in italics. Is he attacking the credibility of her accusation or not? Answer honestly, please.

they're attacking the way she did it, not the content (which i still don't know much about either).  they're offering up what they know from the tweet.  whenever these allegations come out, credibility is always an issue.  she did not get bombarded by reporters and blurt something out, she put this forth on twitter on her own.  i have no reason to doubt her veracity, but i agree she left a lot to be desired in this format.  i wouldn't have said it the way zombie said it, but he's attacking the method, not the message.  i know it's hard to tell the difference when you've got your  outrage detector set to "ludicrous" sensitivity.

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't think it means anything that she mentions Bernie or Putin or Santa Claus. Your concern about how juvenile and repugnant it can get is bullshit because instead of going after the people who are questioning her credibility you're just doing your usual bullshit of attacking me. Playing referee again and a very biased and shitty one, at that.

i'm not attacking anyone, but i appreciate the kind words.  again, he was posting what very little info he had.  maybe he's being disingenuous but you're making a lot of leaps here.  my attack is on twitter, which has established itself as a toxic wasteland for this type of garbage.  unless this is her first day on twitter, she knew that including the bernie hashtag in the middle of a primary cycle would get attention.  this isn't because she's in the wrong, it's because twitter pretty much sucks when it comes to political discussion.

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Who the fuck are you to tell potential victims of sexual assault what is "right" and "smart"? Fuck off.

 i'm not telling her anything.  i'm telling you that i don't think the way she did it was right or smart.  your animosity tells me you agree.  but kisses right back, hombre.

14 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What the fuck does Bernie have to do with ANY of this? You guys are obsessed and it makes you incapable of dealing with anything.

not sure.  oh wait...

51 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What is the functional difference between a passionate advocate for Joe and a troll who attacks his critics (and accusers)? Tell yourself what you want, henry, you're doing the exact same job, whether it is out of love for Joe or hatred for the left.

when you say "the left", who did you mean?  bernie?  bernie supporters?  be honest.

and have a good day. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

they're attacking the way she did it, not the content (which i still don't know much about either). 

Zombie: "You consider this a credible allegation?"

Is he asking about the wisdom of her PR strategy or is he asking the about the credibility of the accusation itself? Why can't you just answer this straight?

Attacking the credibility of an accuser and covering for those who do is extremely shitty. Think about what your position here is and why it is that way. Why are you running interference for people who are attacking a woman reporting sexual assault? What are you even getting out of it?

Quote

i have no reason to doubt her veracity, but i agree she left a lot to be desired in this format.  i wouldn't have said it the way zombie said it, but he's attacking the method, not the message.  i know it's hard to tell the difference when you've got your  outrage detector set to "ludicrous" sensitivity.

No, he's not. He is saying that the accusation itself is not credible. His entire post is attacking her, specifically, not just her PR strategy.

You're not illiterate, henry, you're just locked into an argument that you refuse to get out of because you would rather continue running interference for pieces of shit than backtrack in front of me.

Be braver than that.

Quote

 i'm not telling her anything.  i'm telling you that i don't think the way she did it was right or smart.  your animosity tells me you agree. 

My animosity here is towards men who will attack a woman for reporting sexual assault that might look bad on those who align with them politically. It is also towards those who help the aforementioned piece of shit.

This is a huge part of why women don't come forward at all. They are attacked personally. Their method of reporting is attacked. Or, at absolute best for them, they are ignored completely.

Quote

  when you say "the left", who did you mean?  bernie?  bernie supporters?  be honest.

This. You are more outraged by mouthy Internet leftists than fellow-travelers who attack the credibility of women reporting sexual abuse. It's not a good look for you. Be a little more independent in your thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29176

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Zombie: "You consider this a credible allegation?"

Is he asking about the wisdom of her PR strategy or is he asking the about the credibility of the accusation itself? Why can't you just answer this straight?

Attacking the credibility of an accuser and covering for those who do is extremely shitty. Think about what your position here is and why it is that way. Why are you running interference for people who are attacking a woman reporting sexual assault? What are you even getting out of it?

the bolded part is the end of a paragraph he began with "in her tweet".  his wording overall leaves a lot to be desired, and i have no knowledge of zombie or his posting history.  i have no relationship with him on or off surly, and i don't know his political affiliations or leanings.  he listed things that he thought were counter-productive to her actual content.  typically when someone is attacking someone's veracity, they question the actual story, not the delivery onto social media.  i stayed away from it yesterday, and i probably should've today. 

the problem is that you've turned every cock-eyed glance into an assault, and i'm just tired of all the crying wolf.  let her story speak for itself.  she doesn't need you or your white-knighting involved.  i'm just over here waiting for the update on the hate-crime from the pete staffer.  

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

No, he's not. He is saying that the accusation itself is not credible. His entire post is attacking her, specifically, not just her PR strategy.

he's attacking her strategy.  specifically.  as were others.  everyone but you.  she has her story to tell, let's get her in front of some tv cameras or a print journalist.  twitter caused this nonsense, and that's not where these stories belong.

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

My animosity here is towards men who will attack a woman for reporting sexual assault that might look bad on those who align with them politically. It is also towards those who help the aforementioned piece of shit.

since i am not guilty of this, i'll let it pass.

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This. You are more outraged by mouthy Internet leftists than fellow-travelers who attack the credibility of women reporting sexual abuse. It's not a good look for you. Be a little more independent in your thinking.

i'm not outraged at all.  you said we were attacking the left, and i said we were actually complimentary (and used bernie as an example).  we mix it up with you because it's fun and you're an easy target.  i know it would make it easier for you if we all hated you personally.  that would make it easier to comprehend why a "superior candidate" is getting beat for the 2nd time in 5 years by inferior ones.

i know biden is only a marginally better option than trump, but that's where you should focus your angst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29176

Posted
Posted

as an aside, whenever i see stuff like this, i think of a ricky gervais interview, where he was asked about twitter and why he thought it had gotten so far out of control.  he said, "you go on twitter and say 'why did the chicken cross the road', and someone comments, 'you insensitive prick, my chicken died last night.'"

outrage olympics, competitive victimhood, and all the other dramatics on twitter are not new, they're just showcased because it's an election year and everybody's blood is up.

go outside, take a walk, get some fresh air.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the bolded part is the end of a paragraph he began with "in her tweet".  his wording overall leaves a lot to be desired, and i have no knowledge of zombie or his posting history.  i have no relationship with him on or off surly, and i don't know his political affiliations or leanings.  he listed things that he thought were counter-productive to her actual content.  typically when someone is attacking someone's veracity, they question the actual story, not the delivery onto social media.

One way of attacking someone's veracity is questioning the story, absolutely.

Another way of attacking someone's veracity is questioning the credibility of the accuser. You already know this, henry.

Let's read. :)

------------------------------------------
In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recently expressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?
-------------------------------------------

This post is attacking her credibility. You're working very hard to wave your hands around it, but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rougarou

Rougarou 594

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

One way of attacking someone's veracity is questioning the story, absolutely.

Another way of attacking someone's veracity is questioning the credibility of the accuser. You already know this, henry.

Let's read. :)

------------------------------------------
In her tweet: #BernieIsOurFDR. That just screams credibility.  And I've seen on twitter she repeatedly supported Biden over the last 30 years and has recently expressed a strong affinity for Putin. You consider this a credible allegation?
-------------------------------------------

This post is attacking her credibility. You're working very hard to wave your hands around it, but it is what it is.

B_T,  which one describes you a) a Juicy Smollet is telling the God's Honest Truth and to attack his credibility or question is story is racist, OR, b) Okay fine, I admit Juicy didn't do it, BUT, what he did was still noble because racism like that exists and it COULD have happened and if you question him or his credibility, you are racist.

Edited by Rougarou
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted

False choice fallacies don't help, my trollish friend. 

If you're genuinely curious as to how I reacted to the Smollett, you can find my posts on the subject here using the search function. :)

I don't think I ever commented on it because I never cared about it. Seemed like a huge mess, like he was misleading at best, and I don't even know what the truth ended up being behind that.

What's your ultimate point? Am I a soyboy SJW?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...