Rape/Sexual Assault Culture

Hold your amusement. You missed the discussion, which revealed many posters who agreed they would do the same in regard to electing Clinton versus a republican candidate.

 

Against somebody who killed 1 million people. Not this judge versus that judge.

 

Let me try a different angle, because this "who deserves the vote in a hypothetical race" has gotten us off track.

The WH should have handled Sunday's news by expressing concern over the allegation and for the apparent victim. The WH could then for political reasons state that as this alleged act occurred 37 years ago, there's no point in going through further investigations, and that the WH has full confidence that Brett Kavanaugh will continue to be a model professional. Something like that.

But to attack the accuser? And the reporters who did the research? Come on. That's actively aiding and abetting a sexual-assault culture. That's effectively saying, "Don't listen to women, they make stuff up." That Trump would do such a thing is expected, as he's a serial liar and sexual assaulter himself,, but that the party's leaders would line up behind the serial liar and sexual assaulter, and that its voters (from the comments that I read) would pile on by attacking the accuser and reports ... that's terrible.

 

It's also disingenuous because the Democrats faced a similar situation only recently, and their reaction was completely different. Party leaders didn't jump on Al Franken's accusers, nor did they attack the journalists, and the accusations were taken so seriously that Franken was pushed out of his position.

The two parties today treat sexual assault allegations very differently. Period.

 

It would be a vile argument even if correct.

 

It is both correct and vile.

Most economic motivations are.

 

Trump wasn't nominated because GOP voters thought that his economic (or judicial) policies were better than Ted Cruz's or Jeb Bush's. He was nominated because he was more vile than they were. He got nominated for The Wall, not for economic proposals.

So many the argument holds that Trump won in the general election because people thought that his economic policies were so much better than Hillary's that they were willing to hold their noses for him -- I doubt that argument, but maybe -- but it does not work for explaining how Trump was nominated in the first place.

 

The article has an update:

An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book's account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.​

​

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html

Sounds like this is some shitty journalism and really ********ing careless editing. The authors are on NPR's Fresh Air today, IIRC, so I'm curious if they address this.,

 

It's immaterial to the central issue, which is that Trump and the GOP shouldn't be jumping on people making allegations of sexual assault, but I confess that I am confused. The newspaper article features discussions with Ms. Ramirez. Did she decline to speak at one point, then decide to speak at another?

 

Same here. Which is why I find it a problem.

 

There's nothing disingenuous about it. In fact it is the perfect example of putting your cognitive dissonance and biases on display.

 

Women, if you're being sexually assaulted make sure you take close notice of your attacker's dick because Ben Shapiro wants to know exactly what it looks like https://t.co/08JKgMBQS4

— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) September 16, 2019

 

You underestimate the stupidity of people that think Tariffs are good.

That stupidity used to be part of the left, the democratic party, in some ways it still is, they just don't get attention because Trump is doing them.

Bashing Chinese manufacturers or Mexican manufacturers for stealing our jobs was something that both Trump and Sanders were doing.

There is a reason on why a segment of union members had Trump and Sanders are their #1 and #2 choices.

But fortunately, because tariffs are stupid regardless on what party calls for them.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...-trump-a-second-term?utm_source=pocket-newtab

 

I'd consider this an acceptable visual from the type of GOP that knowingly confirmed a rapist to begin with. But this is a new day, and they don't have to dogwhistle any longer.

Yes, it is.

It's now expected that the GOP would do just this sort of thing, upgrading from confirming a sexual harasser to confirming a sexual assaulter. With great power comes great power. As far as the voters go, there aren't a lot of confirmed Trump voters here. A lot of these people knew they didn't need to actually vote for Trump to profit off his deeds- they just needed to not vote for Hillary and Trump would win. "I didn't torch that building- I just stood and watched the arsonist pick up the lighter and the gasoline. There's no law against owning both a lighter and gasoline..."

 

Many said they would pick Clinton over Dole.

But I'm sorry to disturb the echo chamber here. Work has picked up again so I shall make my exit.

 

It shouldn't be that hard to say that Nazis are bad. Give it a try sometime.

 

Tweeden's story wasn't that compelling, but it's not what got Franken canned anyway. It was the other ~5 women who said Franken was very handsy.

Whether being handsy, in public in front of a bunch of people where you obviously aren't trying to get someone in bed, but you're showing a lack of boundaries and respect for women's bodily autonomy...whether that's enough to make a person leave the Senate, we can debate that.