:lol: Anyhow, pencil in 'insane clown shit show' for November.

I wanna see Biden have a mental breakdown on stage.

Papa, son, mommy!

And eat a live baby?

Posters on here be like:

Yeah, I know Biden just ate that baby on live TV, but you know, the supreme court!

There are two sides to lung function: getting rid of CO2 (pumping) and oxygenation that happens passively in the alveoli.

The ventilator helps with oxygenation because we can hold the lungs open and provide high concentrations of O2.

It's not that we're failing completely to oxygenate and they die from that, it's systemic damage. They just get too far gone.

Yeah, I know Biden just ate that baby on live TV, but you know, the supreme court! — Baden

I dont think anybody is idolizing Biden.

Yeah, I know Biden just ate that baby on live TV, but you know, the supreme court! — Baden

Or smoke crack.

I'll try to dig up the video. Maybe you can comment more on it then.

Such are the wonders of a two party system and the self-fulfilling attitude of having no choice. — Baden

So you think the best way to find a candidate with personal integrity is to just have more parties to increase the odds one won't be a piece of shit in his personal life?

It seems like better vetting is in order more than anything else. It's not like I'm going to vote for the Bill Moose party or some such shit just because their candidate is an eagle scout.

So you think the best way to find a candidate with personal integrity is to just have more parties to increase the odds one won't be a piece of shit in his personal life? — Hanover

Funny, in every other area of life, Americans scream about the virtues of choice. You need 700 flavours of ice cream, but you can't see the point in more than two political parties. Imagine you had only two flavours of ice-cream, shit flavoured and puke flavoured. There's your political system right there, even leaving aside the fucked personalities of your current candidates for the presidency.

:ok:

I wonder how many we can get through on this forum alone before November. Shouldn't be too hard. Should be able to cross a few off already. Definitely 'Do you want Trump?' is done.

They stand for wall street. That power house of femininity and emancipation. In other words, nobody in power gives a shit about Tara.

Well...it seems that the people who helped insure Trump's election in 2016...are at work seeing to it that he will be re-elected.

What a bunch of chumps.

It's you and the Dem machine who want Trump to win. Why else would you be getting behind a senile accused rapist? You realize without suburban women, you have zero hope of winning, right? You realize vast swathes of them are not going to vote for someone they think is a rapist? And you realize you can't make them forget about Tara Reade by calling them Nazis? What you need to do is make Biden stand down. If you don't do that, I conclude you want Trump to win.

Baden
10.1k
↪Frank Apisa

It's you and the Dem machine who want Trump to win. Why else would you be getting behind a senile accused rapist? You realize without suburban women, you have zero hope of winning, right? You realize vast swathes of them are not going to vote for someone they think is a rapist? And you realize you can't make them forget about Tara Reade by calling them Nazis? What you need to do is make Biden stand down. If you don't do that, I conclude you want Trump to win. — Baden

Conclude what you want.

Last election I supported and voted for Hillary Clinton...and attempted, as much as possible, to persuade the people who spoke against her (but who obviously realized the danger of a Trump presidency) to stop speaking against her and to rally to her cause, because doing what they were doing was aiding Trump in his election bid.

This time, I realize the jerk-offs who are doing the same thing to Joe Biden...ARE jerk-offs...and not worth the effort to entreat them to pull their heads out of their asses.

Trump will be remembered in history as the most disgusting, destructive thing that ever happened to our Republic. His supporters will be regarded as slightly below him on the ladder of loyalty to nation and and sanity.

And below them...will be the people who are doing what you are doing, Baden. That bottom group will be regarded as the true sludge.

And below them...will be the people who are doing what you are doing, Baden. That bottom group will be regarded as the true sludge. — Frank Apisa

I understand the approach of supporting the ideology but not the person. You can logically be a good person and vote for a bad person. It really comes down to what degree you expect your leaders to be good people versus wanting them to support your views.

I don't follow your position tough. You blast Trump for being a disgusting person and provide that as reason not to support him, but you give Biden a pass for the same behavior.

Logic would require some consistency here. Either be a pragmatist and vote for a bad person whose politics you agree with (and so withhold your criticisms when your Trump opponents do the same), or condemn anyone who votes for a morally bad person.

I've expressed some reservation in convicting Biden myself, despite mounting evidence because I do think as a society we're too quick to judge. However I do wish to distance myself from any suggestion that the accusation against Biden couldn't possibly have occurred because digital penetration is impossible without arousal and consent. That argument indicates an irrational advocate unwilling to accept any damaging evidence.

I take your position really to be to do whatever is necessary to get Biden elected, regardless of what double standards, logical contradictions, or ad homs you have to engage in. Fair enough, but I don't think that position holds much weight in a philosophy forum and it's very doubtful that's a winning marketing strategy either.

Hanover
5.5k
And below them...will be the people who are doing what you are doing, Baden. That bottom group will be regarded as the true sludge.
— Frank Apisa

I understand the approach of supporting the ideology but not the person. You can logically be a good person and vote for a bad person. It really comes down to what degree you expect your leaders to be good people versus wanting them to support your views.

I don't follow your position tough. You blast Trump for being a disgusting person and provide that as reason not to support him, but you give Biden a pass for the same behavior. — Hanover

I most assuredly do NOT give Biden a pass on any behavior, Hanover.

I suggest, as strongly as possible, that he is a MUCH better choice when the choice becomes Biden or Trump...as it seems to be settling.

If Biden is guilty of assaulting Reade, I condemn it in the strongest terms, but I still would choose him over Trump.

ASIDE: For reasons I have outlined elsewhere, I suspect the thrust of Reade's accusations are false. Something almost certainly did happen...but not nearly the kind of thing she is alleging.

Logic would require some consistency here. Either be a pragmatist and vote for a bad person whose politics you agree with (and so withhold your criticisms when your Trump opponents do the same), or condemn anyone who votes for a morally bad person. — Hanover

Logic would not require that at all...in any way.

In any case, what you term "morals" factors in very low on my list of qualities I want in a president. I want competency, intelligence, and a desire to put the country before self as much as possible...much higher.

I've expressed some reservation in convicting Biden myself, despite mounting evidence because I do think as a society we're too quick to judge. However I do wish to distance myself from any suggestion that the accusation against Biden couldn't possibly have occurred because digital penetration is impossible without arousal and consent. That argument indicates an irrational advocate unwilling to accept any damaging evidence. — Hanover

I suspect SOMETHING happened...but not what Reade is alleging. As for disagreement with my position...I accept that you disagree. If it is necessary for you to think of me as "an irrational advocate unwilling to accept any damaging evidence"...I will have to live with that.

I take your position really to be to do whatever is necessary to get Biden elected, regardless of what double standards, logical contradictions, or ad homs you have to engage in. Fair enough, but I don't think that position holds much weight in a philosophy forum and it's very doubtful that's a winning marketing strategy either. — Hanover

"Take" whatever you want regarding my "position" on this issue. I have stated my position clearly...and it does not match up with your characterization of it.

In any case, what you term "morals" factors in very low on my list of qualities I want in a president. — Frank Apisa

So if it turned out Biden was a paedophile, you'd still support him? (Or to make it more analogous, let's say he was credibly accused of paedophilia). What exactly would he have to do for you not to support him?

Oh God Biden's going to fucking die, and he'll take anyone who has cared about sexual assault and rape down with him. This is not a take-down of Biden - this is a take-down of anyone who ever asked that women's grievances be taken seriously. Biden's actually going to fucking ruin the credibility of an entire generation and cause for justice. Holy shit.

Baden
10.1k
In any case, what you term "morals" factors in very low on my list of qualities I want in a president.
— Frank Apisa

So if it turned out Biden was a paedophile, you'd still support him? (Or to make it more analogous, let's say he was credibly accused of paedophilia). What exactly would he have to do for you not to support him? — Baden

One...I said "morals" (or what others consider "morals')...were low on my list of qualifications...not absent from the list. I would, like any other sane person, hope for a "moral" president. But the term "morals" can be rather twisted. There are some (probably many, in the US) who would consider being "God fearing" to be moral...and being agnostic or atheistic to be immoral. I consider that to be nonsense.

Two...if a CREDIBLE accusation of pedophilia were made against Biden...I would be hugely disappointed. HUGELY! (I would also be hugely skeptical.)

But if it were a choice between an accused pedophile Joe Biden and Trump...

...I would choose Biden before Trump in an instant.

In my opinion, Trump MUST BE removed from office.

What a bunch of chumps. — Frank Apisa

Chimps?

The ad is spot on. The Dems are horribly exposed here.

But if it were a choice between an accused pedophile Joe Biden and Trump...

...I would choose Biden before Trump in an instant. — Frank Apisa

Seek help.

But if it were a choice between an accused pedophile Joe Biden and Trump...

...I would choose Biden before Trump in an instant.
— Frank Apisa

Seek help. — Baden

For what?

I'm getting mad depression dudes. Idk what's going on lately.

Shawn
10.6k
I'm getting mad depression dudes. Idk what's going on lately. — Shawn

Some kind of virus goin' around.

Oh God Biden's going to fucking die, and he'll take anyone who has cared about sexual assault and rape down with him. This is not a take-down of Biden - this is a take-down of anyone who ever asked that women's grievances be taken seriously. Biden's actually going to fucking ruin the credibility of an entire generation and cause for justice. Holy shit. — StreetlightX

Maybe a sensible Biden supporter can address this. How much are you willing to tear down for Biden? And why? Why can't you get away from the guy? The chances the Reade thing is going to be resolved in his favor are extremely low right now. Why not campaign to get him removed? Start now before it's too late.

This is Linda Hirshman with a fuck-ton more interest in the question than you'll ever have.

From the NYT


"I’ll vote for Mr. Biden this fall.

I won’t say it will be easy. I have been writing on and agitating for women’s equality since “The Feminine Mystique” came out in 1963. I know how supposedly “liberal” men abused the sexual revolution in every imaginable way. I am unimpressed by their lip service to feminism, their Harvard degrees or their donations to feminist causes.

In 1998, I was one of a few establishment feminists to argue on behalf of Monica Lewinsky, when the unofficial representative of the movement, Gloria Steinem, threw her under the bus in the pages of The New York Times to protect Bill Clinton. I maintained my position until, two decades and a #MeToo movement later, Ms. Steinem issued a non-apology for the essay. So I hate, hate, hate to say the following.

Suck it up and make the utilitarian bargain.

All major Democratic Party figures have indicated they’re not budging on the presumptive nominee, and the transaction costs of replacing him would be suicidal. Barring some miracle, it’s going to be Mr. Biden."

She says dispense with the "gotcha" you chimps.

If all you've got is ad homs and a quote from one random feminist who supports Biden, you've got nothing. When you can formulate an argument of your own, feel free to do so.

If all you've got is ad homs and a quote from one random feminist who supports Biden, you've got nothing. When you can formulate an argument of your own, feel free to do so. — Baden

You asked for a Biden supporter's viewpoint, I gave you one. It was more than a quote because I linked the NYT article it's from.

If you didnt understand her, I could try to help you, but I certainly don't need an argument to provide you with what you asked for.

I asked for a viewpoint from posters here. I can't exactly carry on a debate with her, can I? Or do you just want me to dig up quotes from those who don't support Biden as a riposte? And there's nothing to what she said as it stands. It was "I'm a feminist and I support Biden because > utilitarianism". That's it. Period. So, what does that add to the conversation, frank?