Heh.

Where are you hiding? Just making sure that everything is well with you and yours! Miss ya!

I'm here. Been playing catch-up for days. Almost there too.

XOXOXOXO

Wake up. Wise up. Rise up.
Get Real.

Shut up. Shut up. Shut up.
Get lost.

That's French. :)

Frankly, I don't give a shit about people like you, excuse my French.

Ce n'est pas français.

Nicely put, Russ.

I appreciate that, Liz. But that said, you have got to stop taking any comment that isn’t pro-Joe as a personal insult.... it is not going to win over undecided voters who have yet to discover for themselves all of the great things about Biden. Seriously, I half expect you to challenge someone to “step outside” for insulting your man. That isn’t the best way to change someone’s opinion...although it does work occasionally, but that’s a rare thing.

So relax, Killer...we have a long road to take before we reach Election Day...pace yourself!

Where are you hiding? Just making sure that everything is well with you and yours! Miss ya!

Russ

Prima facie, it's not a needle that can be threaded. He has to be tolerable to people like me, while also being tolerable to people who consider it axiomatic that a man has an absolute entitlement to put his hands anywhere that doesn't threaten to undermine another man's confidence that his children are biologically his, and that those limits have to be defined by authoritarian social norms, not by the woman's consent.

WTF? Why would he want to be, much less NEED to be, tolerable to ”people who consider it axiomatic that a man has an absolute entitlement to put his hands anywhere that doesn't threaten to undermine another man's confidence that his children are biologically his, and that those limits have to be defined by authoritarian social norms, not by the woman's consent?”. Talk about going to extremes! Do you hear the phrase “drama queen” used often when people are describing you?

And why should Biden jump thru hoops for you to find him “tolerable”? I’d rather have a candidate standing by his beliefs, convictions, and actions than have someone willing to do or say whatever it takes to get elected! You don’t care for Biden being the Democrat’s nominee, that’s been clear from day one. This story is already on the way out. If you cannot see it for the GOP’s disinformation trap that it was, then clean your glasses.

Especially when you talk about Biden's actions coming from a place of trying to comfort and encourage and not from a sexual place.

This is key.

I have a real problem trusting people who claim to be supporters or even “friends” with Joe Biden who went to the press to complain about his actions without going to him first.

Most, if not all, of the above women claimed that they did not think Biden’s actions were sexually motivated — they were just uncomfortable by his touching them.. More than one said that Biden was attempting to comfort them after they had experienced a hardship. If you don’t believe that his actions were sexually motivated, why in the world would you think talking to the media is the best way to let Biden know that he had made you feel uncomfortable?!?

Biden is a “hugger” — a man who emphasizes with what others are feeling and who wants them to know that they aren’t alone. He’s comfortable with a level of physical contact with those he is close to that others might find too bad intimate. Reade is the only person who has claimed that Biden touching her constituted sexual assault and that he had done so intentionally. After close to 4 decades of public service and being in the public eye and this is the sole woman to make such a claim??? One thing that men in positions of power who cheat on their partners all have in common is that it is never just one time that they cheat.

As for your friend who believes Reade, does she know of any person who has been sexually assaulted — and who has come to recognize that they were assaulted — who then spoke highly of their attacker? Reade’s neighbor said that Reade claimed years ago how Biden had penetrated her with his fingers, so Reade was not in denial of what she had experienced. Then both the neighbor and Reade have supported Biden in past elections??? I cannot fathom ever voting for someone that I believe sexually assaulted a good friend...much less voting for someone who sexually assaulted me!

These are the reasons to believe Biden over Reade. Neither Biden’s past actions nor Reade’s past actions support her claim that Biden sexually assaulted her.

Probably not.

Biden has commented also on the need for investigations to find the truth of any given matter. Leaving this part out not only distorts the meaning but imparts whole new meaning.

Those people are just being ridiculous.

I have seen Biden put his hands on peoples' shoulders and head and back - but only ever to show empathy or to give encouragement.

The people you cite are up to something else. And, if you can't see that, then I guess I'll have to put you on the shelf next to Michale. Go ahead, now, try to push my buttons.

even if your friend were right and tara reade were 100% accurate in all her accounts, is another four years of donald trump's presidency really the outcome she'd like to see? that's certainly showin' em.

JL

On Lucy Flores's shoulders, in what she described as "an intimate way reserved for close friends, family, or romantic partners". On Amy Coll's shoulders "for a beat too long". On Sofie Karasek's hands when she didn't want them there. On Amy Stokes Lappos, who said he "put his hands behind my head and pulled me close and I thought, 'he's going to kiss me.'" On Caitlyn Caruso's thigh. Down D J Hill's back. On the back of Vail Kohnert-Yount's head, as he allegedly pressed his forehead to hers.

I quoted the relevant part, and linked the source I got it from. I don't think that my selection distorted the meaning at all.

So what? Is there anyone on the planet who cares what you do or don't give a shit about? I'm talking about what Biden needs to do in order to win the general election. You probably should give a shit about that.

Elections are determined mostly by who decides to vote. I have a friend in a swing state, whom I talk with online, who flat-out believes Tara Reade. She currently intends to leave the top line of her ballot blank, and to put all her actual efforts (donations, yard sign, whatever) into the Senate races. What I say to her, or don't say, is one of the factors influencing whether she decides to vote for Joe Biden or not. That kind of interaction is happening among millions of people. Not many millions, out of the hundreds of millions of people in the country, but it only takes a few tens of thousands of swing-state votes to turn the election.

https://time.com/5403068/joe-biden-on-christine-blasey-ford/

But, I'm not going to let you get away with that.

Where did he put his hands?

I think the hair-sniffing weirdness is what makes the Tara Reade story dangerous. Tara Reade is not a "perfect victim". Dismissing her accusation would be automatic, for the general electorate, if not for other stories of Biden putting his hands where they shouldn't have been.

I don't know if there is a satisfactory solution. Prima facie, it's not a needle that can be threaded. He has to be tolerable to people like me, while also being tolerable to people who consider it axiomatic that a man has an absolute entitlement to put his hands anywhere that doesn't threaten to undermine another man's confidence that his children are biologically his, and that those limits have to be defined by authoritarian social norms, not by the woman's consent.

First, he needs to articulate a standard of how to deal with such things, that's acceptable even to people like me. Or rather, he needs to reaffirm and expand on the one he stated in the case of Christine Blasey Ford: always start from the presumption that an accuser is telling the truth about the essence of the allegation, even if details change, even if major parts are left out the first time she makes the accusation. Then explain something about how to take it seriously, going from there. A presumption isn't really defined, in any operational sense, until you've specified how it can be overcome, according to the relevant standards of proof. But he also needs to avoid alienating the people who absolutely don't care if it's true, and really don't want it ever to be taken seriously at all. It's a tough needle to thread.

But, done properly, it builds on something he did right. He didn't say "believe all women, and that's that", when many people on our side of the aisle were speaking carelessly in such proclamations. He said "you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real", and presumptions are made to be refuted. The latter part is me saying it, not him. But it's true. That's the whole point of them, and it's implicit in what he said when the shoe was on the other foot. He just needs to take that implication seriously now.

And I do mean now. It needs to be put to rest before the general electorate starts paying attention, with a lot of time to spare. He probably shouldn't do most of this in person, but he should do it. Whoever says it should be a recognizable proxy, someone in the campaign or someone with a long history of close association with him personally.

Then, for several weeks after that's over with, someone needs to generate news hooks about the sexual assault and rape cases that Trump has bragged about. Effective enough that people hear about them who don't normally follow political news. Numerous enough that people get tired of hearing of them. And soon enough that they're over and done with before the general electorate starts paying attention to the campaign.

And, Biden should consider responding to Trump's tweets as required as one way to show off the Biden leadership style and ability to put out persuasive arguments that might even change a few minds in Trump's twitterverse. Stranger things have already happened.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/opinions-joe-biden-how-the-white-house-coronavirus-response-presents-us-with-a-false-choice/ar-BB13TMLg

Well, in my book, he is. :)

Those appear to be national polling stats and we do not have a national presidential election. Our Tangerine Nightmare should have taught you not to feel reassured by them. Biden's not been relentlessly demonized for 20 years like HilRod (and he's not a woman), but he's not the cat's pajamas either. If he wants to win, he'd better make this about the hideousness of Nazi Drumpf.

C'mon. The Obama smears have not even begun.

BTW - China! is trying to kill Americans.

Today I came across a comment that gave me some reassurance of the outcome of the presidential election.

This commenter listed two reasons that made him hopeful about Trump's political demise.

First, he said that Trump's popularity/job approval/support has been consistently at 45% +/- 3% and that on a good day, he loses by 4%; on a better day he loses by 16%.

Secondly, he made the infinitely important point that Hillary Clinton is no Joe Biden. Of the 20% of voters in 2016 who disliked Trump AND Hillary, most broke for Trump. This year, that 20% break even more decidedly for Biden.

That makes perfect sense to me. What say you?