And the 2020 winner is ... dangerous distrust

[McLoofus 35,182]

15 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

But I do think for whatever reason, conservatives seem to be more prone in this moment to it overall than moderates and those left of center.

Feel free to ignore the below word vomit, but...

I suspect that it stems from the technocracy driving the economy. It's true that a LOT of people have been left behind in the microchip age, and they are overwhelmingly white conservatives. And they are angry, scared, and desperate. (Not a shot and not news to anyone here. We all agree that's why trump won in 2016.) So it's those people who are most focused on identifying the cause of all their problems and who will be most emotionally swayed by the more extreme takes in the media. As discussed before, it's not dissimilar to how people become radicalized in every culture. It's human nature and that's why, were the shoe on the other foot, no, Democrats would not behave the same way.

It's true that the trump presidency didn't actually make life *tangibly* worse for liberals. (Beyond his mishandling of the pandemic. Hell of an asterisk right there.) So if he'd won again, yes, we'd continue to be miserable emotionally and terrified of a continued attack on the checks and balances that define our democracy, but we'd still have our jobs and our retirement funds and we'd still be able to afford whatever kind of standard of living and security we currently had. We wouldn't require an explanation for all the extreme problems in our life because we wouldn't have them. We wouldn't feel like life isn't fair, except of course for the marginalized communities to whom trump doesn't even try to appeal. 

So these ideas that everything is rigged, the brown people are stealing our jobs, the elites run all the media, etc all come from the same place, and wouldn't dominate the collective mindset of liberals like they do under-educated and/or under-employed, conservative whites. Just totally different circumstances.

I mean, jeez, we all agree there's a giant chasm dividing this country. To assume that both sides would react to things the same way is counter-intuitive at best.  

[aubiefifty 16,848]

On 11/30/2020 at 9:28 AM, DKW 86 said:

I think you are politically masturbating at this point. If anyone thought Trump was going to act like an adult they need their heads checked. He has won nothing. He will be gone. People like you are so in to TDS y’all have lost your minds. The rest of America has moved on and are decorating the trees. You should to. These lower life forms that have acted like howler monkeys about the “Existential Threat” of Trump are just nuts. He will be gone in a few weeks and we all know it. I think even his best backers know that. 

 saying those holding trump accountable have tds and trump is still doing crazy crap including trying to steal an election and getting people standing up to him over election results threats and all the above is a pretty big stretch. i will call trump out on any stupid crap he ever does. all you are doing is taking shots and looking down on folks because we are not indies. and you cannot make statements like that without including me as we all know i have been calling trump on his bull for years. you bang everyone on the right and the left when your political party is full of batsh*t crazies. at least clean up your own game before you start lecturing the rest of us. good grief.

[DKW 86 7,437]

Dude, get a grip. Nothing is going to happen to Trump, that is not how DC works. It is over and everyone knows that including Trump. He is just growling to keep his base sending in the money. 
 

We are wasting time on the clown at this point. Look, love everyone here, I mean it. Even homey at some basic level. Trump is gone. Does anyone here expect him to act like a man? I dont. He never has. Why would you expect it now? 
 

But make no mistake. He is defeated and gone. We’re the elections perfect? Of course not, none ever are. But the level of imperfection in no way is on any level to over turn anything. Barr just admitted that. If Barr says it, then DJT’s time is up. 

[DKW 86 7,437]

By the way, I know full well that the Progs have crazies too. But my crazies want people fed, educated, and covered with healthcare. The other two parties have had their time in power over the last 220 years or so and have failed.  I just think it is time for someone else to try and fix these things. 😉

[wdefromtx 3,159]

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

Just to clarify:   Do you mean "rigged" (as in by our own system) or "influenced" by Russian social media proxies?

You still stuck on Russia? Call it rigged, influenced, free and fair.....whatever. Doesn’t matter. 42% thought it wasn’t free and fair then. Were you one of that 42%? 

[TitanTiger 20,506]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

You still stuck on Russia? Call it rigged, influenced, free and fair.....whatever. Doesn’t matter. 42% thought it wasn’t free and fair then. Were you one of that 42%? 

I mean, it kinda matters.  It's one thing for an outside enemy like China or Russia to put sock puppets all over social media to spread rumors and gossip to influence an election.  It's an entirely different level to suggest that forces within our own country tampered with electronic voting machines so they were programmed with algorithms to "flip" votes from Biden to Trump, to make accusations of falsifying results, submitting fake mail-in ballots and so on.  

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I mean, it kinda matters.  It's one thing for an outside enemy like China or Russia to put sock puppets all over social media to spread rumors and gossip to influence an election.  It's an entirely different level to suggest that forces within our own country tampered with electronic voting machines so they were programmed with algorithms to "flip" votes from Biden to Trump, to make accusations of falsifying results, submitting fake mail-in ballots and so on.  

"Kinda", in this case, meaning "really, truly, obviously". 

The former sews distrust in our enemies and their preferred candidate. 

The latter sews distrust in our entire democracy. 

Captain Obvious standing by on Zoom waiting for a few stragglers to join the meeting. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

23 hours ago, homersapien said:

And what does Apple's actions have to do with Democratic policies?    Man, you are really grasping here.

A far better example - ecologically speaking - of unintended or counter-productive consequences would be the use of ETOH (from corn in gasoline).  Course that's an idea that is pushed primarily by "red", corn-producing states. 

https://e360.yale.edu/features/the_case_against_ethanol_bad_for_environment

 

Thanks for proving my point. I never said it was all one sided. I guess Biden didn’t get the memo....or maybe he just wants their votes first?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/16/energy-202-joe-biden-ethanol-push-woo-iowa-farmers-sets-up-tension-with-environmentalists/%3foutputType=amp
 

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

35 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I mean, it kinda matters.  It's one thing for an outside enemy like China or Russia to put sock puppets all over social media to spread rumors and gossip to influence an election.  It's an entirely different level to suggest that forces within our own country tampered with electronic voting machines so they were programmed with algorithms to "flip" votes from Biden to Trump, to make accusations of falsifying results, submitting fake mail-in ballots and so on.  

Your entitled to your opinion. Personally any cause of distrust in our election process is an issue. I don’t agree with Trump fanning the flames, he played on the doubts that many had for awhile though. But some of y’all act like this country will go into total anarchy because of him. We won’t, once we remove that cyst things will get back to normal. 

[TitanTiger 20,506]

51 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Your entitled to your opinion. Personally any cause of distrust in our election process is an issue.

No one's suggesting that both things aren't "an issue."  What we're saying is, all issues are not created equal.  Some are far more serious than others.  If you can't see that the latter is far more troublesome than the former, I don't know what to tell you.

 

51 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

I don’t agree with Trump fanning the flames, he played on the doubts that many had for awhile though. But some of y’all act like this country will go into total anarchy because of him. We won’t, once we remove that cyst things will get back to normal. 

I think it creates on going problems for him to play on the influence he has to continue to sow discord and division and suspicion over the election being legit, over the news media anytime they don't kiss his ass sufficiently, the whole thing.  No one here as suggested we're falling into "total anarchy" but we are saying that what he's doing is damaging and the damage won't necessarily go away just because you remove the cancer from the Oval Office.

[homersapien 11,409]

20 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

You need to ask your boy Loof about that....those were his words not mine.........

 

The only thing that scares me about liberals (and conservatives for that matter) is how gullible you people are. You should strive for better change than in this world than what your cult leaders give you. But if being happy with policies that make very little difference when better can actually be achieved.....you do you.

Nice post! 

First you evade a direct question, then follow with bunch of  poo flinging.

I think you are in the wrong forum. 

[homersapien 11,409]

5 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

You still stuck on Russia? Call it rigged, influenced, free and fair.....whatever. Doesn’t matter. 42% thought it wasn’t free and fair then. Were you one of that 42%? 

There's a distinct difference between the terms "rigged and "influenced".

"Rigged"suggests some sort of internal (to our election systems) - maybe a nefarious ghost in the machine, corrupt handling or stuffing of ballots, etc.

"Influence" would refer to an attempt to fool or hoodwink voters to favor or disfavor a given candidate. Examples would be false information broadly distributed through social media, or perhaps including things like illegal contributions.

So if you are claiming the Democrats say the 2016 election was rigged, you would be wrong.

And if you truly don't differentiate the two, then I am with Titan.  I don't know what to say.  They are completely different issues, with different implications, requiring different responses.

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

No one's suggesting that both things aren't "an issue."  What we're saying is, all issues are not created equal.  Some are far more serious than others.  If you can't see that the latter is far more troublesome than the former, I don't know what to tell you.

 

I think it creates on going problems for him to play on the influence he has to continue to sow discord and division and suspicion over the election being legit, over the news media anytime they don't kiss his ass sufficiently, the whole thing.  No one here as suggested we're falling into "total anarchy" but we are saying that what he's doing is damaging and the damage won't necessarily go away just because you remove the cancer from the Oval Office.

Where’s all this discord? Things look status quo as far as I’m concerned. You can’t say it’s that 70% that are causing problems because I’m pretty sure most will just move on like the people that thought Hillary should have won. Most of the trump supporters I know, while they think some cheating happened have moved on. 
 

Apparently y’all are way more pessimistic than I thought, but then again that seems to be a liberal trademark with all the doom and gloom. I think this country will be just fine once we move on. Will it be instant, no but realistically all Trump did was expose a problem we’ve needed to address for a long time. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Nice post! 

First you evade a direct question, then follow with bunch of  poo flinging.

I think you are in the wrong forum. 

Actually that first sentence was something Loof said. Soooooo ask him. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

There's a distinct difference between the terms "rigged and "influenced".

"Rigged"suggests some sort of internal (to our election systems) - maybe a nefarious ghost in the machine, corrupt handling or stuffing of ballots, etc.

"Influence" would refer to an attempt to fool or hoodwink voters to favor or disfavor a given candidate. Examples would be false information broadly distributed through social media, or perhaps including things like illegal contributions.

So if you are claiming the Democrats say the 2016 election was rigged, you would be wrong.

And if you truly don't differentiate the two, then I am with Titan.  I don't know what to say.  They are completely different issues, with different implications, requiring different responses.

 

No actually the question in that poll specifically said rigged. Want to try again chief? 

[TitanTiger 20,506]

48 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Where’s all this discord? Things look status quo as far as I’m concerned. You can’t say it’s that 70% that are causing problems because I’m pretty sure most will just move on like the people that thought Hillary should have won. Most of the trump supporters I know, while they think some cheating happened have moved on. 
 

Apparently y’all are way more pessimistic than I thought, but then again that seems to be a liberal trademark with all the doom and gloom. I think this country will be just fine once we move on. Will it be instant, no but realistically all Trump did was expose a problem we’ve needed to address for a long time. 

First, I'm not a liberal.  I know it's hard for some to fathom that a pro-life, pro-family, orthodox Christian, who believes in traditional understandings of marriage and gender would dare criticize Republicans and would be more concerned with things he sees going wrong in his own tribe than in the other tribe, but it happens.  We exist.

Second, I think Trumpism has been a cancer to conservatism and the GOP.  And while I'd love to believe that once Trump is out of office there will be a correction to historical norms, I think the cancer has a ways to go before it's excised from the party completely, if it ever does. We've had two election cycles worth of GOP House and Senate candidates who've made it into Congress based on platforms that amount to little more than how much better they'd be at French-kissing Trump's ass than the rest of the field.  It'll take some time to cycle those know-nothings out.  And hell, DJT is reportedly considering not showing up to the inauguration and instead holding an event of his own to announce he plans to run again in 4 years.  And you'd have to be crazy to think he wouldn't have an excellent chance to win the damn nomination again.

So while I'd love to feel assured we're all just going to "move on," I'm not really seeing a lot of evidence that's going to be the case just yet.  I hope I'm wrong.

[TitanTiger 20,506]

I should clarify.  It's hard to just declare one is "conservative" or "liberal" anymore.  Generally in real life if someone asks me which I am my response is "on what issue?"

If we're talking about abortion or transgender issues - pretty damn conservative.

If we're talking about immigration, it's just not an issue I get energized about the way most Republicans seem to.  I'm ok with a path to citizenship for those already here and without a criminal record.  I also think we should know who is coming and going across our borders.  I don't see any rationale for being a**holes to the DACA kids or separating children from parents at the border.  So probably skew a bit more liberal on that.

If we're talking about gay marriage and the domino effect that issues around sexuality and gender has on religious conservatives and rights of conscience - conservative.

By the same token I don't believe any secular (non-religious) organization or business should be permitted to refuse service to a person, refuse to employ a person, refuse to lease housing to a person and so on because they are gay or transgender.  And even religious organizations should not be refusing to serve someone in those categories. So, more left on that one?

If we're talking about whether we should have universal health care coverage of some kind - I lean left on that one.  There's more than one way to try and accomplish it but I think it's a goal we should pursue and that it's a black mark on America that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy is medical bills.

On tax policy, I'm not a libertarian so the phrase "taxation is theft" sounds like something a middle schooler comes up with after reading too much Ayn Rand.  I think that taxes can be too high such that they create a drag on economic growth and prosperity and I think they can be too low such that they send deficits spiraling out of control and hinder our ability to take care of things that are beneficial to a good society to live in.  I also think that extremely rich people have used their power and influence to skew the tax system so that the rest of us are left holding the bill. So center-left on that?

I think that being pro-life should be more than just opposition to abortion.  So I'm in favor of paid family leave after the birth of a child for at least three months, preferably more.  I think that we should come up with ways to incentivize companies, colleges and so on to provide on site daycare.  I think universal health care ties into this as well.  If you really want abortion rates to plummet, attack the things the make it harder for women and families to have children.  I don't think these things should be considered anti-conservative but for whatever reason they are, so more liberal on these things.

I think you can be pro-military and pro-American military strength as a deterrent to countries like China, Russia, Iran and so forth and believe we spend too much on defense.  I'm with Eisenhower on this - the military-industrial complex is out of control and eats up too much of the budget. So, center-left here.

I could go on, but I hope I've made my point.  I don't sign up for an entire slate of political positions anymore.  I try as a Christian to look at issues and positions and evaluate them in light of the Scriptures.  I don't subscribe to the notion that real Christians are to be "The Republican Party at Prayer."  Neither party lines up with Biblical teaching perfectly so I will support a party and its representatives where I believe they are doing right and I will oppose them where I believe they are doing wrong.  I don't know any other way to do it and be faithful.

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

First, I'm not a liberal.  I know it's hard for some to fathom that a pro-life, pro-family, orthodox Christian, who believes in traditional understandings of marriage and gender would dare criticize Republicans and would be more concerned with things he sees going wrong in his own tribe than in the other tribe, but it happens.  We exist.

Second, I think Trumpism has been a cancer to conservatism and the GOP.  And while I'd love to believe that once Trump is out of office there will be a correction to historical norms, I think the cancer has a ways to go before it's excised from the party completely, if it ever does. We've had two election cycles worth of GOP House and Senate candidates who've made it into Congress based on platforms that amount to little more than how much better they'd be at French-kissing Trump's ass than the rest of the field.  It'll take some time to cycle those know-nothings out.  And hell, DJT is reportedly considering not showing up to the inauguration and instead holding an event of his own to announce he plans to run again in 4 years.  And you'd have to be crazy to think he wouldn't have an excellent chance to win the damn nomination again.

So while I'd love to feel assured we're all just going to "move on," I'm not really seeing a lot of evidence that's going to be the case just yet.  I hope I'm wrong.

This has been going on way longer than Trump. At worst we go back to 2015. I am sure he stands a good chance to win the nomination again. Until things in this country change with politicians we will have people like him rise to the top.

[wdefromtx 3,159]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I should clarify.  It's hard to just declare one is "conservative" or "liberal" anymore.  Generally in real life if someone asks me which I am my response is "on what issue?"

If we're talking about abortion or transgender issues - pretty damn conservative.

If we're talking about immigration, it's just not an issue I get energized about the way most Republicans seem to.  I'm ok with a path to citizenship for those already here and without a criminal record.  I also think we should know who is coming and going across our borders.  I don't see any rationale for being a**holes to the DACA kids or separating children from parents at the border.  So probably skew a bit more liberal on that.

If we're talking about gay marriage and the domino effect that issues around sexuality and gender has on religious conservatives and rights of conscience - conservative.

By the same token I don't believe any secular (non-religious) organization or business should be permitted to refuse service to a person, refuse to employ a person, refuse to lease housing to a person and so on because they are gay or transgender.  And even religious organizations should not be refusing to serve someone in those categories. So, more left on that one?

If we're talking about whether we should have universal health care coverage of some kind - I lean left on that one.  There's more than one way to try and accomplish it but I think it's a goal we should pursue and that it's a black mark on America that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy is medical bills.

On tax policy, I'm not a libertarian so the phrase "taxation is theft" sounds like something a middle schooler comes up with after reading too much Ayn Rand.  I think that taxes can be too high such that they create a drag on economic growth and prosperity and I think they can be too low such that they send deficits spiraling out of control and hinder our ability to take care of things that are beneficial to a good society to live in.  I also think that extremely rich people have used their power and influence to skew the tax system so that the rest of us are left holding the bill. So center-left on that?

I think that being pro-life should be more than just opposition to abortion.  So I'm in favor of paid family leave after the birth of a child for at least three months, preferably more.  I think that we should come up with ways to incentivize companies, colleges and so on to provide on site daycare.  I think universal health care ties into this as well.  If you really want abortion rates to plummet, attack the things the make it harder for women and families to have children.  I don't think these things should be considered anti-conservative but for whatever reason they are, so more liberal on these things.

I think you can be pro-military and pro-American military strength as a deterrent to countries like China, Russia, Iran and so forth and believe we spend too much on defense.  I'm with Eisenhower on this - the military-industrial complex is out of control and eats up too much of the budget. So, center-left here.

I could go on, but I hope I've made my point.  I don't sign up for an entire slate of political positions anymore.  I try as a Christian to look at issues and positions and evaluate them in light of the Scriptures.  I don't subscribe to the notion that real Christians are to be "The Republican Party at Prayer."  Neither party lines up with Biblical teaching perfectly so I will support a party and its representatives where I believe they are doing right and I will oppose them where I believe they are doing wrong.  I don't know any other way to do it and be faithful.

 

This is interesting because there is a clear difference between Religious Conservatives and being Politically Conservative. Many conservatives are freaks and are for gay marriage, open marriage, etc. But have to act like they are against it only to make sure they get the religious votes. LOL

[johnnyAU 3,635]

I'd say I'm more liberal than most conservatives on a few topics, and more conservative than most liberals on a few, which puts me almost dead in the center, with a slight lean libertarian. I'm also not as extremely political as many of the hard core ideologues around.  The subject was never really brought up in my family growing up. Both of my parents passed without us having any idea which side they may have been on.  Judging by the hate spewing vitriol thrown around online and the severe toll that choosing one side or another is having on families and friendships currently, looking back it was much more peaceful...and I miss it. 

As harmonious as my own family has been through the years, which results from my wife and I having rational discussions about most life decisions, and making sure we are on the same page raising the kids, we are at odds politically on some issues. The good thing is that we try and teach the kids to find their own paths, and do their own research without taking everything at face value. That is getting harder and harder to do with the abundance of social media and 24-7 access. 

[DKW 86 7,437]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

I should clarify.  It's hard to just declare one is "conservative" or "liberal" anymore.  Generally in real life if someone asks me which I am my response is "on what issue?"

If we're talking about abortion or transgender issues - pretty damn conservative.

If we're talking about immigration, it's just not an issue I get energized about the way most Republicans seem to.  I'm ok with a path to citizenship for those already here and without a criminal record.  I also think we should know who is coming and going across our borders.  I don't see any rationale for being a**holes to the DACA kids or separating children from parents at the border.  So probably skew a bit more liberal on that.

If we're talking about gay marriage and the domino effect that issues around sexuality and gender has on religious conservatives and rights of conscience - conservative.

By the same token I don't believe any secular (non-religious) organization or business should be permitted to refuse service to a person, refuse to employ a person, refuse to lease housing to a person and so on because they are gay or transgender.  And even religious organizations should not be refusing to serve someone in those categories. So, more left on that one?

If we're talking about whether we should have universal health care coverage of some kind - I lean left on that one.  There's more than one way to try and accomplish it but I think it's a goal we should pursue and that it's a black mark on America that the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy is medical bills.

On tax policy, I'm not a libertarian so the phrase "taxation is theft" sounds like something a middle schooler comes up with after reading too much Ayn Rand.  I think that taxes can be too high such that they create a drag on economic growth and prosperity and I think they can be too low such that they send deficits spiraling out of control and hinder our ability to take care of things that are beneficial to a good society to live in.  I also think that extremely rich people have used their power and influence to skew the tax system so that the rest of us are left holding the bill. So center-left on that?

I think that being pro-life should be more than just opposition to abortion.  So I'm in favor of paid family leave after the birth of a child for at least three months, preferably more.  I think that we should come up with ways to incentivize companies, colleges and so on to provide on site daycare.  I think universal health care ties into this as well.  If you really want abortion rates to plummet, attack the things the make it harder for women and families to have children.  I don't think these things should be considered anti-conservative but for whatever reason they are, so more liberal on these things.

I think you can be pro-military and pro-American military strength as a deterrent to countries like China, Russia, Iran and so forth and believe we spend too much on defense.  I'm with Eisenhower on this - the military-industrial complex is out of control and eats up too much of the budget. So, center-left here.

I could go on, but I hope I've made my point.  I don't sign up for an entire slate of political positions anymore.  I try as a Christian to look at issues and positions and evaluate them in light of the Scriptures.  I don't subscribe to the notion that real Christians are to be "The Republican Party at Prayer."  Neither party lines up with Biblical teaching perfectly so I will support a party and its representatives where I believe they are doing right and I will oppose them where I believe they are doing wrong.  I don't know any other way to do it and be faithful.

 

Agree with most. But I am permanently burned by the ARP and the RNC. 
They talk a lot crap and do not mean one word of it. Abortion? Try to find a Republican Talking about it when there isnt an election coming. Clue: You Wont. It is a money making issue and that is all. Same thing with Balanced Budgets, etc. The Republicans had me in their pockets for 25 years. 1980-2005. No more. I do not believe even one word they say anymore. They are 100% Wall Street Money and Nothing Else.

The Dems, under the DLC-Clinton Leadership have turned into Republican Lite. They are almost indistinguishable from the Republicans. Some are bat-crap crazy to boot. They will keep screaming "Defund the Police!!!" and losing elections for the next 10 years or so and will wonder why?

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

Agree with most. But I am permanently burned by the ARP and the RNC. 
They talk a lot crap and do not mean one word of it. Abortion? Try to find a Republican Talking about it when there isnt an election coming. Clue: You Wont. It is a money making issue and that is all. Same thing with Balanced Budgets, etc. The Republicans had me in their pockets for 25 years. 1980-2005. No more. I do not believe even one word they say anymore. They are 100% Wall Street Money and Nothing Else.

The Dems, under the DLC-Clinton Leadership have turned into Republican Lite. They are almost indistinguishable from the Republicans. Some are bat-crap crazy to boot. They will keep screaming "Defund the Police!!!" and losing elections for the next 10 years or so and will wonder why?

Careful, you will upset the snowflakes by saying both parties are practically the same. 

[DKW 86 7,437]

12 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Careful, you will upset the snowflakes by saying both parties are practically the same. 

F'em and Feedem Fish Heads....

[Grumps 3,704]

On 11/30/2020 at 10:49 PM, TitanTiger said:

You think hearing that your dad was accused of sexual assault, as bad as that is, is on the same level as having people think you as a teenaged girl had sex with your uncle?  And that the level of seriousness with which to take the allegation was similar?  

With one, we had a person willing to go on the record and appear before Congress to make her accusation - it was something that could not be ignored.  On the other we have far right idiots passing the information around on blog sites and dingbats like SocialCircle sharing it on average Joe message boards like this one.  

Kavanaugh is a grown man and a legal expert who can defend himself.  How would a teenage girl have the maturity and experience to be able to do the same?

Kavanaugh's kids possibly hearing what their dad was accused of, as unfortunate as that is, something is not on the same level as a teenage girl being accused of participating in incest.  Nor was it something that you could just ignore when you're about to put a man on the highest court in the land for a lifetime appointment.  But there is ZERO reason to be spreading this Hunter Biden rumor that has no basis in anything.

This is the kind of crap that irritates me.  Some of you pick the weirdest things to put on equal footing.  

Things can be comparable without being equivalent.

No one claimed to have pictures of Kavanaugh performing illegal activity. The same cannot be said for Hunter Biden. Do you think that accusations of Trump's son with his niece would have been discussed? You know that it would. And the liberals have any problem with it.

For the record, if anything inappropriate happened between Hunter and his niece , she would not be responsible for any wrongdoing. She was a minor when the actions were alleged to have happened. She would be an innocent victim.

[TitanTiger 20,506]

7 hours ago, Grumps said:

Things can be comparable without being equivalent.

No one claimed to have pictures of Kavanaugh performing illegal activity. The same cannot be said for Hunter Biden.

Have you considered that as shaky as the NY Post story was - such that not even Fox would touch it without the chance to independently verify the hard drive and emails and that almost no one in their own newsroom was willing to put their name in the byline on - that it never once mentioned or even hinted at this?  Do you really think they'd ignore that if there were any substance to it?  If there was anything to go on besides a bunch of right-wing nutjobs on weirdo blog sites (and SC) talking about it?

They aren't really even comparable.

 

7 hours ago, Grumps said:

Do you think that accusations of Trump's son with his niece would have been discussed? You know that it would. And the liberals have any problem with it.

No.  If the level of proof were the same - which is to say - none, zero, zilch, nada.

 

7 hours ago, Grumps said:

For the record, if anything inappropriate happened between Hunter and his niece , she would not be responsible for any wrongdoing. She was a minor when the actions were alleged to have happened. She would be an innocent victim.

I know that and I'm glad you understand that, but she still suffers the public humiliation of it when people push the story.