|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You keep pushing talking points on me that I'm not using, and misrepresenting my argument. i have literally not looked at this thread in hours or responded to you until that post, soooo seems like the issue is you won't actually say all the very simple things that you think were totally within the party's power to do to correct this that they refused to
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:This is not what im saying at all. Donald Trump was being impeached, not Joe Biden. What Donald Trump did mattered, what Joe Biden and his son did not matter. The standard Republican move is to distract you from what matters by focusing attention on shiny objects that don't matter. You are focused on the shiny object (hunter biden) that doesn't matter, so the Republicans have manipulated you well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 05:56
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Donald Trump was being impeached, not Joe Biden. arguing that other people focused on the shiny object, and pointing out the object is, in fact, shiny and other people will focus on it is not actually the act of being focused on the shiny object. edit: grammar thin blue whine fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 05:59
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You do recall what Obama did right? This is a really weird argument to make in favor of playing into a conspiracy theory, err, sorry, "right-wing narrative"
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:07
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Donald Trump was being impeached, not Joe Biden. It does not matter what the GOP says or does, as others have already pointed out they will find anything to throw at the other side. Hunter Biden should not have taken a job at a foreign gas company in the first place. The guy could have grifted 1000 other ways that wouldn't have led to this, but welp. Joe could have at least done something to blunt the appearance of corruption. As far as what the party could have done to blunt the GOP talking point, or dispel the idea that they are accepting of this appearance of corruption, there's a couple things. They could have not tolerated the corruption in the first place, but if that failed for some reason they could have disavowed it, and used it as a pivot to point out corrupt acts of the Trump family.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:08
|
|
|
Strange Poon posted:Yeah, the Mueller investigation flopped in a large part because they put a lot on Mueller coming out and dropping a huge bomb on Trump. Instead it was wet paper bag and Mueller was a huge liability because he came off as hostile and senile. The Democrats actually laid some good ground on how Trump was obviously corrupt and it looked like he had some corrupt dealings but Mueller's testimony was so bad it tanked the whole thing. Wow, it's almost like Optics Matter! So, wait, in your first paragraph, you say the Democrats laid some good ground, which implies that they did actually do work and push the issue, then in the next paragraph you go back to “but because Democrats didn’t try hard on anything until Ukraine they’re corrupt.” quote:I'm not even arguing my own personal viewpoint on this. I think it's unlikely any of it is true. The Dems HAD to impeach because Trump was on the loving White House lawn stuttering out a plea for China of all loving people to investigate Biden so they had to try and actually do something this time, even though Pelosi had made it pretty clear -repeatedly- they weren't going to impeach at all and Trump's fate needed to be "decided at the ballot box". All of which Pelosi said way before anything around Ukraine came out, leading you to argue that they came out to protect Biden, while the rest of the country saw it as an appropriate reversal given the scope and depth of what happened. quote:So, one last time: Do I think it's hard to argue against the optics looking bad for the Democrats? Yeah, I honestly do. I think it's a difficult position to defend because there honestly is some measure of doubt on the motivation of the Dems and I also think because of that it had an impact on the impeachment process. It looks like a majority of Americans came around but not the people we needed to remove. Did I think he would ever get removed? No. Stop acting like I posted that the Dems are corrupt when I'm actually arguing I think they're incompetent but merely LOOK corrupt on this. So, wait, the optics were bad and so the Dems were never going to win, but also the Dems were never going to win anyways? Are you reading any of what you’re saying? quote:I burned my popcorn while replying to this dumbass post so thanks a lot, dick! Edit: went too far, no one deserves that skeleton warrior fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:10
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It does not matter what the GOP says or does, as others have already pointed out they will find anything to throw at the other side. yeah, he could have called for the Ukrainian government to increase anti-corruption efforts involving the gas company
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:10
|
|
|
OJ MIST 2 THE DICK posted:yeah, he could have called for the Ukrainian government to increase anti-corruption efforts involving the gas company Or, and this is really crazy but hear me out, he could have represented the US and the EU in wanting to oust the corrupt Ukranian prosecutor general who, among other things, was not investigating Burisma like he was supposed to! ...oh wait that's exactly what he did  EDIT: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:12
|
|
|
OJ MIST 2 THE DICK posted:yeah, he could have called for the Ukrainian government to increase anti-corruption efforts involving the gas company I will concede this is what happend. I never thought otherwise. I am not arguing the GOP talking points. Joe Biden didn't do anything wrong, but Hunter certainly invites the appearance of corruption, and i don't see how that is arguable. Nobody seems to be disputing it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
Everyone knows the best way to debunk a conspiracy theory is to put it front and center and extend its news cycle
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:14
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I will concede this is what happend. I never thought otherwise. I am not arguing the GOP talking points. Joe Biden didn't do anything wrong, but Hunter certainly invites the appearance of corruption, and i don't see how that is arguable. Nobody seems to be disputing it anyway. Nobody is, but I think we're all kind of annoyed that someone is taking the fever swamp bullshit seriously here. Hunter is a different person from Joe, he's a grown-rear end adult and he's responsible for his own actions. Joe Biden went broke trying to keep one of his sons from dying of cancer, to the point he got a personal loan from Obama, so he was probably just happy the other one had a paying job. He also, crucially, is not responsible in any way shape or form for the criminal actions of Donald Trump, and so is not qualified to testify about them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
Papercut posted:Everyone knows the best way to debunk a conspiracy theory is to put it front and center and extend its news cycle Yes actually. You counter deep rooted conspiracy theory with aggressive factual based counter arguments, and you don't stop repeating them. I this case the democrats absolutely failed at informing the public about the actual timeline of events, as is evident in the fact that the joe biden prosecutor bullshit still stalks around, as well as all of you assume that I am parroting those talking points with zero self reflection. I do not think the impeachment would have gone any different if Hunter Biden had not been an issue. I do however think it was a mistake and a pretty decent example of corruption to accept a position on a foreign gas company board. That mistake allowed the propagation of conspiracy and muddied the water with half-truths and willful misrepresentation of the facts. The waters would not be nearly as muddy had it not happened. If you don't think what Hunter did was corrupt, argue that, otherwise, I don't see how my points are that crazy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:25
|
|
|
There's a crazy Republican talking point asking why Obama wasn't in the Oval Office on 9/11. It's clear that this is bullshit because Obama wasn't even President at that point. But since Obama hasn't offered any explanation, Republicans can use it as a talking point. Therefore I think Obama should explain why he wasn't in the Oval Office on 9/11. But I want to be very clear that I'm not repeating Republican talking points.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:28
|
|
|
Look guys, we tried walking with this Burisma conspiracy gum on the bottom of our feet while chewing on these impeachment shoes and it just didn't work. Guess there's no way to do both at the same time. Oh well...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:31
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Joe Biden didn't do anything wrong, but Hunter certainly invites the appearance of corruption, and i don't see how that is arguable. Nobody seems to be disputing it anyway. Dude's a Yale educated lawyer with a rich dad, his future was always going to involve sitting in C-suite meeting rooms. Also, worth noting, he was appointed to the board of Amtrak back in the day by that well known DNC power-broker George W. loving Bush.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:32
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Let me make this easy for you. If Obama was an American citizen why isn't he releasing his birth certificate??? It was really smart of the Democrats to let one of their primary candidates get away with promoting that narrative.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Why? He is the son of a powerful US politician and he gets board roles? That's like literally every son of every US Senator, former VP, Chief of Staff, literally anyone connected in any substantial way. Yes thank you for making my point on how corrupt this all is. it's hard to fight corruption in good faith when the party itself is corrupt. it would have been really helpful to not have that problem when impeaching the most criminal president in the last 60 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:35
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:So, wait, in your first paragraph, you say the Democrats laid some good ground, which implies that they did actually do work and push the issue, then in the next paragraph you go back to “but because Democrats didn’t try hard on anything until Ukraine they’re corrupt.” Well, they didn't move to impeach after the Mueller findings so uhh... they laid some good ground to do something and then didn't do anything, so yeah you can say they didn't "try hard enough". Like what the gently caress is this weak "gotcha" poo poo LOL??? quote:All of which Pelosi said way before anything around Ukraine came out, leading you to argue that they came out to protect Biden, while the rest of the country saw it as an appropriate reversal given the scope and depth of what happened. Yeah, you're right. The ONLY thing Trump could be impeached on was this Ukraine business. You're right, up until this point he was extremely popular, had done nothing illegal, and the public just didn't give enough of a poo poo to investigate him on anything else. quote:So, wait, the optics were bad and so the Dems were never going to win, but also the Dems were never going to win anyways? Are you reading any of what you’re saying? Well, the only thing to say is that I think the Dems could have done better, and maybe if the former hadn't happened the latter would maybe not be true. It's almost like this whole situation is hosed and we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand. quote:You deserve it. Oh, no it's not difficult to understand. Spite over reason, I guess maybe you do understand the Average American and Trump supporters after all. thin blue whine fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:36
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I this case the democrats absolutely failed at informing the public about the actual timeline of events, as is evident in the fact that the joe biden prosecutor bullshit still stalks around, as well as all of you assume that I am parroting those talking points with zero self reflection. You are literally arguing that logical argument, well presented, will completely end conspiracy theories, especially conspiracy theories circulated by those for whom the theory advances their agendas. Are you... new to the internet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:37
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:You are literally arguing that logical argument, well presented, will completely end conspiracy theories, especially conspiracy theories circulated by those for whom the theory advances their agendas. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. You can however try to prevent others from falling into the same trap with well reasoned arguments and good faith efforts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:39
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yes thank you for making my point on how corrupt this all is. 'The kids of rich people also get rich people jobs' is not the slam dunk on corruption that you think it is. Unless you think that this is exclusively an issue for the Democrats?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:41
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. You can however try to prevent others from falling into the same trap with well reasoned arguments and good faith efforts. 
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:'The kids of rich people also get rich people jobs' is not the slam dunk on corruption that you think it is. Unless you think that this is exclusively an issue for the Democrats? No, it's a broad bipartisan issue. I know low-level corruption is largely accepted, but I for one would like it to end, and can admit to the idea that maybe it undermined the democrats position.  I honestly don't understand why this is treated as a crazy GOP talking point mirroring position. Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
Strange Poon posted:Well, they didn't move to impeach after the Mueller findings so uhh... they laid some good ground to do something and then didn't do anything, so yeah you can say they didn't "try hard enough". Like what the gently caress is this weak "gotcha" poo poo LOL??? So you’re saying that, when the Mueller hearings were finished and the American public obviously responded with a shrug, Democrats should have cried “drat the torpedos” and moved on to impeaching anyways? And that, somehow, the optics of the Democrats pushing against popular opinion would have been better than this one where the public overwhelmingly wanted more investigation? quote:Yeah, you're right. The ONLY thing Trump could be impeached on was this Ukraine business. You're right, up until this point he was extremely popular, had done nothing illegal, and the public just didn't give enough of a poo poo to investigate him on anything else. Yes, that last one. Not enough of the American people gave a poo poo to investigate him on anything else, or else the “optics”, as you are so insistent is the only reason you’re angry that the impeachment was about Ukraine, would have easily led to the GOP being able to talk about the Democrats carrying out the fanatical vendetta of its most extreme members. Assuming the House could even must the votes to open an investigation given the lack of public support.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:45
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:No, it's a broad bipartisan issue. I know low-level corruption is largely accepted, but I for one would like it to end. Right, we should really make the impeachment of the criminal in chief about something unrelated and unpleasant but legal that someone you don't like did. That'll certainly clear things up for people too dumb to understand extortion, which I think was your original complaint when you sauntered in here. Munkeymon fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. You can however try to prevent others from falling into the same trap with well reasoned arguments and good faith efforts. Given that a majority supported removal of Trump and an overwhelming majority was calling for more investigation and witnesses, I think the Democrats achieved that handily and you’re looking for things to complain about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:52
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:Right, we should really make the impeachment of the criminal in chief about something unrelated and unpleasant but legal that someone you don't like did. That'll certainly clear things up for people too dumb to understand extortion, which I think was your original argument when you sauntered in here. I've been here the entire thread. My argument was that they should have driven a fleet of buses over the bidens to maintain a moral high ground when impeaching the most criminal president in 60 years. Taking a stand against even the appearance of corruption could have been beneficial, and useful considering the rampant corruption of the trump family. Also, "unpleasant but legal" makes you sound like susan collins. skeleton warrior posted:Given that a majority supported removal of Trump and an overwhelming majority was calling for more investigation and witnesses, I think the Democrats achieved that handily and you’re looking for things to complain about. It would have been nice to reach Nixon levels of removal support, but I guess that's why Fox News exists. I'll admit i'm disappointed in where things stand, but i feel it is valuable to review how our representatives could have done better. Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 06:58 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 06:53
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I've been here the entire thread. The proper response to this whataboutism is "stop changing the subject". It's really easy and effective because usually even pretty dense people perk up and notice that one party was trying to steer things off-topic. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Also, "unpleasant but legal" makes you sound like susan collins. Rich coming from the guy regurgitating Fox News commentator talking points
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:00
|
|
|
Christ. We are arguing about Hunter loving Biden? Who gives a poo poo. He is a nobody and the story is bullshit created to muddy up the conversation. The fact that anyone gives a gently caress about who is named to the board of a company when many board seats for companies are for the most part purely there for name value. Perfect example Apple’s board has Al Gore, James Bell, Andrea Jung, Ronald Sugar and Susan Wagner on it. Most of them have some upper business management experience but they are mostly there because they look good to investors and the public. People take the gig because it is easy money. You show up to a meeting once every quarter mostly, you get told what and how to vote prior to the meeting, you make the votes, get taken to a nice dinner and go home. It is a big way of how former politicians, business leaders and celebrities make extra money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:02
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I've been here the entire thread. There was no way to get anything out of driving a bus over Biden. All it would have done is distract from Trump's crimes and allow the Republican's to distract the media with "corruption" bullshit (and "dumb Hunter" bullshit). All things considered, they did a pretty amazing job of keeping attention on Trump's crimes - letting the Republicans get Biden near the proceedings would have given R's ammunition to derail the whole thing. E: The fact of the matter is that the administration has nothing on Biden, or they could have pushed the investigation through proper channels and/or done it themselves. That's not saying there's nothing to be had, but there's certainly nothing to gain from doing their homework for them. Stickman fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:03
|
|
|
Except this impeachment wasn't about nepotism and bringing it out would just lend credence to Trump's conspiracy theories. If the Democrats brought up Biden instead of the crimes Trump actually committed it would have moved the focus off Trump and his crimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:04
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:The proper response to this whataboutism is "stop changing the subject". It's really easy and effective because usually even pretty dense people perk up and notice that one party was trying to steer things off-topic. The GOP has essentially turned the Gish Gallop into a political strategy, and you can't beat that with "stop changing the subject." You have to be familiar with the talking points used and have arguments against all of them, and get them out in the public before they do. Djarum posted:Christ. We are arguing about Hunter loving Biden? Who gives a poo poo. He is a nobody and the story is bullshit created to muddy up the conversation. I don't disagree Stickman posted:There was no way to get anything out of driving a bus over Biden. All it would have done is distract from Trump's crimes and allow the Republican's to distract the media with "corruption" bullshit (and "dumb Hunter" bullshit). All things considered, they did a pretty amazing job of keeping attention on Trump's crimes - letting the Republicans get Biden near the proceedings would have given R's ammunition to derail the whole thing. I think whether anything would be gained or not is debatable. It may have gotten other witnesses, but it also may not have. If it was a closed door deposition in the house before the senate trial, it wouldn't have been nearly the distraction you make it out to be. I think they could have maintained their focus while removing the Biden talking points entirely had it happened that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I think whether anything would be gained or not is debatable. It may have gotten other witnesses, but it also may not have. If it was a closed door deposition in the house before the senate trial, it wouldn't have been nearly the distraction you make it out to be. I think they could have maintained their focus while removing the Biden talking points entirely had it happened that way. That's true, but it was also extremely unlikely to happen. I doubt that the Democrats could have forced closed deposition (or gotten any concessions if they did) because the Republicans knew full well that the only benefit (to them) of Biden's testimony was as a circus distraction. They weren't even willing to put him on the stand when they could unilaterally block all Democratic witnesses - they certainly weren't going to trade anything for closed-door depositions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:45
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It would have been nice to reach Nixon levels of removal support, but I guess that's why Fox News exists. Nixon levels of removal support became impossible in the early 2000s, when the finality of the Great Realignment meant that the parties were much consolidated in viewpoint and therefore much more willing to bend their viewpoint of reality in order to support their team. Please note that, for all of the fluctuation in “should he be impeached” his approval rating is mostly untouched, indicating that those who support him are unconvincable and this effort has been about raising Democratic and Independent awareness and enthusiasm to get him the gently caress out in November. As for “how they could have done better”, as someone who improves processes and organizations for a living, there’s a point at which “identifying problems to fix for the future” segues into “nitpick on unfixable things to validate my hatred for my job/co-workers/boss whom I am obviously better than.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 07:48
|
|
|
Another thing that also has caused the utter breakdown of our government especially in the Senate is in the 90s the Republicans changed the rules of how bills were created and introduced. Previously most things would come out of committees. Committee chairs held most of the power in the Senate and most issues with any sort of legislation would already be hashed out by the time it was introduced. It also encouraged bipartisan cooperation as you had fewer people with their hands in the cookie jar. The GOP moved to give most powers to the Majority Leader which previously had been more of a ceremonial position. This in turn started the gridlock we see today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 08:18
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:that’s not how this scam works, this scam works by associating the words Biden and corruption as often as possible so people who want to believe can and do and as we can see by this idiotic post it’s not just idiot republicans it works on Deteriorata posted:Hunter Biden and what he did or did not do was completely irrelevant to what Donald Trump actually did. SubG posted:The Republicans have been lying literally continuously about literally everything. The set of people who look at this loving endless geyser of frothing horseshit and decides that hm yes I would've been on the Democrat's side but HUNTER BIDEN BIDEN BIDEN is literally zero. This whole show trial was staged explicitly to appeal to voters, since it never had a chance of actually succeeding. The complete failure of the democratic party to fully consider the issues of framing around their show trial, and the insistence of people like those above that framing is all conspiracy theories, is exactly why the democrats consistently lose on messaging, and why impeachment has had zero effect on Trump's popularity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 08:27
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:Before the Democrats had any ability to investigate things, the Washington Post and NY Times were reporting on emoluments and self-dealing and the public reacted with shrugs. Did you just not pay attention from 2017 through 2018? It didn't help that there was very little leadership from the Democrats in Congress in response to those revelations. Had Pelosi, Schumer, et al. reacted to Trump's rank corruption with shock and outrage, as opposed to, well, shrugs, it's likely that the public would have been more onboard with holding him accountable. But of course, the culture of corruption that benefits Trump also quite visibly benefits the Democratic establishment, so...nothing doing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 08:49
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Because if it hadn't been Hunter Biden, they would have invented something else. The point was to smear Joe Biden, in whatever way was possible. If Hunter hadn't been involved in Ukraine, Trump would have invented some other bullshit excuse elsewhere and we would be having the exact same argument about something else nonsensical and trivial. This reminded me of how Trump didn't even get entangled in Ukraine to smear Biden in the first place. He did it because he literally believed that conspiracy theory about an imaginary Hillary server there. And when that didn't pan out he figured out a sham Biden investigation would be good too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 09:23
|
|
|
The thing that absolutely blows my mind about all this Hunter Biden nepotism nonsense is that Trump's son and law and daughter are literally enriching themselves off the presidency with top positions in his administration. If we had an informed or reasonable electorate in this country they would be seeing the hypocrisy in the comparison but instead we have people cheering for Rush Limbaugh getting the Presidential Medal of Freedom. FML
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 11:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:The thing that absolutely blows my mind about all this Hunter Biden nepotism nonsense is that Trump's son and law and daughter are literally enriching themselves off the presidency with top positions in his administration. If we had an informed or reasonable electorate in this country they would be seeing the hypocrisy in the comparison but instead we have people cheering for Rush Limbaugh getting the Presidential Medal of Freedom. FML Thats why framing mattered. Trump's kids are obviously corrupt, but by picking a show trial fight over anything even remotely involving the corrupt failson of a high ranking democrat the democrats completely lost the initiative and control of the narrative. If you're going to have a show trial the *show* part matters much more than the *trial* part.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 11:28
|
|