President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Reasonable. Empirical.

Poll: Battleground Republicans trust Trump over Mueller

 

My usual disclaimer: I'm no Trump fan.
But the timing of the sexual assault claim is convenient, to say the least.
And is the fallout of the #MeToo era going to be that women are to be believed 100 percent of the time?

 

A robust discussion on this is occurring elsewhere, but the timing is not the doing if the accuser.

 

These robust discussions will end with the sides calcified on the same sides as the affirmative action debate. In my mind, there are a lot of the same sticking points in those two debates without much of an answer in concern to balancing the need to right past wrongs with basic constitutional rights. And this one is even stickier because we're not talking about who gets into Cal. We're talking about justice for violent, awful crimes going up against the basic right to be presumed innocent.

Godspeed in finding common ground there.

The only solution I can think of moving forward are consent forms and tests for consciousness. How romantic.

 

To find common ground in politics today, you need to look for it. Conservatives, National Republicans, Evangeicals and right wing media don’t want to look

 

Good points. And, in this case, it’s more an opportunity to shake one’s head at the absolutism of Old Tony.

 

I actually find him more palatable when he's able to let his guard down. I'm glad he has a place he can do that.

Also, I've set a goal to get kicked off the board by New Year's to free up time to get more done and be less anger-filled by the time I have to take care of a baby. I think this is a good start.

 

Misleading and inaccurate.
1) The story quotes or refers to four women — not two — who are on the record and standing by their man.
2) There appear to be no signers on the record saying they are taking back their support.
3) Two no comments. This means they’ve contacted six people, four of whom are unchanged and two of whom are non-committal.
4) This thing assumes that every non-responder has heard or seen the message/question and is intentionally not responding because they don’t want to admit they’ve changed their minds. Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

Yeah, I thought that was a really shitty, misleading way to report what he'd found.

There was value to what the two were doing, too. Just presented terribly.

 

And to the best of our knowledge, never cheated at golf.

 

2012 is convenient?