actually loads of mens rights activist groups are calling this into question because of the turnaround time on accusation. Unfortunately the intolerant left is zero tolerance for anything slightly right leaning, so they now are pro rape and pro white male, which is odd but whatever.

Did I say that? Typical liberal logic, twist words to fit some weird narrative.

I'm talking about his stance on MeToo.

To be more specific on your second point: I think a lot of Trump supporters and Republicans ideologically support the principle of 'in dubio pro reo'; the idea that a mere accusation shall not preclude someone from being elected or promoted - and they therefore dont think that these accusations should sink Biden (just yet).

Conservatives are of course massively gleeful because this case, and the way it's handled by Biden, the Democratic party and their allies in the media, exposes their blatant double standard and their tremendous hypocrisy. On top of that, it retroactively proves conservatives right who were arguing during the Kavanaugh hearings that it would be very dangerous to reverse the burden of proof and establish a "guilty until proven innocent" standard.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 11 2020 04:50pm

ye that

But... nobody has ever seriously argued (I mean, you can find crazies arguing anything) that we should abolish the "guilty until proven innocent" standard. That's a standard in court though, not a standard for public opinion.

Thing is, you can call the libs out for a double standard, but that really just highlights a common theme in this case. That the worst case scenario for liberals is they follow the same standard we see Republicans follow all the time. I.E. even if it is totally proven Biden is still only equal with Trump's history, and even if we assume liberals are totally two-faced on this, that's a standard we are literally seeing played out by conservatives as we speak.

So..... yeah. At their worst "the left" is only as bad as "the right" is at all times.

a lot of impassioned editorials from serious columnists arguing just that, for a societal shift to change the standard. And we've had the delicious opportunity of seeing first just conservative media saying that and now both aligned sides of the media saying it, except the conservatives say it while blowing raspberries at the liberals with an 'i told you so'

I have total trust in your interpretations. Your record is flawless, totally objective, and in no way tainted by ideology.

That's exactly what the #believewomen movement was all about. They urged for all accusations by all women to be believed a priori, which necessarily implies that it is on the accused man to prove his innocence.




"Guilty until proven innocent" was also the standard that liberals/Democrats and large swaths of the mainstream media wanted to establish in the court of public opinion (as opposed to the court of law) when they argued that Kavanaugh should not be appointed to the Supreme Court because of allegations for which there was zero corroborating evidence.




In terms of treating women, this might be true. But when it comes to weaponizing women's rights and feminism to smear the political opponent, and when it comes to claiming a "moral high ground" on these issues, the Dems are definitely worse than Repubs.



There are no "totally proven" sexual assualt allegations against Trump, hence, this statement is factually incorrect.
And yes, I know that there are several credible allegations against Trump, and that the allegations against Biden presumably wont ever be "totally proven"...

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 11 2020 05:58pm

kavanaugh repeatedly and demonstrably lied to the senate - not just during his scotus confirmation hearings, and not just concerning blasey ford. that alone should have disqualified him. in regards to the sexual misconduct allegations he has refused any cooperation or real investigation, despite tearfully claiming he wanted to clear his name - and so did republicans.
that lead to a very limited (in time and scope) token 'investigation' that specifically excluded some of the more promising avenues, and had just one possible outcome: to NOT come up with anything that would clear the already unreasonably high bar republicans had to even consider rejecting him. there was no stronger evidence than 'just' a very credible (according to even republicans at the time) victim, that told others at the time, and kavanaugh's own very suspect and dishonest behaviour, because that was not wanted by republicans.

that said, the standard is not 'guilty until PROVEN innocent', but rather 'suspect if there are credible allegations, and rather NOT rewarded with a lifetime position without a REAL investigation'. i know you're not exactly a fan of nuance, but since you base your whole argument on that strawman, i thought i'd remind you of the actual facts...

I can vouch this 100%.