[News] Post a D&D Picture

Previous incarnations of Cleveland/P&C/D&D have had an image thread, to handle political cartoons and other image-based stuff that doesn't belong in the general post-a-picture threads.

If any of them spawn an extended discussion, please spawn it off into its own thread. Replies to non-picture replies should take the form of a link pointing to a post on a different discussion thread.

And I shouldn't have to say it, but the images still need to abide by the rules.

Nevin73 wrote:

I do wonder, though, if Democratic congresspeople would be willing to vote to impeach a Democratic President for crimes? But if Trump were a Democrat, would we see more backbone from the left in standing up for the country? Personally I think they all put party before anything else.

The best example I can think of as to why you are incorrect is Al Franken. A photo came to light of him in an inappropriate pose and he resigned.

And yet the Democrats still lionize Bill Clinton and have successfully made the numerous sexual assault allegations against him into a partisan issue. The Dems don't get a passing grade on this stuff, either.

Fair enough but I live in the real world where there are only two practical choices so I grade on the curve. I know that isn't a popular opinion with many but it is what it is.

and just to be clear - that doesn't mean we shouldn't work tireless to improve the party but it does mean when I walk into the voting booth I am not going go see each party as equally bad.

I had forgotten about Franken. Good points.

Sure, I still vote for the Dems, too. But let's not pat ourselves on the back and talk about the integrity of the Democrats versus the Republicans when we're just as willing to overlook the rapist in our party because he's a good fundraiser.

edit: Point made better on the second page I didn't see.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Sure, I still vote for the Dems, too. But let's not pat ourselves on the back and talk about the integrity of the Democrats versus the Republicans when we're just as willing to overlook the rapist in our party because he's a good fundraiser.

Sure, plus all of the terrible things Obama did for civil rights like privacy. Definitely a choice of the lesser of two evils, but one is clearly lesser.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

And yet the Democrats still lionize Bill Clinton and have successfully made the numerous sexual assault allegations against him into a partisan issue. The Dems don't get a passing grade on this stuff, either.

You are not wrong, but there is more to the story. Our attitudes and expectations have changed.

Joe Biden was part of the awful hearings where he and the Dems and GOP put Anita Hill through Hell. And at that time, even if people believed Hill, a surprising amount of the public called it no big deal.

But for Dems, that time period prompted change. Look at the Kavanaugh hearing. The Dems has a diverse group and several women, while the GOP has to hire someone to ask questions so they didn’t look so bad.

No one I saying the Democratic Party has a pure history. But when it comes to recognizing the problem and making a change, they have been what I would hope all political parties be. This really isn’t the same Democratic Party from the Clinton days, even if some of the same names are around.

Personally, I found the entire premise of Nevin’s post to completely false, and it’s been false for decades. Doesn’t mean all Dems are pure, but as a party, they are far more proactive.

Even in the Northam case, where they failed to get him to step aside, the entire party cane down on him. His ability to understand that he could stay and weather the storm cane from what Trump and other GOP sh*theels have shown. The public moves on and ceases to care.

If Northam becomes the norm for the Dems, then we have an issue. But, for now, he’s the exception. Meanwhile, Steve King is running again.

Jayhawker wrote:

This really isn’t the same Democratic Party from the Clinton days, even if some of the same names are around.

You're absolutely right. However, Bill Clinton himself is still a prominent and active member of the party. He still gets trotted out for big fundraisers, keynote speeches, and the like. The Democratic party, although it has changed significantly from what it was during his presidency, hasn't changed so much as to distance itself from him.

To be really clear: I'm not doing some kind of "both sides are just as bad" thing. It's still a choice between the chicken, and the piece of sh*t with glass in it. I'm just saying that the reckoning for sexual harassment and assault in politics has only extended so far and that tolerance of that kind of behavior in men continues to transcend left/right paradigms of party politics.

Who is still trotting out Bill Clinton. I know he was a big player in 2016 for Hillary. I don't recall hearing much about him last November, but that may just be because i don't particularly care about him so it just didn't jump out of the background. Which candidates in particular are using him for fundraising?

I feel like it's good information to know and a pretty prominent check mark in the con column when I'm deciding who to vote for come primary time.

thrawn82 wrote:

Who is still trotting out Bill Clinton. I know he was a big player in 2016 for Hillary. I don't recall hearing much about him last November, but that may just be because i don't particularly care about him so it just didn't jump out of the background. Which candidates in particular are using him for fundraising?

I feel like it's good information to know and a pretty prominent check mark in the con column when I'm deciding who to vote for come primary time.

He was doing a lot of fundraising events for the party itself, although apparently a number of candidates in 2018 didn't want to campaign with him so perhaps there has finally been some kind of shift around him.

thrawn82 wrote:

Who is still trotting out Bill Clinton. I know he was a big player in 2016 for Hillary. I don't recall hearing much about him last November, but that may just be because i don't particularly care about him so it just didn't jump out of the background. Which candidates in particular are using him for fundraising?

I feel like it's good information to know and a pretty prominent check mark in the con column when I'm deciding who to vote for come primary time.

the first search result when I googled "Bill Clinton fundraiser"

No One Wants to Campaign With Bill Clinton Anymore

It's funny to me how conservatives like to remind us that Democrats are the original slaveowners, racists, KKK fans, etc. It's like, yeah, but why the funk did you decide that was the direction you wanted to go?

Edit: beaten by the Clock

Edit: Doublehausered.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

He was doing a lot of fundraising events for the party itself, although apparently a number of candidates in 2018 didn't want to campaign with him so perhaps there has finally been some kind of shift around him.

To give you an idea about the size of that shift, Bill made over 100 appearances to support candidates during the 2010 midterms. In 2018 he made a handful of appearances.

And I could find very little information about Bill being actively involved--or involved at all--in DNC fundraising for the midterms.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/amabSfW.jpg)

Jayhawker wrote:

No one I saying the Democratic Party has a pure history. But when it comes to recognizing the problem and making a change, they have been what I would hope all political parties be. This really isn’t the same Democratic Party from the Clinton days, even if some of the same names are around.

I largely agree, but with one caveat: they only do so when it’s politically expedient, when they are certain that taking a firm stance won’t cost them political capital. Everything around the Green New Deal is a perfect example of this. We are at a point where we need a drastic, desperate measure about climate change, and so many Dems are still dragging their feet about it without offering any sort of meaningful solution of their own. Feinstein basically told a group of children to go eff themselves the other day when they asked her to support the policy.

Still better than the GOP, mind you, but let’s not pat these people on the back too hard. If they actually took risks and weren’t consistantly behind the curve on social issues maybe it wouldn’t take people like Sanders to get younger voters engaged.

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0XSeZnV4AURyax.jpg)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/0A8nY8M.png)

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0abVABXgAESe3c.jpg:large)

IMAGE(https://i.postimg.cc/5tZfXD2B/1b27ylf905j21.jpg)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/9KDmU52.gif)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/mn7ZnDE.png)

IMAGE(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/53090663_778085279245197_5103144415845679104_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=f7663e01f9556e1fbbdffbf5bc5c0d75&oe=5D17BBAC)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/xuCsQm6.png)

Was Hitler strong in his denial?

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/RgTf7Up.jpg)

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/P8wRTA8.png)

In other words, Trump hardly knew him really.

Weird to see them admit that he ran in 2012. I thought he won his first time?

Mixolyde wrote:

Weird to see them admit that he ran in 2012. I thought he won his first time?

The Republicans try, but as you can see they sometimes have trouble keeping their story straight. Or telling us why they employed a liar as National Deputy Chairman of the RNC.