The controversy over Joe Biden's treatment of women, explained

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

That presence extended to a habit of quite publicly making remarks about women’s appearances and frequent physical contacts that any modern HR department would probably warn against. For years, it was played off primarily as a joke — “Joe being Joe” — paired with some complaints from progressive writers and a larger volume of complaints from conservative writers that progressives were being hypocritical in not complaining about Biden.

In the wake of the heightened mobilization of women in the Democratic Party and the #MeToo movement, it was inevitable that this would become an issue if Biden ran for president. And even though he’s not quite in the race yet, he and his camp keep very heavily hinting that he will be soon.

The allegation isn’t that he has dark secrets, but that the stuff we’ve seen on camera and laughed off should be taken seriously as making public life hostile to women. Critics fear this will bring to life their long-held nightmare of #MeToo overreach, in which the idea of long-public behavior by a well-known and well-liked Democrat is suddenly unfairly castigated.

(snip)

These are all nice sentiments, and they underscore one of the reasons nobody in progressive politics has been particularly eager to bring this up. Biden is a personally very well-liked member of the Democratic Party establishment, nobody really thinks he meant any harm, and were he quietly fading into an elder statesman role, everyone might leave well enough alone. But Biden is putting himself forward as a political leader for the present-day, and his conduct does not really fit cutting-edge progressive values. You can clearly see that even in this statement, which centers his subjective intentions rather than women’s experiences.

(snip)

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/2/18290345/joe-biden-lucy-flores-amy-lappos

[Demsrule86]

1. Sanders won't win a general so let's hope he out quick in the primary.

And the attacks on Biden are bullshit.

[LongtimeAZDem]

2. Can't really add anything to that

[Uncle Joe]

3. Are you suggesting the women that have come forward don't know their own feelings?

[LongtimeAZDem]

7. In the case of Flores, I doubt her story completely

But, more to the point, if you want to be taken seriously as a strong, independent adult, there's stuff you have to learn to deal with.

I've been subjected to many situations where others, both male and female, got too "up close and personal" and that made me uncomfortable. But, since I knew that wasn't their intent, as Flores admits, I let it go.

That's what grownups do; they don't (literally!) make a federal case out of it.

Nearly everyone agrees, even some of those who say Biden went to far, that he does it out of a genuine desire to be caring and compassionate. Both Flores and Lappos specifically state that they didn't believe it was sexual in any way.

So, we're seeing somebody get ratfucked for going over the line with being a nice guy. Enough.

[PatSeg]

18. What?

You didn't go around all the cable news shows and discuss your discomfort with the entire country?

But seriously, unless we've lived a hermit's existence for our entire life, we've all felt uncomfortable with some people either at work or socially. It could even be people that we genuinely liked, but as grownups, we know that everyone is different and what is okay with one person, might not be with another.

You know, it dawns on me that we have so many things to be upset about, especially in this Trump era, how anyone can dwell on crap like this is beyond my understanding. Well, not completely if you throw in political maneuvering and dirty tricks, that tends to make some sense.

[Uncle Joe]

19. It was never about sex so much as an invasion of personal space and a resultant feeling

of a loss of identity power.

"But, more to the point, if you want to be taken seriously as a strong, independent adult, there's stuff you have to learn to deal with."

That's one way to do it, 'go along to get along' or you can work to change those power dynamics as the lady in the article below is doing.

Why Men Feel As If They Own Women's Space And How To Take It Back

(snip)

I was sitting in class and Cam was sitting on the complete opposite side. I heard rumors about him being very pushy and forward, but hadn't experienced it myself, so I kept a pretty neutral opinion of him, until my professors assigned us partners to work with. I got assigned to work with Cam for the rest of the class. So I looked to see if he was going to come to me (I had space next to me) but he didn't move, so I got up to got to him (nbd). I sit next to him and begin to start on our assignment, to which he barely participates in. And honestly, that worked for me because I am an independent worker anyways.

So, there I am sitting there doing the assignment when he moves his arm onto my desk. I was perplexed, but studies show men feel entitled to more space than women so I brushed it off. His arm wasn't really bothering me...except it was. Why are you on my desk, in my space? I thought it to be very rude and scooched my desk over, trying to be subtle. Nope, it did nothing. Then he begins to stare at me, odd behavior yes, but not a crime. I brush my hair (which luckily is super thick and long) over my shoulder to hide my face. He then has the audacity to move my hair out of my face. He touched my hair without permission. He was on my desk without permission. He begins hitting on me, even with all my fuck off signals. When he touched my hair I told him not to touch me. He was like, "but you're so pretty, I just wanted to see you."

(snip)

Men feel as though they have more rights over my space (a woman's space) than I do. It's crazy. You can't even always blame the man because it's been conditioned into them. I have to tell my boyfriend ALL the time that he's being domineering. He gets so upset and apologizes. He doesn't even realize it until I point it out though. Cam wouldn't care if I pointed it out. My boyfriend does because he says it helps him grow and learn as a person and as a man, but not all men care about learning and women's experience.

(snip)

And neither should you, because women are equal and deserve just as much as men, and that includes space.

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/personal-space-invaded

[LongtimeAZDem]

20. A "loss of identity power" because of a kiss on the head? Seriously?

Flores is an ex-gangbanger that did time for auto theft, and her identity was lost because of that?

Even if I believed that, I couldn't respect it.

[Uncle Joe]

22. Even an invasive shoulder rub can do it, I remember when D.U. thought this was out of bounds

Last edited Tue Apr 2, 2019, 09:33 PM - Edit history (1)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1659972

[treestar]

23. DU thought it was

Funny. We made fun of Dubya. It was not discussed as sexual harassment. No way did Merkel think about it that way. I would bet on it.

[Uncle Joe]

24. None of the women that have come forward to my knowledge

have claimed sexual harassment against Joe.

The issue is a respecting of personal space and how unwanted invasion of such creates feelings of identity diminish-ment and a loss of personal power.

[LongtimeAZDem]

25. That doesn't rate going on all of the pundit shows and saying it disqualifies a candidate

You're not selling me on this.

Do I believe the women were honestly uncomfortable? Yes.

Do I think they're making a mountain out of a molehill? Yes.

Do I think that they're proving the predictions of all of the male chauvinist pigs of 50 years ago? Absolutely.

Saying that they were diminished by an innocent violation of their personal space depicts them as fragile and weak.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Who said it disqualifies a candidate?

It may be a "mole hill" to you but you're not them.

I don't understand why respecting personal space should empower male chauvinist pigs?

[LongtimeAZDem]

29. Flores and Lappos both said Biden shouldn't run because of this

I believe it is important to them; I think they need to deal with it.

[Uncle Joe]

32. Do you have a link where they say it disqualifies Joe from running?

[LongtimeAZDem]

33. Is your Google not working?

Flores called Biden’s conduct “disqualifying.”

To be fair, Lappos disqualified Biden not on his actions, but on his gender, which is IMO despicable:

“If Biden truly supports women and gender equality he would step aside and support one of the many talented and qualified women running," she said. "The same goes for other men who have thrown their hat in the ring. ”

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436823-biden-accuser-i-came-forward-because-im-disappointed-in-my-party

[Uncle Joe]

34. Despite the title and a paragraph in your Flores article, there is no actual quote from her

that I can find anyway, stating that Biden should be disqualified from running. She has just been pushing for an apology as to how he made her feel by invading her personal space.

In fact Lucy states she would vote for Biden over Trump.

JOE BIDEN ACCUSER LUCY FLORES SAYS 'IT'S NOT EVEN A QUESTION' SHE WOULD VOTE GOR FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OVER DONALD TRUMP

The first woman to step forward and recount an alleged experience of inappropriate touching from former Vice President Joe Biden said Monday that their interaction in 2014 would not keep her from voting for Biden in the 2020 presidential election.

Lucy Flores spoke to CBSN, the live-streaming news network operated by CBS News, where news anchor Tanya Rivero asked the former Nevada lawmaker if she would vote for Biden should he earn the Democratic nomination and run against President Donald Trump.

"That’s not even a question, of course I would support Biden," Flores replied.

But Flores said she would not vote for Biden in a Democratic primary, as there are things she does not "agree with in his history, positions he has taken," such as Biden's actions during the 1991 Senate Judiciary hearings to confirm Clarence Thomas as Supreme Court Justice.

(snip)

"There's absolutely a line of decency. There's a line of respect. Crossing that line is not grandfatherly. It's not cultural. It's not affection. It's sexism or misogyny," Lappos said.

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-accuser-lucy-flores-says-its-not-even-question-she-would-vote-1382648

As for Lappos she says that Biden should step aside in allowing a woman to be President but there is no information in the article as to whether she would support Biden over Trump

"It wasn’t sexual, but he did grab me by the head," Lappos told The Hartford Courant.

"He put his hand around my neck and pulled me in to rub noses with me. When he was pulling me in, I thought he was going to kiss me on the mouth," she added.

(snip)

In her statement Monday, Lappos said Biden, who is expected to enter the 2020 presidential race, should "step aside and support one of the many talented and qualified women running."

“If Biden truly supports women and gender equality he would step aside and support one of the many talented and qualified women running," she said. "The same goes for other men who have thrown their hat in the ring. Women are 52 percent of the population. We are not a minority, we are the majority. It is time we are represented as such. After 45 male presidents it is time we elect a woman.”


https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436823-biden-accuser-i-came-forward-because-im-disappointed-in-my-party

[LongtimeAZDem]

35. I guess you're insinuating that the reporter was lying, but here is the actual quote:

"As foot soldiers for the party, we are expected to keep our dirty laundry to ourselves," she said. "For me, it (Biden's behavior) is disqualifying. I think it is up to everybody else to make that decision."

You could have found this easily, but you decided to spin. Sad.

[Uncle Joe]

36. Did you read your own article? There are no quotes from Lucy stating that Biden should be

disqualified from running.

[LongtimeAZDem]

37. "For me, it (Biden's behavior) is disqualifying."

I don't know how much clearer that can be.

You're not engaging honestly; I'm done.

[Uncle Joe]

38. I just supplied you with a post wherein Lucy states categorically that she would vote for Biden

over Trump.

Believing that someone shouldn't run and that someone should be "disqualified" from running are two entirely different animals.

Peace to you LongtimeAZDem

[BlueFlorida]

58. I don't believe that

She voted for Jill Stein the last time around.

[CentralMass]

66. Flores said she woulc vote for him if he won the nomination

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-accuser-lucy-flores-says-its-not-even-question-she-would-vote-1382648

[treestar]

45. +1

Sexual harassment is one thing, but this is saying we are too fragile to deal with life, giving right wingers "proof" that we are not tough enough for the big jobs!

[treestar]

44. I can't imagine "identity diminishment" or "loss of personal power" over such a thing

Putting this forward makes us women into weak sounding people and gives right wingers an opening to say we are not tough enough to deal with things. Anything can be taken too far. Here's an example.

[Uncle Joe]

52. Your opinion is not universal.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128749414

[treestar]

75. I never expect any opinion of mine to be "universal"

but the independent average voters we need I would bet are not so extreme on these issues.

[BlueFlorida]

59. +1000 nt

[Hekate]

64. That is a very startling assertion. I have to admit I know zero about Flores, except Joe...

...was there to endorse her as a candidate and that she works for Sanders both then and now.

If what you say is entirely correct, LongtimeAZDem, I applaud her personal changes and growth.

However, all things considered, I will still have Biden's back.

[LongtimeAZDem]

65. As do I. She was a juvenile offender, and credits her parole officer with helping

her turn her life around. She then went to college, and law school, which is impressive as hell.

So to say that she had a "loss of identity" because of an affectionate gesture beggars belief.

[trueblue2007]

50. I am confused. Why can Bernie put hands on shoulders give hugs etc and it is okay

But it is wrong for Joe Biden to do it?

[OilemFirchen]

55. Because he's her "Daddy"?

Just guessing.

[BlueFlorida]

60. ...

[treestar]

76. Because he is not a corporatist oligarch centrist silly

[Triloon]

106. "Identity power"? What the hell is that?

How do I lose my identity power? Isn't my identity my own? Aren't I responsible for it? And my personal space, isnt that also mine? Arent I responsible for maintaining it? Should I hold the rest of the world responsible for it? If someone intrudes on my space and I don't like it is up to me to push back, and no one else.
Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned and not in touch with "cutting edge progressive values", but this micro-agression junk is all bunk to me. A rubiks cube of pop-psychology semantics. I believe we all have bigger fish to fry.
(If anyone wants to jump on me for thinking this, please answer my questions first)

[Demsrule86]

28. Sure they do. Flores was coached carefully . As for eskimo kiss

Last edited Tue Apr 2, 2019, 05:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Woman. She wants men to quit so we elect a woman...after all...poor weak women must
have men go to win (sarcasm). I despise them both and believe they are liars.

[CentralMass]

67. What do you doubt about her story ?

[Gothmog]

41. I am good friends with Sarah Slamen, a former sanders campaign worker

Sarah Slamen was the subject of significant harassment by high ups in the sanders campaign https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016224223
Here are some posts about Sarah on DU https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5207992

Here is a youtube video of Lawrence O'Donnell interviewing Sarah

Sarah was not invited and was excluded from the meeting of sanders campaign workers to discuss the sexual harassment issues. There are still issues with the sanders campaign according to Sarah.

[Uncle Joe]

42. I believe this to be a sound analysis of the issue, one sided media coverage and how Bernie's

campaign has addressed it.

It's a long read but I believe well worth it.

Fantastic Lies: Special Ratf*cking Edition Part One

(snip)

The fact is that if you actually read the article (a task made more difficult by Politico’s “innocent” decision to repeatedly alter it in the time since its publication) the story is a largely positive one. Sanders 2016 staffers who acknowledge the (previously reported) toxic atmosphere that most political campaigns give rise to, are requesting a meeting to preemptively attack sexual harassment during a potential 2020 run; a campaign they themselves are seemingly still interested in participating in.

The signers want the Sanders campaign to release a “productive statement on harassment in the campaign environment” and to establish a “follow-up plan to implement concrete sexual harassment policies and procedures” as well as a “commitment to hiring diverse leadership” by which I can only assume they mean “more women.” These seem like completely reasonable requests to me, and more importantly they actively demonstrate that people involved with a potential 2020 Sanders campaign structure are actively looking to address harassment and violence (sexual, or otherwise) proactively.

(snip)

The authors also mention 2016 high-level campaign volunteer and former Our Revolution organizer Sarah Slamen, noting that she “quit the organization at the end of 2016 after she said she was berated by a male member of the Our Revolution steering committee for suggesting an organizing plan. In emails reviewed by The Times, she raised issues about sexist behavior with committee members who saw the incident and Our Revolution’s national board of directors. She said she received no reassurance that anything would change.”

Frankly, the inclusion of Slamen’s story in this piece is problematic because, even setting aside the fact that Our Revolution is merely a politically-affiliated progressive activist movement and thus explicitly doesn’t work under Sanders, Weaver or the campaign committee, there’s really no evidence presented that Slamen’s assessment was shared by the Our Revolution board; a body containing numerous progressive women who are openly sensitive to the issue of sexism. Indeed, because of the fact that there were admittedly multiple committee members present, no action was taken and nobody else is quoted in the article, it seems reasonable to question if Slamen’s real issue is that other people who witnessed the situation didn’t think the problem was sexism. Or, I guess you could believe that a bunch of highly-experienced professionals, feminist activists and progressive members of Our Revolution who represent a myriad of races, genders and socioeconomic backgrounds are all in on some sort of nefarious plot to get Sarah Slamen. Once again, the watchwords are “believe women” not “assume they are infallible” and Slamen’s story is sort of a case of “she said, but literally nobody else who saw it did.”

(snip)

http://www.ninaillingworth.com/2019/01/12/fantastic-lies-special-ratfcking-edition-part-one/

To date along with the more stringent reforms in Bernie's 2020 campaign, to my knowledge no other campaign has unionized.

The problem that Joe faces is more direct and can't be helped by a union.

[Gothmog]

47. Denial is not just a river in Africa

I will pass this article on to Sarah. She will be amused

BTW, Sarah ran sanders' Louisiana operations http://www.p2016.org/sanders/sandersorg.html

LOUISIANA
Headquarters: IBEW Local 130 office, 3200 Ridglake Dr., Suite 400A, Metairie, LA 70002
State Coordinator Sarah Slamen
(from early Jan. 2016) Did GOTV on John Bel Edwards' gubernatorial campaign. Gained noteriety in July 2013 after state toopers escorted her out during her testimony against an anti-abortion bill in Texas (&gt . Campaign manager on Green Party candidate Amy Price for Houston City Council At-Large in 2011. From Texas.

Sarah was also active in Texas, New York and San Diego for the sanders campaign. I know that Sarah was in charge of trying to set up sanders' San Diego office until sanders shut down his ground operation in California and relied solely on events and TV ads (where Old Towne Media made a ton of money). Sarah was the point person for the Texas Democratic state Convention with the Limon person who there are some really fun stories about. I will ask Sarah if she knows that she never worked for the sanders campaign.

I doubt that sanders solved any of the underlying problems and I suspect that Sarah and others will be speaking up.

Again, thank you for amusing if poorly written article from someone no one has every heard of and who got all of his facts wrong.

[George II]

56. "How Bernie's campaign has addressed it"? I don't believe he's explained...

...fully how he's going to address it, particularly the "more stringent reforms" this time around.

Perhaps that's the reason that his campaign workers felt the need to join a union, because they aren't satisfied with how he plans to addressing the "culture of sexual abuse, harassment, and inequality" in his last campaign?

[Gothmog]

89. sanders met with some but not all of the persons complaining for 15 to 30 minutes

Evidently all problems were solved during this short meeting

[George II]

91. There was a lot of grumbling from many who traveled to Washington to "meet him", angry....

....that he spent so little time with them discussing the issues at that day and a half meeting. Of course the little time he DID spend with them coincided with an important vote on sanctions against a Russian oligarch, so he skipped the vote.

I'm not surprised that not too long after that meeting/non-meeting the Sanders campaign workers voted to unionize, taking that step to ensure the abuse and harassment of the last campaign aren't repeated.

[Gothmog]

100. The Washington Post is also asking questions about this

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

102. From the Washington Post-Sanders needs to answer some questions

Link to tweet

Through much of the 2016 campaign, the press maintained a glaring double standard. Since then-candidate Donald Trump was, well Trump, he was rarely grilled on his policy notions (where’s your fabulous health-care plan? why should we believe you have one?), confronted with his outright lies or quizzed face to face on his finances. If a reporter had the audacity to ask a question, Trump would shy away and no follow-ups would be forthcoming.

The same pattern now repeats itself with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). He is indulged, allowed to skip by details, avoid probing and evade hard policy questions. We’d like to hear him pinned down, not permitted to move to the next topic without answering queries such as these:

.....What did you fail to do on the 2016 campaign that allowed female staffers to be harassed? How could you not have known what was going on? If you couldn’t run an harassment-free campaign, why should voters think you can run an administration free from harassment?

[Uncle Joe]

105. I don't expect any positive news to come from Bezos' newspaper regarding Bernie.

They talk about "he hasn't provided his taxes yet," this coming from the paper owned by the richest man in the world whose corporation payed no taxes.

(snip)

Bezos added to his business interests when he founded aerospace company Blue Origin in 2000. A Blue Origin test flight successfully first reached space in 2015, and Blue has plans to begin commercial suborbital human spaceflight in 2019. He purchased The Washington Post in 2013 for US$250 million in cash. Bezos manages other business investments through his venture capital fund, Bezos Expeditions.

On July 27, 2017, he became the world's wealthiest person when his estimated net worth increased to just over $90 billion. Bezos's wealth surpassed $100 billion for the first time on November 24, 2017, and he was formally designated the wealthiest person in the world by Forbes on March 6, 2018, with a net worth of $112 billion. The first centi-billionaire on the Forbes wealth index, he was named the "richest man in modern history" after his net worth increased to $150 billion in July 2018.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos

Amazon Will Pay a Whopping $0 in Federal Taxes on $11.2 Billion Profits

Those wondering how many zeros Amazon, which is valued at nearly $800 billion, has to pay in federal taxes might be surprised to learn that its check to the IRS will read exactly $0.00.

According to a report published by the Institute on Taxation and Economic (ITEP) policy Wednesday, the e-tail/retail/tech/entertainment/everything giant won’t have to pay a cent in federal taxes for the second year in a row.

This tax-free break comes even though Amazon almost doubled its U.S. profits from $5.6 billion to $11.2 billion between 2017 and 2018.

To top it off, Amazon actually reported a $129 million 2018 federal income tax rebate—making its tax rate -1%.

(snip)


http://fortune.com/2019/02/14/amazon-doesnt-pay-federal-taxes-2019/

There is nothing in Bernie's message that the top 1% should be paying their fare share that Bezos appreciates.

Bernie will release his taxes when he's ready, as one of the economically poorer members of the Senate, I believe there will be no there there.

[Gothmog]

113. sanders has not correct the sexual abuse issues in his campaign

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

70. No I am suggesting they are politically motived, liars

And perhaps attention seekers.

[Demsrule86]

98. No, I think they are lying for political reasons. This is not a me to thing

If your space is invaded ,speak up. It is an insult to survivors to equate such stories with sexual asault.

[Uncle Joe]

99. I have seen no one equate this to sexual assault, not the women, none of the candidates, not

Nancy Pelosi and certainly not from me.

[Demsrule86]

101. I am not pointing fingers at you but I believe it was presentd by the women involved like a me to

moment and it is not.

[Uncle Joe]

104. My reading of their take is just the opposite, they never accused Biden of sexual assault,

it was an invasion of privacy, certainly not as severe but demeaning to them nonetheless.

[Demsrule86]

107. It is women accusing a man of bad behavior. Very much like Franken

[Amimnoch]

8. God I'm hoping.

I'd love to support a Democratic Party Candidate in the GE.

ANYONE but BS 2020.

[BlueFlorida]

14. +1000 nt

[cwydro]

17. This.

[Demsrule86]

72. Me too. We could have beat Trump. Now that is endangered.

[marylandblue]

61. He won't get out quickly. He has money and loyal supporters.

Biden needs to have a rapid response team, like Bill Clinton did. All the candidates need that because whoever is doing well will be targeted.

[Demsrule86]

71. He had money last time...it still won't help him win a nomination.

Have you considered his negatives? He is not unknown thus I don't expect them to decrease, His staying in once it is apparent he can't win will only hurt our 2020 efforts . The supers even on a second ballot will vote with the candidate with the most votes as they always do. Although, I hope he doesn't drag a losing campaign to the convention. We really need to beat Trump.

[marylandblue]

74. Well based on his previous behavior, he's going to stick around at least through the convention

If only to keep himself relevant. We'll just have to deal with it. I am not that worried if he stays in. IMO an exciting candidate will keep Sanders damage to a minimum. I am more worried about the right wing noise machine that will go after whoever our candidate is. If there is no real dirt, no real divisions, they will just make it up. Our candidate needs to have a media strategy to deal with that.

[Demsrule86]

88. I agree with you. Any who won't vote for our nominee no matter what, were

Never with us to begin with.

[Gothmog]

97. Washington Post-'Electability' and 'Bernie' don't belong in the same sentence

Link to tweet

“A combined 58 percent of voters are either uncomfortable (37 percent) or have reservations about (21 percent) Bernie Sanders’ 2020 bid. For Elizabeth Warren, it’s a combined 53 percent. And for Kamala Harris and Beto O’Rourke, it’s 41 percent of voters expressing either reservations or discomfort.” Given that the overwhelming number of voters know who Sanders is, there is no excuse — as there is for other candidates — that they have insufficient information to decide whether to vote for him. Sanders is about as well known as former vice president Joe Biden, yet the poll shows that Biden’s comfortable/uncomfortable rating (48/48) clearly outpaces Sanders’s (37/58).....

Sanders’s age, the “socialist” moniker he embraces and his 2016 campaign problem with women are not going to change during the race. It’s unlikely his personality or his familiarity with foreign policy will improve, either. (The guy is 77, and if we have learned anything from Trump, it is that septuagenarians don’t change their personalities nor attend to habitual deficits in knowledge.) Oh, and on Sunday he again promised to release his tax returns, which he promised over a month ago would be “soon.”

[WeekiWater]

4. "that any modern HR department would probably warn against"

That about sums up the severity of the problem.

Kind of tells you all you need to know about those thinking he shouldn't run because of this.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

5. People are fired for not changing behavior similar to Biden's after they've been warned.

He hasn't apologized and issued a statement that didn't seem really self-aware. I'm not interested in promoting someone like that.

[WeekiWater]

6. I find that to be an extremely weak position to hold.

A position that makes little sense.

"People are fired for not changing behavior similar to Biden's after they've been warned."

The sentence in the article, highlighted by the op, doesn't even claim the guarantee of a warning. But now we are up to "firing."

The hyperbole is what's become a joke. It flat out mocks the real issue and all women's issues.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. I would consider the current discussion over his behavior a warning.

The hyperbole is what's become a joke. It flat out mocks the real issue and all women's issues.

Thinking there's a "real issue" is part of the problem. Women bring up issues that bother them; here's one of them.

[WeekiWater]

11. Understood. You don't think there is a real issue.

"Thinking there's a "real issue" is part of the problem."

It has to be hard holding your position. First it's over the top. Then it's dismissive.

[floppyboo]

9. It has been pointed out to him in the past, and he has changed his behaviour

I haven't heard or seen of repeats in the past little while. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here.
You CAN learn new tricks. I've taught some of my old 70+ friends not to flick their butts on the ground or out the car window - not that I have taught them to quit smoking

[PatSeg]

21. Fortunately you have a lot of choices

However, I felt his statement did reveal self-awareness and a willingness to understand Flores' viewpoint. I suppose it depends on a person's viewpoint, but I found it honest and sincere.

“In many years on the campaign trail and in public life, I have offered countless handshakes, hugs, expressions of affection, support and comfort,” the statement read. And not once — never — did I believe I acted inappropriately. If it is suggested that I did so I will listen respectfully. But it was never my intention.”

“I may not recall these moments the same way, and I may be surprised at what I hear. But we have arrived at an important time when women feel that they can and should relate their experiences, and men should pay attention, and I will."

“I will also remain the strongest advocate I can be for the rights of women. I will fight to build on the work I’ve done in my career to end violence against women and ensure women are treated with the equality they deserve. I will continue to surround myself with trusted women advisors who challenge me to see different perspectives than my own,” the statement continued. “And I will continue to speak out on these vitally-important issues where there is much more progress to be made and crucial fights that must be waged and won.”

On Saturday, Biden’s spokesperson Bill Russo released a statement which seemed to cast doubt on Flores’s account. Russo said that “neither then, nor in the years since, did [Biden] or the staff with him at the time have an inkling that Ms. Flores had been at any time uncomfortable, nor do they recall what she describes.”

https://www.thecut.com/2019/03/joe-biden-issues-statement-in-response-to-lucy-flores.html

[MineralMan]

12. Yglesias has stated that he voted for Mitt Romney when he ran for Governor of Massachusetts in 2002

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Yglesias

[BlueStater]

13. So?

Nothing he says should ever be taken seriously again because he voted for a Republican 17 years ago?

[MineralMan]

15. Just a point of information.

Make of it what you will.

[BlueFlorida]

16. Sanders has 0% chance of winning the primary

He should accept it and live with it instead of trying to go scorched earth and denigrating any Democrat who is higher in the polls.

Sanders is well-known and his current support is his high water mark. It can only go rapidly downhill from here without brakes.

Judging from DU alone, over 50% of his 2016 supporters have left him. I don't see any "new" supporters.

[louis c]

27. Not surprised this BS is posted by a supporter of BS (NT)

[Uncle Joe]

30. I want the Democrats to win the White House first and foremost.

I believe the strongest candidate would be Bernie Sanders, this is quite open for anyone to see.

But you don't address any of the substance in the actual OP, just putting forth a conspiracy theory.

Perhaps Flores went on to support Bernie Sanders in part because of the incident, that would be logical.

The incident with Biden took place in 2014, at least a year before Bernie even announced his candidacy.

[louis c]

31. I support Democrats. I'm funny like that.

[Gothmog]

40. Washington Post-'Electability' and 'Bernie' don't belong in the same sentence

Link to tweet

“A combined 58 percent of voters are either uncomfortable (37 percent) or have reservations about (21 percent) Bernie Sanders’ 2020 bid. For Elizabeth Warren, it’s a combined 53 percent. And for Kamala Harris and Beto O’Rourke, it’s 41 percent of voters expressing either reservations or discomfort.” Given that the overwhelming number of voters know who Sanders is, there is no excuse — as there is for other candidates — that they have insufficient information to decide whether to vote for him. Sanders is about as well known as former vice president Joe Biden, yet the poll shows that Biden’s comfortable/uncomfortable rating (48/48) clearly outpaces Sanders’s (37/58).....

Sanders’s age, the “socialist” moniker he embraces and his 2016 campaign problem with women are not going to change during the race. It’s unlikely his personality or his familiarity with foreign policy will improve, either. (The guy is 77, and if we have learned anything from Trump, it is that septuagenarians don’t change their personalities nor attend to habitual deficits in knowledge.) Oh, and on Sunday he again promised to release his tax returns, which he promised over a month ago would be “soon.”

[bernie59]

62. Somehow, I don't reckon many candidates will

pay a lot of attention to sources like Washington Post regarding who's electable. In my mind, they are still on probation due to their 2016 performance.

[Gothmog]

63. I have a subscription to the Washington Post and trust their coverage

The numbers cited in the article and not going to change just because you do not like the source.

[bernie59]

68. It's not that I don't like the Washington Post

It's just that they have not been very accurate with predicting Presidential primaries and elections as of late.

[Gothmog]

83. The article contains facts that are not going to go away

I really believe that sanders is simply not electable

[ehrnst]

110. What does that have to do with their fact checking?

Just because what they find might be disturbing doesn't mean that it isn't factual. Reporting a candidates own words isn't "predicting" it's relaying facts.

You keep murmuring about their "2016 predictions" - what specifically are you talking about?

[ehrnst]

111. Can you remind us what WAPO's "2016 performance" was again?

Specifically?

[Demsrule86]

81. MSNBC reported today that Trump wants to run against Sanders using

the socialist meme. They think they can beat him. Yet, they fear Biiden- and will run ads against him even before he announces...this was on Morning Joe.

[Gothmog]

39. Biden Advisers Think Bernie Sanders Is Behind The Allegations Of Inappropriate Behavior

Link to tweet

[Uncle Joe]

43. No proof or evidence, perhaps some in Biden's camp are pushing this because they believe

Last edited Tue Apr 2, 2019, 08:16 PM - Edit history (1)

that Bernie is Joe's strongest competitor, should Joe run.

[Demsrule86]

46. She is on the board of Our revolution. And we know

Sirota lied about working for the campaign and trashed Beto.There is precedent.

[Autumn]

49. No she is not on the board of Our Revolution. You have been told that many times and

you yourself posted several times in the thread where it was posted that she was no longer on the board, yet you persist on continuing to post that lie. Shame on you. Look to yourself before you complain about someone else's lies.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128745690#post35


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/24/our-revolution-bernie-sanders-staff-changes-607330

Second top official resigns from Bernie Sanders group
A co-vice chair of Our Revolution who accused the group of insensitivity toward Latinos parts ways in the wake of a POLITICO report.

Velasquez’s departure follows the resignation of Lucy Flores, a former Nevada assemblywoman and fellow founding board member, who quit in April over her own anger at Our Revolution for, in her view, ignoring issues important to Latinos. The group’s former political director has also claimed she was fired by Turner for helping with organizing in favor of the DREAM Act, which Turner has not disputed.

[Demsrule86]

73. whatever, she was a Sanders surrogate and on the board. And that is her motivation to attack

Biden. Is Sirota involved? She is a disgraceful. And if she succeeds we will lose. She and others who are politically motivated to attack candidates will destroy Me Too also,..,Hmm a known surrogate attacks a Sanders opponent who is beating Sanders by 10 or more points,..and I am supposed to believe her completely stupid story,.,that would be a no.

[Autumn]

77. Whatever. Everything you say is suspect to me because you are knowingly

posting over and over again what you know to be a lie. When you have to blame Bernie for actions of what another candidate actually did you have already lost.

Autumn (33,915 posts)

49. No she is not on the board of Our Revolution. You have been told that many times and

you yourself posted several times in the thread where it was posted that she was no longer on the board, yet you persist on continuing to post that lie. Shame on you. Look to yourself before you complain about someone else's lies.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128745690#post35


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/24/our-revolution-bernie-sanders-staff-changes-607330

Second top official resigns from Bernie Sanders group
A co-vice chair of Our Revolution who accused the group of insensitivity toward Latinos parts ways in the wake of a POLITICO report.

Velasquez’s departure follows the resignation of Lucy Flores, a former Nevada assemblywoman and fellow founding board member, who quit in April over her own anger at Our Revolution for, in her view, ignoring issues important to Latinos. The group’s former political director has also claimed she was fired by Turner for helping with organizing in favor of the DREAM Act, which Turner has not disputed.

[Demsrule86]

79. It is not a lie. She was on the OR board and was a Sanders surrogate in 16. She also knew about

the sexual harrassment allegations and did nothing. I find it telling that you feel the need to attack me . Don't call me a liar again. You may not believe what I post is true but I am not lying...perhaps a difference of opinion. In any case, your attacks on my credibility are surprisingly and rather sad.

[Autumn]

82. No one said it was a lie that she WAS on the board, ,that's an established fact. You have been

posting and over that she IS on the board even after you knew she left Our Revolution in May 2018. I posted a direct link to you knowing she wasn't on the board and you were still continuing to say she was. That speaks a lot to me of your credibility.

[Demsrule86]

86. I don't believe she ever really left. She had a disagreement with one of the OR

People. She is still a Sanders supporter in my opinion. Who knows what her status is...consider Sirota. Sanders gets my vote only in a general as I think he will lose a general. I will vote for whoever the nominee is....including Sanders. But I pray somone else who has a chance will win the primary.

[Demsrule86]

80. Also, I used the words 'is or was' on the board. After all the campaign denied tha Sirota was

associated with the campaign after the attacks on Beto but later acknowledged he was.

[Autumn]

84. You used the word is, deliberately, not was. After knowing she wasn't on the board.

Last edited Wed Apr 3, 2019, 12:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Demsrule86 (28,344 posts)

46. She is on the board of Our revolution. And we know

Sirota lied about working for the campaign and trashed Beto.There is precedent.

[Demsrule86]

85. I have used the word was...but I think she is still a sanders supporter and I don't believe

her. She also ignored sexual harassment which included violence during 16. Think what you like. I believe she is a political operatives who will harm me too. I will finish with this...she was on the board of OR. That fact is not in dispute. Time will tell if she is associated with the campaign.

[George II]

92. I believe he/she corrected that in post #73. Now, was she a surrogate for Sanders and was she....

...on the board of Our Revolution?

[Autumn]

93. Tell you what George, read post # 46, then read post #49 again and see what she and I

are discussing. Then read this OP pointing out that Flores was not on the board of our revolution she had left in May 2018 and the responses in the thread.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128745690

then read # 46 post #49 and get back to me with her being correct in her posts that Flores was on the board of Our Revolution when she knew she wasn't. Post #73 means nothing, that is nothing to do with the conversation. . The fact that Flores was on the board at one time, the fact that there was a connection to them and Sanders was never in question. I'm not going on a deflection merry go round. Have a nice day.

[George II]

94. Tell you what Autumn, read Post #73. If you think it means nothing that's your opinion.

Have a nice day.

[Autumn]

95. Post # 73 means nothing to me so I have no need to read it. It has nothing to do with someone

posting what they know is not true.

[Gothmog]

48. LOL-sanders hires people like Sirota for a reason

I think that Joe is far more worried about Senator Harris than he is about sanders. Without support from African American voters, sanders will not be the nominee.

[loyalsister]

51. Thanks for posting

The response to this is like white fragility- when white people have their feelings hurt if their racially insensitive or hostile behavior is noted.

What I thought was missing from Joe's statement is this. With what I now know because of me too, it is clear that there are likely to be women who felt threatened by me despite my good intentions. Their experience matters, I can't fix it, I can only commit to do better.

[PDittie]

69. Not a huge fan of Matt Yglesias

But he nailed it completely in this piece.

[George II]

53. What is the point of this?

[BlueFlorida]

57. Bernie supporters think this is a winning issue for them

[Demsrule86]

87. Just the opposite. Regardless if Joe runs or not, I will not switch my vote to Sanders

In the primary.

[Skidmore]

114. Not sure.

Think there was a wagging finger with all that 'splainin' that this woman is resenting right now. On the cutting edge of progressive thinking enough to know that I can think for myself.

[underpants]

54. 👀

Marking for later read

[sfwriter]

78. it was inevitable that this would become an issue if Biden ran for president.

Been saying it for months. Later expect Anita Hill to come up.

[Drunken Irishman]

90. By that logic, Sanders has to go too...

Because I promise you most HR departments would have a conniption fit if they found out management had ignored, either willfully or ignorantly, sexual harassment allegations like we saw from some on his staff during the 2016 campaign.

[Uncle Joe]

103. Bernie has apologized, they have also changed the 2020 campaign to be much more diverse.

Link to tweet

/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1083425779407572992&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2019%2F01%2F10%2Fbernie-sanders-apologizes-for-sexual-harassment-in-2016-campaign.html

Bernie's campaign is also the only one to date to welcome unionization, a further safeguard against such incidences happening again.

[Drunken Irishman]

108. So has Biden.

[Uncle Joe]

109. That's true.

[Gothmog]

96. I like this statement by Joe Biden

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

112. Washington Post-Opinion: After his video, Biden may come out even stronger

Link to tweet

By late Wednesday afternoon, his video tweet had received more than 66,000 likes.

It’s not clear this was even necessary. Other than journalists, it was hard to find anyone who honestly thought “Biden is a hugger” was news; it surely wasn’t new. Even Republicans had come to his rescue. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), in a reminder of the old Lindsey Graham, remarked, “I just want to say Joe Biden is my friend, and I know him very well, and whatever he did it may have been inappropriate but it was not driven by malice or misconduct.” Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) also vouched for him, as has Meghan McCain.

Biden conveyed in his message why he touches people — to soothe, empathize and encourage. In saying that he would resist the notion that politics has to be “antiseptic,” he showed that he’s in public service not for glory but to help others. In short, he helped voters remember the positive qualities he’s well known for, which even political opponents attest to.