What do you think of Tim Ryan's concession speech?

[Anonymous]

"We have too much hate, we have too much anger, there’s way too much fear, there’s way too much division, and we need more love, we need more compassion, we need more concern for each other.

These are the important things. We need forgiveness, we need grace, we need reconciliation. …

I have the privilege to concede this race to J. D. Vance because the way this country operates is that when you lose an election you concede and you respect the will of the people. We can’t have a system where if you win it’s a legitimate election and if you lose, someone stole it. …

We need good people who are going to honor the institutions of this country…. The highest title in this land is citizen, and we have an obligation to be good citizens."

[holdem4884]

Unlike the clown above.

Yes, "when you lose an election you concede and you respect the will of the people. We can’t have a system where if you win it’s a legitimate election and if you lose, someone stole it." Sounds amazing but it's so basic

[WhitneySnow]

He’s not wrong

[Asker]

Exactly! "when you lose an election you concede and you respect the will of the people"

[LuvLuv89]

That sounds more like hot air and words... it's very easy to say things that people will like, but not actually mean them or live up to them. It's kind of like Biden saying he would lead based on the principles of unity... then becomes one of the most divisive president's in history (e. g. his red speech). It's like a pedophile saying "we need to eradicate pedophilia" and then doing nothing to eradicate pedophilia.

I'm unsure on what Tim Ryan's stance is on Trump's legitimate presidency (2017-21), but for Dems in general to consider it illegitimate and then sing the "let's accept democracy" narrative is so low it goes beyond stupidity... Absolute Tribal Bias?

Given the stakes are so high on the verge of a new global and domestic US order coming into existence, obvious double standards (e. g. BLM vs Jan 6th), corporate news media activism, increased Authoritarianism (e. g. deny natural immunity vs Covid) etc etc etc... it would be foolish to not be skeptical about the voting & counting process, especially when it has become less regulated.

[Asker]

You don't think he meant those words, that he won't live up to them? Those words he said while living up to them?

Don't you wonder why the word "pedophile" comes up in conversations about politics so much these days? It's because nobody in the Republican party is repudiating the slimy nonsense coming from the hard right.

Every time the right falsely accuse the left of something in the US today, it's a reflection of what they do. Texas governor Gregg Abbott, justifying his terrible anti-abortion law, declared that he would eliminate rape in the state; do you think he meant it? Do you think he can or will live up to it?

There were lots on the left who were upset by the results of the 2016 election, there was good reason to be (backed up with evidence which only grew over time), but I don't think any claimed that the numbers were wrong or that Trump hadn't won it.

Jan 6th was the tip of the iceberg when it came to stealing the presidency from the people of the US, "natural immunity" requires you to catch the virus that is far more likely to kill or harm you than the vaccine, and US elections have never been more regulated.

[TroyDT2]

Perhaps, but he was actually practicing what he preached.

[LuvLuv89]

Whether he will is still to be seen. It's easy to accept a concluded loss and claim the "I'm oh so virtuous" card for future political gain. You wouldn't see Charlie Crist having a whinge either... whereas, Arizona is a different situation regardless of your partisan bias. I'm less concerned about proving fraud or not, and I'm certainly not a biased partisan. I'm more concerned that the public has clearly lost faith in the process... fix it so the public has faith again. How is that a partisan agenda?
HR-1 clearly adds flexibility to scope of fraud in the voting & counting process. I assume you're not being disingenuous.

I went with "pedophile" because I knew I'd get done for saying "Nazi". Either way, the I'm merely demonstrating a point and not actually making a comparison.

What was Abbott's abortion law? it may have not been terrible to some, given the constitution. We'll see if he can live up to whatever rape policy he made... politicians often don't. Not to worry, you can always have an abortion across the border... that is federalism. Every time the LEFT accuse (Jan 6th, dodgy court rulings, Russian collusion) the RIGHT of something it's a reflection of what they do (BLM, Soros backed rogue prosecutors and judges, the Steel Dossier & Hillary's Uranium scandal).

[LuvLuv89]

The Trump Russia collusion conspiracy was chucked out. No, they claimed the numbers were rigged (Russians hacking the voting & counting process, which the FBI failed to provide evidence of as I read their release). There was also the quieter choir singing that Clinton should have won it because she gained more votes than him, haha.

Are you saying Jan 6th was an insurrection with no arms being beared (a hockey stick and flag pole doesn't count), dudes in red beach shorts and sneakers, and zero deaths on site (excl a MAGA supporter)? Seems too hyped by the corporate news media to me. I certainly condemn it as a serious act... but calling it an insurrection is hysterical and tribal bias.

Natural Immunity is simply not more likely to kill you than the vaccine for the vast majority of people. This is called absolute risk, and they may not have discussed this in your sources. Amongst groups of youth, serious injury from the vaccine is a higher threat than a virus injury or death... but I can't recall my source on that.

[Asker]

"It's easy to accept a concluded loss and claim the "I'm oh so virtuous" card for future political gain."

Then why didn't Trump? Ryan's making the point that he was doing what's right, unlike Trump, it also puts pressure on Kari Lake to concede if she loses.

"I'm more concerned that the public has clearly lost faith in the process... fix it so the public has faith again. How is that a partisan agenda?"
Because you're ignoring that the only reason people have "lost faith in the process" is because they've been lied to, and most of the Republicans that haven't amplified that lie themselves have refused to call out the ones that did.

"HR-1 clearly adds flexibility to scope of fraud in the voting & counting process."
How exactly does it do that?

"We'll see if [Abbott] can live up to whatever rape policy he made..."
Really? You think it's possible to eliminate rape in a state?

"Not to worry, you can always have an abortion across the border... that is federalism."
Up until the point where Republicans create federal laws to limit them against the wishes of the states.

"Every time the LEFT accuse (Jan 6th, dodgy court rulings, Russian collusion) the RIGHT of something it's a reflection of what they do (BLM, Soros backed rogue prosecutors and judges, the Steel Dossier & Hillary's Uranium scandal)."
You think there are "Soros backed rogue prosecutors and judges"? LOL. (Look up Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointed judge who has been handing Trump all sorts of favors in the stolen documents case.)

[LuvLuv89]

"Then why didn't Trump?"... because it wasn't concluded that he lost. It was proven there was fraud in certain key states, but they weren't investigated... or couldn't be investigated due to lost evidence. I'm not saying the outcome was stolen or fraud was sufficient to change the outcome; I'm saying we don't actually know who won, and certain things should have been investigated... this compares to the 2-3yrs of the Russia Trump Collusion conspiracy theory investigation, which was a hoax from day 1 (I would know, I called it). But, Conservatives in particular are rightly suspicious of double standards and hidden agendas occurring in favor of their political opposition... the censorship of the Hunter Biden story being another proven prime example of a rigged information system, again with help from the FBI (add Lisa Page, Peter Strock, McCabe to this list, and their released texts from 2016). Naturally, some people are suspicious of the election process, and how far the scope of proven corruption goes, and want increased transparency and order... given past proven dodgy shit. Why would Dem supporters disagree with this, unless they have something to hide?

HR-1: "How exactly does it do that?"... voter ID reforms in the name of racism, haha. You can research the rest.

[LuvLuv89]

"Really? You think it's possible to eliminate rape in a state?"... No, like I said... he's a politician. In context, as harsh and disagreeable "6 weeks" (since last menstrual cycle) is (i. e. 3 or 4 weeks after conceiving) to you and me, most women still know by this stage (but not all). You add on time to test, and have an abortion (in addition to the obvious psychological trauma), 10 - 16 weeks is far more practical (in my opinion) and belongs in the "pro-choice" camp, traditionally speaking. Having said that, a rape victim would have a test ASAP if she is responsible and has access to support, as hard as that may sound... it's just a harsh reality, and provided that occurs, 6 weeks is very reasonable. The problem Conservatives have is that 16 weeks is no longer enough (because the Dems wanted to re-energize the debate to get some votes)..."pro-choice" means 8mth now. So, it goes both ways. A federal law for no abortions is fair game relative to a federal law for 8mth abortions. Soooooo, keep it with the states, as rational sense has prevailed. The idea that a Conservative federal govt would install zero abortions is hysterical given how liberal the US is.

Lol, that wouldn't even surprise Trump supporters. However, it's in no way as systemic as the continuous mass early release / light sentencing via Gascon etc.

[Asker]

I find it fascinating that you've got a problem with a Democratic politician pointing out something that is in the power of every politician to do, the way politics is supposed to work in the US, and had done until Trump came along, but none with a Republican politician making a patently ridiculous assertion that he has zero chance of achieving in defence of removing even the figleaf of "rape and incest" exceptions to an abortion ban (which, I think we agree, a six week limit essentially is).

Regarding the 2020 election, you might like to read this: https://lostnotstolen.org/ Or the Jan 6 committee hearings which show clearly that Trump knew he'd lost the election early on.

About the abortion issue, where Republicans are the dog that caught the car but the car's still moving: now their states' have passed draconian bans, they're looking to make them federal (no matter that their whole argument against Roe was about "state's rights", and that they often claim that women can simply go to another state for an abortion).

The problem with an absolute time limit on abortions is that it ignores the fact that problems still occur late in pregnancy that can make an abortion the least bad option. Nobody carries a fetus for 8 months for fun, they want to have a baby. They don't want to have to give birth to a baby whose only experience of life will be a few hours, days or weeks of agony before they die. It should be a decision to be left up to the woman and her doctor, not 'Women, Doctors, Local Political Leaders', as Oz said in debate.

[LuvLuv89]

I've already answered your first paragraph, and I didn't fully understand it.

I'll read through that link, thanks. The executive summary reminds of some experiences I've seen in life: If I'm under a 6mth probationary trial period of employment and I'm discriminated against by bullies who want to control me, and end up being dismissed prior to end of probation... how do I prove this was unlawful discrimination if the govt states the burden of proof is on the employee? Meanwhile, the employer conducted monthly (but unfair) monthly reviews as per law. The fact is I can't prove anything, they politically own me, and I have to play by their rules.
A great lie burdens your opposite (i. e. not you) to prove it was a lie, while providing them no means of doing so... and you stand their looking innocent. I. e. an absence of evidence of significant fraud doesn't dispute what I've already said; plus I've already referenced that. But will skim read it.

In the worst case situation, abortion is not a constitutional right... therefore is subject to democracy, while Biden has stated clearly he doesn't want it to be; he wants it to be neo-constitutional. Regardless, no Republican party will get elected by seriously insulting 50% of the swing state electorate.

Haha, we have 20 weeks to decide in NZ... and for whatever reason, if you need longer to decide then you require permission from 2 independent relevant medical practitioners. In otherwords... it's a harsher standard to the Liberal US, and a woman does not have the absolute right to choose! It's a policy we generally accept via democracy, and we leave it alone. The problem with the US is your political and corporate leaders like to keep picking at your scabs, make you bleed, and then you go crazy over rational issues. Both sides feed off each other to produce angry and radical positions on topics that could be easily compromised.

[Guy13]

Setting up a presidential run. Now he has to be perfect after that statement

[Asker]

He has the right attitude, at least.

[ChefPapiChulo]

wow. stand up guy.

[Asker]

And that seems to be extreme these days.

[TroyDT2]

Great speech.