Here, give it a watch, I uh...thought it was an interesting attempt for sure.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27iShNbMYlc
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27iShNbMYlc
-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
SC Representative Nancy Mace attempts to defend her endorsement of Trump...it does not go well.
- Thread starter TheAbsolution
- Start date
- US Politics
For US politics and election threads
First thread in the new subforum, congrats OP.
Regarding the video, yeah this was bad. She's tried to dunk on George a few times already since it happened and it just never lands because she can't really answer the question to anyone's satisfaction and instead deflects and makes it about her.
Regarding the video, yeah this was bad. She's tried to dunk on George a few times already since it happened and it just never lands because she can't really answer the question to anyone's satisfaction and instead deflects and makes it about her.
Holy shit... this woman is crazy.
The mental gymnastics of this person is insane. You are supporting a rapist.
How is it shaming to ask you a rape victim, how can you support a rapist? Such insanity.
The mental gymnastics of this person is insane. You are supporting a rapist.
How is it shaming to ask you a rape victim, how can you support a rapist? Such insanity.
Nancy Mace is an opportunist. And with the current GOP, her thinking it is going to be offensive pretzels. It will be curious if she can keep Charleston/Hilton Head or not over time.
"Stop shaming me for siding with a rapist!", says the rape victim whilst pouncing on the other rape victim... That's some defence right there.
These people are f*cking crazy.
These people are f*cking crazy.
She knows precisely what she's doing. Scoring points on the national scale to further her career long term. How she looks herself in the mirror at night, like anyone in politics voting for a true lunatic is beyond me. It doesn't matter what the man says or does, he's on the right side of the dividing line, therefore he's golden. Everything across that line will erode the foundations of this country. God bless America.
So she doesn't believe E. Jean Carroll because it was a civil case?
Did Nancy Mace take her case to a criminal court? Because that is an extremely high bar to believe a rape victim, "had to have won a criminal case".
Did Nancy Mace take her case to a criminal court? Because that is an extremely high bar to believe a rape victim, "had to have won a criminal case".
I would expect that she wins at least a couple more terms in SC-01, but that district is not going to stay friendly long-term - even with them shoring it up in redistricting this past cycle she's already underperformed the district's lean in the general, and the Collins-esque reputation she's tried to cultivate in the GOP is also already the kind that risks strong primaries elsewhere.
I'm glad he finished with 'we'll let the viewers decide' lol. I'm also glad he straight up said she's supporting a rapist.
So let me play devils advocate for a second:
.. What was their discussion BEFORE this video started? What was her purpose on coming on the show? Was the intent of the interview "We know this woman has been raped, so let's ask her why she supports this rape victim" ... was that the premise of bringing her on the show? Did SHE know that was the first questions he was going to be asked? Why did she think she was being interviewed... like what was the whole context of this whole interview?!
Okay now back to the actual video: , yeah she's absolutely nuts that she's like "it wasn't a criminal court" and "she joked about it" was like, her excuse for saying its okay Trump raped his victim? What?!!?
I've never heard of this person before this video. Like she could just be a little more honest, "I'm appalled by the actions of Trump and think what he did is absolutely horrible, especially as a rape victim... BUT I still think he's a better candidate over Joe Biden!" Like, I would mildly respect that response more than the one where she excuses Trump alltogether.
.. What was their discussion BEFORE this video started? What was her purpose on coming on the show? Was the intent of the interview "We know this woman has been raped, so let's ask her why she supports this rape victim" ... was that the premise of bringing her on the show? Did SHE know that was the first questions he was going to be asked? Why did she think she was being interviewed... like what was the whole context of this whole interview?!
Okay now back to the actual video: , yeah she's absolutely nuts that she's like "it wasn't a criminal court" and "she joked about it" was like, her excuse for saying its okay Trump raped his victim? What?!!?
I've never heard of this person before this video. Like she could just be a little more honest, "I'm appalled by the actions of Trump and think what he did is absolutely horrible, especially as a rape victim... BUT I still think he's a better candidate over Joe Biden!" Like, I would mildly respect that response more than the one where she excuses Trump alltogether.
Remember folks; civil cases don't really count in sexual assault cases….😒
Crazy to sit there iand accuse someone of delegitimizing their sexual assault while then doing the same to E. Jean Carol; she should be joyous. A jury of her peers believed her and her assaulter has to pay out the ass now.
Crazy to sit there iand accuse someone of delegitimizing their sexual assault while then doing the same to E. Jean Carol; she should be joyous. A jury of her peers believed her and her assaulter has to pay out the ass now.
man I know that's why I would never be able to have a job like that but I would have said "yeah I'm shaming you for defending a rapist you fucking piece of shit, you should be ashamed of yourself for daring to use your own supposed rape experience to defend him, fuck you".
There actually are different evidentiary standards. It's much much easier to get a verdict in a civil case than criminal. It's an important distinction that matters in many contexts when it comes up.
Not that I think her answer was any good because, taking the jury verdict at face value, he more likely than not is a rapist. It's pretty difficult to hand wave that away.
I don't doubt that. I was mainly trying to convey that the difference wouldn't have really mattered to whether she carried water for Trump. It's purely for political convenience.
Tone policing how someone reacts to winning a case that's overshadowed their life for so long.
So ridiculously brazen, and utterly craven. I'm assuming she lacks even the slightest self awareness.
So ridiculously brazen, and utterly craven. I'm assuming she lacks even the slightest self awareness.
Oh absolutely. This woman would clearly do anything to get ahead. Unfortunately this kind of rhetoric will resonate with her voters. That's the real shame.
also just in general she's one of those "moderate darlings" like a certain former user here always used to dub Republicans like her, Collins, John Roberts, and Romney, where they talk a big "moderate-sounding" game where they're trying to get wooly moderates and centrists to think "at least they aren't as bad as (usually) Trump!" and then in reality their voting record is some of the worst most inhuman garbage possible
Her trying to flip the dynamic of shaming back on the interviewer after making a snide comment about EJC joking about the ruling is some heinous stuff. I hope her willingness to throw another woman's rape under the bus of her ambition haunts her until her dying day
It takes a certain type of person to use their trauma as a cudgel, only the most cynical people attempt to pull shit like this
I don't want to say much about the entire exchange, because while she might know exactly what she is doing here, I can't be certain about it. Trauma responses can be all over the place and she was repeatedly pushed back into the subject.
But I will not let her comment at 00:28 slide. Just vile. It already takes so much for victims to come forward, as I myself sadly know all too well, but these kinds of comments make it even harder for other victims to come forward.
But I will not let her comment at 00:28 slide. Just vile. It already takes so much for victims to come forward, as I myself sadly know all too well, but these kinds of comments make it even harder for other victims to come forward.
I kept waiting for George to make that connection more clear in the argument to sideline her filibustering.
Like: "You have repeatedly stated your fears and concerns of being shamed or defamed for opening up about your rape history and I agree that it takes great courage, so why are you not supportive of E. Jean Carroll for her bravery as a fellow survivor?"
Feel he could have really pressed her harder on the civil vs. criminal distinction too. I don't think most women will find they give a shit when it comes to sharing their pain.
even more, her answer to why she's supporting an insurrectionist and criminal is "well my voters are over it and they don't care".
what? so because her base is nuts and don't think he committed rape, led an insurrection, and is a criminal on multiple accounts....means she doesn't care either?
the logic...is special
what? so because her base is nuts and don't think he committed rape, led an insurrection, and is a criminal on multiple accounts....means she doesn't care either?
the logic...is special
Every election cycle, the GOP runs a variation on the Palin playbook, with diminishing results. "Ooh, she's pretty and went to college and we're letting her talk into a microphone!" And they don't realize it falls flatter every time because the never account for the crazy. You'll see it again when Katie Britt gets pushed even harder in 2028.
Glad he didn't put up with that, wish he would have prodded her why she thinks that is offensive to her cause it's not about you lady, he would have asked that to any person endorsing him and she seemed offended just because he asked...
So if there's no criminal court conviction it didn't happen? 🤔 If you make a jokes about a verdict that wasn't for the assault but for your attacker defaming you your assault is invalidated?
This minimum word requirement is stupid.
This minimum word requirement is stupid.
It's classic GOP brain rot. The Republicans in Congress think this way so their supporters do as well.
Same thing we've seen with Jan 6th and every other Trump crime that has happened in plain sight. 'Yes, he was impeached but he wasn't convicted so it's not that bad!"
She's just another variation of the moderate-woman formula that the republicans always run. She's in on the game but this feels so much more ghoulish than their normal attempts.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), whom Haley endorsed in 2022 against a Trump-backed GOP challenger, threw her support behind Trump this week after coming to Washington in 2021 with declarations of becoming a "new voice" for the Republican Party.
Mace was so angry at Trump during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol that she discussed with aides the prospect of confronting the rioters so she could get punched and become the face of anti-Trump Republicans, according to former staffers familiar with the incident, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution.
Mace — who also declared to her staff during the riot that she was a "never-Trumper" — made the comments while she was hiding with staff in her office in the Cannon House building as they watched rioters march through the Capitol on television. If there was video of her challenging rioters on social media, it could give credence to her anti-Trump position, these people said of Mace's thinking at the time. Staffers pushed back against their then-freshman boss, citing guidance from U.S. Capitol Police. Mace eventually set aside the idea, according to the people.
Asked for comment, Mace did not directly address the episode. "What you write doesn't pass for real journalism," Mace said.
Mace is like this dude:
View: https://twitter.com/jmart/status/1766215286431043976
Nah, he was a crazy as county sheriff too. The only credit I'll give is that he may have been faking it on his way to Congress.
The very nerve of her, honestly. I can't stand opportunist like her, and that's as far as I will go as not to be banned.
This says a lot about Nancy, as she looks at a situation like January 6th, as it's fucking happening in front of her eyes and she thinks "how can I make this politically advantageous for me?"
How can anyone listen to this and think it's coherent? There's such hypocrisy in this clearly pre-formulated gotcha response, it's embarrassing.
It's not surprising, though. The moment she began fabricating bullshit in an attempt to discredit AoC's description of the insurrection, it was obvious that she was a shit peddling hypocrite.
It's not surprising, though. The moment she began fabricating bullshit in an attempt to discredit AoC's description of the insurrection, it was obvious that she was a shit peddling hypocrite.