04-07-2021, 01:43 PM
(04-07-2021, 01:22 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't disagree with much here, I just don't like the idea of ruining someone's life over odds only slightly better than a coin flip. A preponderance level of proof is literally 50.1% likely vs. 49.9% unlikely. I realize we're delving into the realm of subjectivity here, but I'd want it to be around 60% likely before I'd be ok with removal from office.
People's lives are ruined all the time with preponderance level. Lawsuits that bankrupt people, people getting fired from jobs for far less, the list could go on and doesn't even include how just an arrest, not even an indictment or conviction, can alter someone's life in a devastating way. In thinking about this response I actually became even more committed to the preponderance level for these situations. Getting to that level with some sort of process would be more benefit of the doubt that many, if not most, Americans are entitled to in their occupations. Due process needs to exist because of the role of an elected official, but I don't think the bar needs to be higher than preponderance.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
