dianaiad
Well-Known Member
I mean the non rapist is a better choice, to be sure. But if one has to defend a politician by saying, well at least he’s not a rapist, is that really a ringing endorsement?
It is when the topic is rape.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy he’s not a rapist, good for the Donald. But that sort of sounds like you had even a worse choice of candidates than even we did. And you guys actually choose to vote. We have to be literally coerced into it.
Hmnnn. That's pretty sad.
I might be a bit young to remember Clinton. He’s the source of the “I did not have sexual relations with those women” soundbite, right?
Yep, that's him.
I actually have a couple of problems with him that float to the top of the scummy soup. The sexual misconduct thing, but also the grand land grab he did in Utah during his administration (that has since, thankfully, starting to be undone). THAT one did a lot more damage to more people, both native American and the later settlers, than anything he personally did in the Oval orifice.
but since it was done in the name of environmentalism and protecting wilderness lands, nobody protested. Except, of course, the people and native Americans whose land he grabbed....and then mismanaged and ignored.
Never mind, hot button.