New scandal:Trump Caught Insulting Women!

[suncowiam]

When your running mate won't defend your actions, you can still depend on a bunch of internet keyboard warriors to do so.

You guys are his last line of defense. He's going to need all the support he can muster now.

I used to hate this election, but seriously, it's gotten a whole lot better. Just put my feet and enjoy my popcorn.

This election was all about who's going to lose it. Lol

 

[Flankerl]

I have been kissed without giving my consent by some weirdo client in my office once. He told me he was rich. Is that supposed to be okay?

For some people it is. Its almost as if not everyone is the same.

 

[SkepticThinker]

For some people it is. Its almost as if not everyone is the same.

I'd prefer not to have one of the people who thinks it is okay, running my country (or any country, really). I'm different that way, I guess.

 

[Flankerl]

I'd prefer not to have one of the people who thinks it is okay, running my country (or any country, really). I'm different that way, I guess.

So he's no different from all the other politicians. They all have opinions like this one.

Hillary for example takes delight in human suffering. Neato.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And he cut the deficit by almost 3/4.

We have cut 'our deficits by almost three-quarters,' Obama says in State of the Union

And Trump will increase the deficit if he is elected

Maybe since Bill and Barack are both in history with good economic performances, maybe Republicans will realize that Republicans just are not the "fiscal conservative" party. They want the government to be ran like a business, and because a business is supposed to make money, Bill and Barack did very well. And he also did make good on his promises to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, even if he did continue drone strikes and was put into a hard spot with ISIS, but he held out on that one as well.
Unfortunately, I think the West is underestimating ISIS. They've been hit hard with air strikes, but it's going to take an invasion to wipe them out, and these small coalitions may not be enough. We may just get WWIII if Putin's coalition and the Western Coalition are dealt an early heavy blow because they didn't send enough bodies and don't anticipate the likeliness of it being the worst fighting that we've seen in a long time. It may literally be a global Crusade. As easily provoked as Trump is, we should definitely not elect him. Worst case, it will be long, it will be ugly, and the sectarian Shia and Sunni violence will spill globally. Honestly, with the possibility of ISIS either dying or thriving soon, Hillary just may be one of our better options for it with her knowledge of the situation. Yeah, she'll hit them really hard, but she won't strike like a mad man (I don't think too many on either side would).

 

[sun rise]

For some people it is. Its almost as if not everyone is the same.

So it's ok for Trump to be an anti-Semite according to you.

 

[Flankerl]

So it's ok for Trump to be an anti-Semite according to you.

10/10 strawman

And of course he can be an anti-semite. Would lead to weird family gatherings but what do I know, might be rather fun or at least lively.

 

[Acim]

It sounds like you hang out with a lot of lowlifes then.

You're welcome to make that assessment, but I find your comments disingenuous. I'm saying most guys are like this. If you believe otherwise, that is plausibly true in your experience, but I'm not saying just guys I hang out with. I'm saying 90% of all males I've ever encountered. None of them would say this publicly, but in private conversations, I've heard it, and/or a variation of it. I have certainly heard much worse than what Trump said.

I think a belief that most guys are not like this is a fairy tale.

With Trump, he said what he said (in private), then gets off the bus and does none of it, as we all see. Thus, like many to most guys, is all talk and little show. I think that's a good thing, but the talk is what is offsetting. How offsetting? Depends on a number of things, but from what I can tell in this thread, how willing one is to feign surprise and ultra puritan values.

 

[ShivaFan]

"hangout with ... low lifes"

Does Hillary hang out with low lifes?

 

[Acim]

So you're saying that kind of talk/behavior is a-ok? What are you saying?

I'm saying the talk is okay. I might be the only one saying this. I'm willing to defend it on the grounds of it being private discussion, that many to most guys do, that some women talk like this, that it is mostly talk, that the other type of talk (the puritan approach) has issues (that I'm familiar with) and that it's not vastly different than other so called offensive talk with regards to 'freedom to speak.'

The behavior that follows up that talk, I see as less okay. I'd have to see it play out for me to judge how okay I find it. If Trump gets off that bus, and in effort to back up what he just conveyed to Bush, while standing right in front of Bush, he proceeds to move in on kissing the woman with nothing being said (by Trump or the woman) and then proceeds to grope her P, I would see that as so bold and so contrary to what I see in public life, that it not okay. And would be grounds for her to file some sort of sexual assault charge against him. Because he didn't do this, right after saying he could, I think matters. But seems all the naysayers are assuming he does do this even while we all witnessed to at least one situation (the one right after him saying it) where he did not.

 

[idav]

You're welcome to make that assessment, but I find your comments disingenuous. I'm saying most guys are like this. If you believe otherwise, that is plausibly true in your experience, but I'm not saying just guys I hang out with. I'm saying 90% of all males I've ever encountered. None of them would say this publicly, but in private conversations, I've heard it, and/or a variation of it. I have certainly heard much worse than what Trump said.

I think a belief that most guys are not like this is a fairy tale.

With Trump, he said what he said (in private), then gets off the bus and does none of it, as we all see. Thus, like many to most guys, is all talk and little show. I think that's a good thing, but the talk is what is offsetting. How offsetting? Depends on a number of things, but from what I can tell in this thread, how willing one is to feign surprise and ultra puritan values.

If this were true then we certainly could use a change and certainly need to elect a woman as president. Thanks for making the case for women Acim.

I digress, that really isn't true because your missing something important. When I hear guys talking very badly none of them think they are gods gift and can just go around assaulting women and think they can somehow get away with it. Women talk of sex just as bad in closed settings but there are lines. Also we wait for a mature adult to be president, not a guy who will never be married to save their life! The tides have been turning for decades, being a womanizer is one thing but being a misogynist is quite another.

 

[Acim]

How many women do you think would be fine with some strange perv grabbing their crotch and/or trying to kiss them?

Honestly, about 1%, perhaps less (but more than 0%).

Now, the question dealing with what Trump was conveying: How many women do I think would be fine with a male celebrity grabbing their crotch and/or trying to kiss them?

And again, I'd have to see that play out. Like groupies for a music group/artist, I think (some) would welcome it. If Prince finished his encore song, walked off stage and went up to a female member in audience and kissed her without asking, I think there's at least a 50% chance she'd react as if that was greatest moment of her life. If he, proceeded in the moment to grab her crotch, I think there's at least 10% chance that she'd react as if life just got significantly better. The percentages I'm going with here are, IMO, low - but intentionally so to make the point as realistic as I can.

Feel I could do the same type of scenario with a whole lot of musical artists, who are stars.

With sports stars, I think the chances of it being well received go down, but not sure.

With movie/TV stars, I think the chances are higher than with sports and less than with music stars.

I think if there were puritan type person that was a star/celebrity, who never followed through regardless of circumstances (meaning even if very obvious that a woman is wanting them to make a move on them), I think such a person could report that they've been propositioned (without words being spoken to them directly) dozens of times. As in, they could say similar to thing to Trump (i.e. these women will let you do whatever you want to them) but then make the choice, for themselves, to never allow themselves to go in that direction. I believe some guys think of it as fringe benefits for choosing to go down that path (become a celebrity). How many guys (or gals)? I don't know, but this puritan nonsense that we are maintaining on this thread strikes me as highly disingenuous if we are really looking to discuss this stuff. I think this assumption that no guy (in his right mind) would or should ever do this is akin to 1950's way of life, and even that strikes me as not so accurate, but is about as fair as I can be to what is the opposite position.

 

[Acim]

Indeed he must. I'm no prude. I frequently talk about sex. But I do not demean and objectify women as does Trump. And when I hear someone demean and objectify women, I at the very least break off whatever social relationship I might have with them. I'm just too old to waste my remaining time with such lowlifes.

Didn't take too long for me to find a past post by you where I would argue your words were demeaning and objectifying a woman. Care to update your position?

Oh, and by the way, lowlifes tend to think I'm lying because they believe all men are like them. The way I see it, they only know as friends the sort of scum who would associate with scum.

And hypocrites allow themselves a free pass by playing the puritan card, when in reality, they aren't so pure.

 

[idav]

And hypocrites allow themselves a free pass by playing the puritan card, when in reality, they aren't so pure.

The list of things coming from Trump on women is unlike anything I've ever seen. The most heinous things about women regarding posts have actually have come from the right "conservatives" oddly enough.

 

[Acim]

being a womanizer is one thing but being a misogynist is quite another.

I'd like to explore the differences between the two, especially as they could plausibly relate to Trump. And then how they might apply to Bill Clinton.

One would think if Trump is so awful on this count, that Bill would be easily identifiable as strong liability any time he speaks anywhere in favor of Hillary and her stance on anything. Because he is just that horrible. Or as others in this thread have said, he is just that much of a lowlife, scum.

Instead, it comes across like two standards in place. Bill Clinton, is to be considered right now a great man, and was a great president, despite all the issues (some allegedly illegal behaviors he engaged in) while Trump, for talking the way he has, is to be considered inherently unqualified for POTUS and is a disgusting, low-life male.

 

[Acim]

The list of things coming from Trump on women is unlike anything I've ever seen.

So, you've never seen an R-rated film, much less X? Never heard any other celebrity talk about things they have done with women, and felt they could do with women because of their status? Never....heck let's just deal with the first two (or three).

 

[idav]

I'd like to explore the differences between the two, especially as they could plausibly relate to Trump. And then how they might apply to Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton isn't running for president and we are well aware why he almost got impeached. But yes by all means explore the difference between womanizing and misogynism. It applies to Trump because his words are misogynistic. Are people supposed not vote for Hillary just because her husband is a pig?

 

[esmith]

The debate? The debate questions were geared towards past events. Iraq, Birther nonsense, tax returns, etc. Don't be lazy. If you want to know what she plans to do it is right here:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

Perused her platform. The only problem I see is that she has to get it through Congress. There are numerous items that seem enticing but no where do I see a plan to pay for all of her "campaign promises". I also see a lot of "dog whistles" in her proposals. Now as you well know I have knee jerk reactions when firearms are mentioned and I find that she, as most, do not understand where the problems are in our streets when it comes to firearms. As I said I agree with some items but there are considerable numbers of them that pander to voters,"campaign promises" that politicians never carry through on". It would be interesting to debate each of her platform points but I don't think that is possible in the time remaining. If anyone wants to take one of her points and start a "sensible" discussion" I would be open to it.

 

[idav]

So, you've never seen an R-rated film, much less X? Never heard any other celebrity talk about things they have done with women, and felt they could do with women because of their status? Never....heck let's just deal with the first two (or three).

Oh come on, I mean in this forum from posts but the worst as I said comes from the right conservative not the left, which is odd. Conservatives are supposed to be the puritans. Context would do you wonders.

 

[Revoltingest]

What's the scandal exactly?

It is quite known that people let "Stars" do all kinds of stuff. And this involves quite a lot of women. Just the way it is.

If Trump were a Democrat, his allies would be praising him as very "European" (as Bill was lauded for his assaults & trysts).
I say he's a boor.
But there are far more important considerations in electing a presidential candidate from the current crop.