I had a lively FB discussion with a man from Kentucky who has two daughters. His claim was that “boys will be boys” and Trump was probably lying anyway, checkmate. I asked if he would be comfortable with a man saying that about his daughters – that he could grab their pussy whenever he felt like it. He said, Benghazi.
I can’t even enjoy this election, it’s too depressing.
I’ve never understood the elevation of the value of honesty above all else and at all times.
To me this implies that the whole world is entitled to know everything at any time. That strikes me as a very naive way of looking at a complex world. No hedging, concealment, discretion, or other subtleties that make life civilized. Why is this desirable? Some things need to be kept secret. Some things need to be revealed piece by piece. Some things should never be revealed. And some things should be totally transparent and out in the open. With maturity comes the wisdom and judgment to discern among the circumstances. Ideally, anyway.
Secrecy can be justified. Having one position that you cite for public consumption and another position you hold private, waiting for the right time to make it your public position, is basically fraud.
But unlike Clint, she’ll win the debate.
And every person whose partner has cheated will think back to what they themselves said about their partner’s playmate…and recall how very few kind and warm remarks they made about that playmate.
The Trump people have been trying this “Hillary was mean to the women Bill cheated with” tactic for months. They keep trotting it out, apparently expecting that the USA is made up of people who said only nice things about their partners’ playmates, and who will be outraged by the idea of saying mean things about their partners’ playmates.
This expectation seems wildly divergent from basic human psychology.
We SDMB adorables should not mix with the deplorables.
Which thread are we supposed to post in tonight? This one or the SDMB live coverage one?
Already happened in the first debate, about to happen again.
An empty chair is one in which nothing is said. What Clinton actually debated was more like a backed up toilet.
Politico is reporting that Trump is convening a pre debate panel of women who have accused Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct.
(on edit)
Uh, except, that… it was ***Carter ***who restarted mandatory registration, four months before the election. It’s true that Ron DID make a habit of really aggressive, scary, muscular sabre-rattly talk to be followed by a more or less normal mix of both bold and boneheaded policies, but that first step was not on him.
You missed the memo about how it’s totally different for girls and boys.
Men in the audience will recognize that Trump is saying that what Trump did is good because a Real Man did it and what Hillary did was bad because it interfered with Bill doing what Real Men do.
Women in the audience … What does Trump care what they think? They aren’t people. If they vote at all they vote as they’re told by their Real Man.
See it makes complete sense.
FTR: I’m not endorsing Trump’s “logic”, just explaining it.
Why are the quotes so important to you? Another poster summarized what was said and you can google several articles with the relevant quotes. That’s enough.
And now another poster supplied the quotes you were looking for. Are you satisfied now?
I did not say it would anger her supporters. Just that it could lose her votes. And I did explain why.
What about these grownups?
Hordes of Mexicans? You are confusing free trade with immigration now. Maybe you should read up on why Hillary’s stance on free trade was such a major issue during the Democratic Primary.
Her words were summarized, but that’s not enough for you apparently. It still gave you wiggle room to ignore them because they were not in quotes.
And I do not have to convince anyone that Hillary is “scary”, nor do I want to. My argument is that reading these revelations will cause Hillary to lose support. And you have failed to adequately explain why that won’t happen.
It was a bizarre and confusing panel of Clinton accusers:
Very bad audio. It looks like an outtake from Jerry Springer.
On CNN, Paula Jones, Broderick, Willey…and two others…Trump is riding this thing all the way into the wall…
Sanders supporters were right about her and Clinton supporters don’t even want to own it. Either that, or they have a SDMB position and a private position.
They are right that there’s nothing damaging about her speeches since she says nothing we didn’t already know about her: she’s pro-open borders, pro-free trade, pro-Wall Street even to the extent that she wants Wall Street to regulate itself and doesn’t feel Wall Street was responsible for the crash, and her positions are all strategic, not genuine.
So yeah, nothing damaging, just confirmation of what we all knew.
I actually find some of these accusations against Bill Clinton to be credible. I find all of these accusations against Hillary Clinton to be bizarre.
I guess so. So you’re saying that the Trump side’s position is that it’s fine for a man to say mean things about his wife’s lover, but icky and wrong for a woman to say mean things about her husband’s lover?
If so, I definitely missed that piece of cultural education.
ETA: Just read your edit–yeah, I guess that all fits in with the ‘Men are People and Women, who aren’t quite People, are here to help them’ philosophy. But I have to wonder how many women–even the right-wing variety–really, genuinely, and sincerely buy the concept that it’s horrible for a woman to say unkind things about their husband’s lover.
Excellent broad-brush talking-points style attack. No nuance or complexity at all. Steve Bannon would be proud!
Ladies and Gentlemen… THIS…
…Is why we can never allow planned Parenthood to be defunded by Pence…
Kellyanne needs to remind Trump about the first rule of holes. And not those kind of holes!!