Trump is also not in his job to save America, he’s in it to make money.,
That’s an assumption. So far she has presented as being reasonably down-to-earth and straightforward. I wouldn’t bet my life on that presentation sticking, but I’m doubting that she’ll come out of this any wealthier than she went into it and I doubt that she’d have much expectation otherwise.
Probably the only real hope for her would be that somehow she catches the eye of a Saudi prince. Beyond that, I don’t know that she has enough of a story to tell to even reach a book deal with someone. Ain’t no one going to want to read a steamy sex novel where the protagonist is Donald Trump.
She writes it as the memoir of a porn star, and includes a chapter about her affair with Trump as the primary selling point.
and now Cohen claims she owes him up to $20 mil for talking about the agreement .
Trump attorney: Stormy Daniels violated agreement, entitled to pay $20M in damages
Oh, I don’t want it to be a weird fetish tape. I hope it’s just straight up screwing …while Trump calls her Ivanka and she calls him Daddy.
Hm…could be, now that you say it. There’s probably a reasonably sizable percentage of the populace that wishes they could read the story of a porn star (glamored up), and this would give them an excuse to pick it up beyond looking for smut and scandalous behavior.
I don’t think that Trump has a thing for his daughter. If he did, then he wouldn’t be having sex with big-busted porn stars, he’d be picking skinny “nubile” style women (or straight-up underage girls) that remind him of when Ivanka was his little girl. I think he just doesn’t have any value metric for women - whether they’re his daughter or not - beyond whether they’re hot enough to fuck, and he’s proud that he spawned a woman who is hot enough to fuck.
Think of it like he has made a beautiful house for his step-son. He appreciates that it’s not for himself, but he’s still proud that it’s a beautiful house.
The quirk isn’t that he wants to fuck her, it’s that Ivanka is a product and is measured on the same sort of transactional metrics that one would appreciate any product. In the product of women, Trump only evaluates them on hotness.
Trevor Noah: “Don’t forget: Donald Trump wants to bang his daughter.”
It takes some real mental gymnastics to try to rationalize how Trump’s multiple statements do not reflect a lustful desire for Ivanka. Trump has long established himself as a legendary creep, a sort of oafish Barney Stinson, but his frequent commentary how how sexy Ivanka is and how he would date her were she not his daughter just ramps it up further.
Stranger
Sincere thanks for the link contribution.
I don’t do false equivalences though:
So what? I don’t have a problem with someone who thinks that candidate A is a scumball in his personal life and no moral leader, but is nonetheless a fine public servant. It’s an entirely plausible case: I happen to agree that the 2 realms can be considered separately and partitioned. Saying that Trump is a moral leader is freaking silly though.
(Are the 2 realms wholly separate? No. Did the Lewinski flap hurt President Clinton’s effectiveness as President? Sure. You can still separate the 2 issues out.)
Most of the linked article consisted of lazy and tiresome both-sides-do-it-ism, except for one result: [INDENT][INDENT][INDENT] …just 26 percent of Democrats (vs. 67 percent of Republicans) agreed that “an elected official who has committed an immoral act in their personal life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life.” [/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT] That 26% figure is a turnaround from the Clinton days, though it would be nice to dig up polling so we could quantify the gap.
Note that the definition of “an immoral act” is an important variable, here. It may be defined by Democrats in a way that differs predictably and reliably from the way it’s defined by Republicans.
That definition could change over time, too: in one era, consensual-but-adulterous sexual activity with someone of the socially-acceptable gender might be considered by most respondents to be “an immoral act,” but a quarter century later, it might be considered to be such by a much smaller proportion of respondents.
Its amazing how at every step Trump and his lawyers confirm what had been previously claimed.
Yes, there is an NDA.
Yes, the document Stormy Daniel’s lawyer claims is the NDA the actual document.
At this point I’m really thinking there must be photos or audio/video recordings because anything short of that has been confirmed by both sides.
I’m not sure I understand this statement, but you have read the claimed NDA, right?
It’s all there including the routing information for the bank account to receive the payment.
Does anyone know what his chances of collecting a penny from her would be? I can’t make heads or tails of it.
MSNBC reports that her crowdfunding has passed $150,000 in two days.
Jim Wright tweets that “We are now quite literally paying her more to fuck Trump than Trump paid her to fuck Trump.”
Personally, I don’t think Trump actually wants to have sex with his daughter. Trump loves his children as a normal parent would and he wants to compliment them. With his sons he might compliment their success or intelligence or good character. But with his daughter he compliments her by saying she has the highest quality a woman can possess in Donald Trump’s mind; physical attractiveness. Trump’s constantly saying Ivanka is sexy because he feels that’s the highest praise a woman can be given.
More like he’s preening himself for being able to get the ‘sexiest’ women. And I wouldn’t put any immorality past a man who thinks rules just don’t apply to him.
Nice you don’t do false equivalences … do you do true ones? Maybe not.
Here’s the reality: we have biases as to how we interpret information, how we filter it, and how we cast it if we accept it as true. All of us we. It is not something unique to “Trump voters”; it is evolutionary cognitive baggage. Training in critical thinking an analysis can offset it some but most of the time not to true neutral and consistent judgement levels.
Here’s some links if you want to dig and see what sort of apples to apples you can come up with.
Current actual question and numbers here.
Clinton era one here and here.
To me the following is the, excuse the expression in this context, money shot.
In the Clinton era:
I cannot find the partisan breakout, but still.
Compare to today. Only 10% of Democrats believe that if the allegations are true it would be "not relevant to Trump’s presidency’ (i.e. a private matter) and overall only a bit more than a third do.
Trump boinking a porn star is actually is less objectionable to me than Clinton getting a blow job from someone he had power over. I hope the cover-up gets him but I’d rather focus on the harms he does as President by way of policy and by way of criminality and incompetence.
And I am pretty sure that if Trump was caught doing what Clinton was caught doing, and lied about it as Clinton did, many of my side (who at worst felt as above when it was Clinton) would be demanding impeachment and conviction and shocked that anyone would disagree.
This scandal won’t result in his core supporters changing their current beliefs about him and it is naive to think it would. IMHO.
You are assuming hypocrisy where there is none. You fail to see something quite obvious. The questionnaire did not specifically ask about Stormy Daniels. It asks a more general question about personal immoral acts. The implication is thus that it is about all of Trump’s immoral acts, not just this one.
Clinton and Trump are not equivalent. Clinton was accused of one possibly immoral act. Trump regularly and consistently commits immoral acts. One is arguably not that big a deal, as long as it’s isolated. The other is a huge deal, because it shows a pattern of unethical behavior.
And even if you think it was clear this was about Stormy Daniels–which part is it referring to? As far as I’ve seen, the public outcry is not the adultery with a possible prostitute. It’s the blackmail and coverup. It’s paying them off before the election. The implication of such a payoff is that some of the people who would vote for Trump would be dissuaded if they knew about this action.
What’s more, you are comparing a different Democratic Party, before #MeToo and all the stuff that led up to it. So there’s even a difference in how we treat sex issues in general. So there’s another data point missing: how do Democrats feel about Clinton’s act now?
Yes, it is more of a problem now that we care about people in power pressuring sex. And it is more of a problem now that one of them has alleged rape, rather than saying it was consensual. You have to look at what the supposed “immoral act” was back then: adultery. And a lot of Democrats see that as a small immoral act, not a big one.
Sure, you can call this context “bias” and technically be correct. But the implication is what you say is that we care about this with Trump because we hate him, and wouldn’t care if it was about a Democrat. But that’s a dangerous proposition that undermines any moral argument against Trump.
So, sorry. This is a false equivalency. We’re not necessarily discussing the same level of immoral action, or the same number. Even with Daniels, you are ignoring that there’s more than one act involved. And you’re comparing things across time without allowing for changes in ideology as a confounding factor.
Oh, and additionally, people need to remember that we’re not going after “core supporters.” This is a “war” of attrition. The idea is to get the people who are wavering. If you focus on convincing the core or base, you’ll never do anything.
Pointing out that Trump has done something illegal and against their morals may be enough to bring over people who are on the edge. That’s why we pursue this, not because we personally think that seeing a prostitute or having an affair while married is that big a deal.
The “family values” Republicans are locked in a lot of cognitive dissonance right now. The “Religious Right” are having to completely argue against their previously stated beliefs about the morality of their leaders. And, for a lot of people, it seems that sex stuff is far, far more important to them than anything else. You can starve the poor, but don’t have sex with anyone but your wife or husband.
Did you click the link? The question I cited was specifically in relation to the Stormy Daniels affair.
Do you not remember the variety of allegations about Clinton’s abuse of power in matters of sex?
I detest Trump. But his disregard for the truth, his pussy-grabbing comments, his boorishness, narcissism, oafishness, racism, lack of empathy and compassion, his actions that go against everything that makes this country great, and at end of day what I am fairly sure will be found to be his criminality … these are the things matter and make him unfit to lead. A consensual affair with a porn “star”? Meh.
YES it is how an item fits into what we each see as the overall pattern. If I or likely you saw him otherwise as supporting and leading on what I thought was morally right, I and likely you would ignore his affair and still call him a moral leader on the things that matter for the country (to me or you). He happens to be on the immoral and unethical side of all that.
On preview - I get your next post’s point. Yes this keeps up the pressure on certain demographics who voted for him. I fear that it can be overplayed … just as GOP leadership overplayed their hand on Clinton. There are actual high crimes and misdemeanors … we may dilute them when we focus so much on what titillates instead.