I just watched the video and honestly what bothered me isn't specifically the "grabbing" part. When I first heard the quote I thought it would be just normal creepy dudes saying shit they'd like to do. If he had said, "I'd like to" first it would be skeezy but not out of character. Nope, worse. The "they let you do anything you want" is what bothers me. Sure on the one hand it could just be "X is rich and famous so I want to sleep with them." Probably not the best scenario but consenting adults yada yada. On the other hand it could be "He's rich and powerful and if I protest bad things could happen to me" which is obviously fucked up.
Part of me wants to see the reality where Trump becomes president to see that none of what he says he will enact either comes to pass or it doesn't help his supporters in a way they were delusional enough to think that it would. But then again the people who endorse him are the type of people who think they are never wrong but everyone else is. They won't self reflect on fucking up. They'll just complain more.
Trump has now threatened Hillary Clinton if any more tapes of him saying nasty shit surfaces (implicitly admitting that such behavior is a regular occurrence for him and undermining the notion that he is a different person now).
He has also been found to spout propaganda that has only been publicized on a state-owned russian news outlet, though there is also speculation that both Trumps talking points and the Sputnik article are based on bullshit cobbled together from emails released by Wikileaks on alt-right message boards. I am not sure which is the worse source for Trump to take his information from.
Maybe Asians? He's already covered Muslims/Brown people (considering his demographic), Black people, Latinos, disabled people, women.
Hadn't he done that already? Off the top of my head: - Supporting Japanese internment - Oblivious to $2bil paid by Japan to US for military - Repeatedly framing Chinese as bogeyman
Maybe Asians? He's already covered Muslims/Brown people (considering his demographic), Black people, Latinos, disabled people, women.
Hadn't he done that already? Off the top of my head: - Supporting Japanese internment - Oblivious to $2bil paid by Japan to US for military - Repeatedly framing Chinese as bogeyman
I wasn't aware of the first two. The third is more about China as an entity rather than the Chinese people. Nothing like "Mexicans are rapist murderers" or "Keep out the Muslims."
The third is more about China as an entity rather than the Chinese people.
Um, what? Suggesting that China is undermining the US economy at every turn as if it and its people are mustachioed cartoon villains doesn't express that he has a nuanced or even realistic view of the Chinese government or people. Painting China as a great satan wouldn't give many Chinese Americans the warm fuzzy and will damage their image in White America's psyche.
I read a demographic study where Asians (meaning all immigrants from Korea, Japan, China, and a few other places are aggregated) voted almost exclusively conservative/Republican until relatively recently, and now are a solid and unwavering Democrat bloc.
I read a demographic study where Asians (meaning all immigrants from Korea, Japan, China, and a few other places are aggregated) voted almost exclusively conservative/Republican until relatively recently, and now are a solid and unwavering Democrat bloc.
I still can't figure out Trumps defense of the tape as "locker room talk". I mean, all he says by doing so is "yes I said those things and meant them, but you weren't supposed to hear it".
I found this super-interesting: There is the USC/L.A. Times tracking poll that has grown infamous to anybody following the polling data since it was a complete outlier, but nevertheless it is cited routinely by Trump's campaign because it was so favorable to them. Nate Cohn wrote an article in the New York Times about why this is and the bad decisions that have lead to it being this way.
I like the idea of that tracking poll, but it's a pity that other pollsters and analysts have found so many flaws in it. Maybe next time more pollsters will find better techniques along the same lines but without those errors. Thankfully they publish a lot of the data, so it can be un-skewed (despite un-skewing being an issue in itself).
Seriously though, I'm just now catching up with the new allegations of several women, including a People reporter, of Trump kissing, groping, walking in on them changing, etc. I could even take the tape of him saying he'd be dating a 10-year old in ten years (when she's 20) to be a joke if he wasn't such a fucking, disgusting creep, not to mention that he bragged about his sexual behavior both off the record (in the Trump tape) and even on (to Howard Stern).
The only thing that gives me solace is through all of this the Republican party is eating itself.
Why are so many media fact checkers going overboard by fact checking opinions stated by Trump or otherwise strawmanning things he has said? Isn't there enough legit lying on his part to warrant honest fact checking?
I mean who cares if he said Hillary was copying his airplane backdrop rallies? He was just making a bad joke yet many media outlets published long fact check articles about it. Who is trolling who here?
I believe that Trump's primary win was due in large part to a media manipulation campaign. As to which side was doing the manipulating is open to debate. Trump received what could be a billion dollars in free campaign exposure during the primary. He barely spent any campaign money on advertising. In contrast Sanders (who I supported) couldn't get any real coverage during the primaries. He had blowout crowds with no press coverage. It seems like a conspiracy looking back.
I am sure you have all heard the joke about how Trump is the one Republican Clinton can beat and Clinton is the one Democrat Trump can beat. To think they are neck and neck in the polls is ridiculous!
The one silver lining to a Trump presidency is that it would not last long and wouldn't accomplish anything. The man has zero institutional support within the party. The first time he did something that could lead to impeachment we would see a suddenly bipartisan congress chomping at the bit to boot him out!
The one thing I legitimately fear about a Clinton presidency is four years of opposition being painted as sexism regardless of the principles involved. That is more of an annoyance than a fear.
One thing I have hated about the Clinton campaign is their "I have a vagina, you have a vagina. Vaginas must stick together so if a vagina owner does not vote for me you are a traitor to your gender." Outreach to women. Who thought that was a good idea?
I expect Clinton to win. I don't know if she will win with a majority or a plurality of the popular vote but I expect her to win. I can only hope that when she becomes President she stops being a trigger happy hawk and opens her eyes to the American policies that have been causing unrest in the world and fixes them. If Republicans manage to acquire strong enough majorities in the Legislature fear of a second Clinton impeachment might keep her from doing stupid things.
If Republicans manage to acquire strong enough majorities in the Legislature fear of a second Clinton impeachment might keep her from doing stupid things.
Stupid things such as? Also, personally, I would be more concerned about the Republican Legislature doing what they've been doing: supporting big business to the detriment of tge working classes, being more "hawkish" than HRX has ever been, and fighting for regressive social policies.
If Republicans manage to acquire strong enough majorities in the Legislature fear of a second Clinton impeachment might keep her from doing stupid things.
Stupid things such as? Also, personally, I would be more concerned about the Republican Legislature doing what they've been doing: supporting big business to the detriment of tge working classes, being more "hawkish" than HRX has ever been, and fighting for regressive social policies.
I am with you on the social side but Clinton is just as much a friend of big business as the Republicans are. Though she is more of a globalist than the Republicans are.
As to which side was doing the manipulating is open to debate. [...] Sanders (who I supported) couldn't get any real coverage during the primaries. He had blowout crowds with no press coverage. It seems like a conspiracy looking back.
To think they are neck and neck in the polls is ridiculous!
One thing I have hated about the Clinton campaign is their "I have a vagina, you have a vagina. Vaginas must stick together so if a vagina owner does not vote for me you are a traitor to your gender."
WTF? Where are you getting this from?
fear of a second Clinton impeachment might keep her from doing stupid things.
First, what does Bill Clinton's impeachment have to do with this? Second, exactly what kind of stupid things are you imagining? Maybe starting two foreign wars costing $3 trillion+?
Comments
I'm like: "These people have websites which explain their positions and policy in nauseating detail. Do you not know of them? Do you not read them?"
He has also been found to spout propaganda that has only been publicized on a state-owned russian news outlet, though there is also speculation that both Trumps talking points and the Sputnik article are based on bullshit cobbled together from emails released by Wikileaks on alt-right message boards. I am not sure which is the worse source for Trump to take his information from.
There are still four weeks left in this campaign.
The third debate will be really interesting in the "Which demographic will Trump repel next?"-sense.
Off the top of my head:
- Supporting Japanese internment
- Oblivious to $2bil paid by Japan to US for military
- Repeatedly framing Chinese as bogeyman
The problem is the GOP has turned into the party of exclusively angry, non-college educated white people, which Trump has co-opted.
The only thing that gives me solace is through all of this the Republican party is eating itself.
I mean who cares if he said Hillary was copying his airplane backdrop rallies? He was just making a bad joke yet many media outlets published long fact check articles about it. Who is trolling who here?
I believe that Trump's primary win was due in large part to a media manipulation campaign. As to which side was doing the manipulating is open to debate. Trump received what could be a billion dollars in free campaign exposure during the primary. He barely spent any campaign money on advertising. In contrast Sanders (who I supported) couldn't get any real coverage during the primaries. He had blowout crowds with no press coverage. It seems like a conspiracy looking back.
I am sure you have all heard the joke about how Trump is the one Republican Clinton can beat and Clinton is the one Democrat Trump can beat. To think they are neck and neck in the polls is ridiculous!
The one silver lining to a Trump presidency is that it would not last long and wouldn't accomplish anything. The man has zero institutional support within the party. The first time he did something that could lead to impeachment we would see a suddenly bipartisan congress chomping at the bit to boot him out!
The one thing I legitimately fear about a Clinton presidency is four years of opposition being painted as sexism regardless of the principles involved. That is more of an annoyance than a fear.
One thing I have hated about the Clinton campaign is their "I have a vagina, you have a vagina. Vaginas must stick together so if a vagina owner does not vote for me you are a traitor to your gender." Outreach to women. Who thought that was a good idea?
I expect Clinton to win. I don't know if she will win with a majority or a plurality of the popular vote but I expect her to win. I can only hope that when she becomes President she stops being a trigger happy hawk and opens her eyes to the American policies that have been causing unrest in the world and fixes them. If Republicans manage to acquire strong enough majorities in the Legislature fear of a second Clinton impeachment might keep her from doing stupid things.