Trump

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

pjalive21 said:

mrussel1 said:

pjalive21 said:

Sad that an issue such as sexual assault is being used in a twisted game...i dont believe not a one of these women and i believe Trump is a pervert...timing is everything and these women are trying to catch their 15min

So you think the reporter from People is lying regarding her encounter?

She of all of them i question the most....she could have taken Trump down at any point working the media but she chooses now? Look ive been a victim of assault when i was a child so i understand the severity of the situation but have also seen good people (not saying Trump is good, not even close) taken down for now good reason either....she had a platform that at any point could have ran the story, I know i would have ran it way before he ran for president

Why woudl she lie and put herself out there like this, open to attack and lawsuits?

Money?

How is she earning money for this? And if Trump sues her, how is that a net positive decision?

I don't know, but if she is lying, money and fame are usually pretty good motives. Who would be most to gain from this story would be where the money came from...Who knows, but without any evidence or witnesses, one has to be skeptical.

So your position is that she MIGHT make some money from this, so therefore she is lying. Even though it's beyond dispute that 1. She interviewed them in Mar Lago and 2. Her very vivid description matches closely with what he said he does. Isn't there some cognitive dissonance in that?

Where did I ever say that my position is that she is lying. I'm just saying that I require a little validation or evidence before I believe something. Just saying that she could be lying...or she could be telling the truth...who knows?

Remember, most of these women told other people about the assaults immediately after they happened. Those people corroborated their stories. That holds a lot of weight to me.

Same here.
Look, if it were one woman maybe I'd question. But it's several women, and all their stories match what Trump bragged about and are consistent with proven ongoing behaviour in his past. And as said, these women did mention these experiences to others when they happened, and those people appear to be backing up those claims. I don't have any doubt anymore.
This reminds me of when the whole Cosby story started breaking. At first, I kind of gave Cosby the benefit of the doubt. But as more and more women came forward, it because clear that the benefit of the doubt was absolutely destroyed. And that was with a man who had a squeaky clean reputation as far as most people knew, so probably earned the benefit of the doubt at the beginning. With Trump, he had a terrible reputation already in this context, with so many comments over the years pointing towards his pervo/predatory attitide about women, and then he said what he did out loud on video. Now with all these women coming forward with same stories, considering the evidence we had already about Trump's attitude and behaviour (including spousal rape accusations from his ex-wife and a civil suit for child rape), I think anyone who doubts that Trump is sexual predator who goes around groping women is in complete denial at this point.

pjalive21 said:

mrussel1 said:

I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.

Just shows how dangerous HRC and her machine is...they out did WikiLeaks dropping emails and then let Trump hang himself and this story of sexual assualt was picked up by the media over Wikileaks, which of course is in HRC back pocket....i said this a long time ago and ill say it again HRC knows how to play the game...

game, set, match...this election is over

From a purely political standpoint (not making any moral judgments) it's absolutely vicious and brutal politics. It's fucking brilliant and Hugh Dillon is right. It will be studied in polysci classes.

Now I'm making a judgment. Who do you want running our foreign policy apparatus? DJT who acts like this?? Or Clinton who is strategic, brillian, and icy cold. I know who I'd rather have up against Putin.

cutz said:

josevolution said:

Like the nation needs more proof what else can we find out about this POS human , it's right there on video that was the real Trump boasting about it !

yet, this woman is defending him?

http://truthfeed.com/ann-coulter-the-same-media-gasping-in-horror-at-pssy-sure-didnt-mind-my-being-called-a-cnt-repeatedly/29199/

So Jim, just wondering, are you still undecided?

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.

For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.

What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...

Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.

BS44325 said:

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.

For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.

What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...

Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.

But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.

BS44325 said:

Gern Blansten said:

BS44325 said:

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.

For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.

What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...

Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.

But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.

She sure did but nobody would call Bernie Sanders or Martin O Malley a strong field.

Oh yeah?

unsung said:

dignin said:

PJPOWER said:

Kev - Coat and Keys said:

Trump admits assaulting women - women come forward about being assaulted by Trump.

Does this need much discussing beyond whether his number of crimes reach Cosby levels?

He is not even up to Bill Clinton levels yet, lol

Wow, Bill is running for president?

If his wife played part it matters. I'll bet she did, and the women said she did. Are they lying but the Trump women all telling the truth?

I would agree with your first sentence.

BS44325 said:

brianlux said:

BS44325 said:

Gern Blansten said:

BS44325 said:

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.

For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.

What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...

Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.

But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.

She sure did but nobody would call Bernie Sanders or Martin O Malley a strong field.

Oh yeah?

Yeah. O'Malley was for the most part considered to be a failed governor and Sanders was not even an official Democratic Party member until shortly before the primary. Sanders may have had the excitement of the left but he was never going to win and the party establishment made sure of that. That is basically what you call a thin bench and/or open field.

I'm not all that familiar with what you mean by "thin bench" (sporting term I assume) but it alludes to weakness and you can't call someone who drew (and still has) as much support as Bernie and call him a week component in politics. Plus you said "nobody" and I and others are not nobody.