In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On October 09 2016 11:53 LegalLord wrote: The most good the hacktivists did was getting DWS out and showing the "plausible deniability" Hillary fans that there were teeth to the Sanders camp allegations of DNC bias. Beyond that they have mostly just stoked the fires of scandal politics.
This is a strawman of the position held by Hillary supporters. The DNC e-mails did not show that any action was actually taken by the DNC to benefit Clinton over Sanders. They showed that several people within the DNC were expecting a Clinton victory (as was pretty much everyone else) and were rooting for her rather than Sanders (which was completely unsurprising given that she had spent the last few decades working for and supporting the Democratic party and the DNC instead of bashing it). At no point did Clinton supporters in this thread deny this was likely the case prior to the publishing of the DNC e-mails by wikileaks.
On October 09 2016 12:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I bet they wish they were pro-choice now... so many conservatives want to abort Trump...
On October 09 2016 11:53 LegalLord wrote: The most good the hacktivists did was getting DWS out and showing the "plausible deniability" Hillary fans that there were teeth to the Sanders camp allegations of DNC bias. Beyond that they have mostly just stoked the fires of scandal politics.
This is a strawman of the position held by Hillary supporters. The DNC e-mails did not show that any action was actually taken by the DNC to benefit Clinton over Sanders. They showed that several people within the DNC were expecting a Clinton victory (as was pretty much everyone else) and were rooting for her rather than Sanders (which was completely unsurprising given that she had spent the last few decades working for and supporting the Democratic party and the DNC instead of bashing it). At no point did Clinton supporters in this thread deny this was likely the case prior to the publishing of the DNC e-mails by wikileaks.
Not going to lie I'm pretty surpsised that this is the best wikileaks and co have come up with to leak on Clinton. This stuff is pretty freaking tame, and taking the public opinion vs private opinion thing at its worst possible conetation is the worst people are freaking out about. I kinda expected wikileaks to have actual dirt after they became a Russian propaganda mouth piece and started pushing trump so hard.
On October 09 2016 10:52 Chris1 wrote: Actions speak louder than words.
"I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73....it never goes away."
ugh i can't read more stuff about her story because half her google mentions are from far-right wing newspapers who just post crap. like i'm sorry that you have news to report but you shit on your credibility when you're so biased
"Broaddrick claims Bill Clinton raped her in 1978, when he was Arkansas’ attorney general, during what she thought would be a morning business meeting. As with many rape allegations, there is no way to definitively prove what happened, especially since Broaddrick didn’t speak out for decades. Through a lawyer in 1999, Bill Clinton denied assaulting Broaddrick and has never been charged. (A spokesperson declined to comment further to BuzzFeed News.) But contrary to what Hillary Clinton alluded to last fall, there is no concrete “evidence” that discredits Broaddrick’s rape claims."
"he [Bill Clinton] confronted her in person to apologize"
"When Jones’ lawyers subpoenaed her, Broaddrick signed an affidavit denying that Clinton had ever raped her. "
"Federal prosecutor Ken Starr’s investigation team reached out to Broaddrick to ask whether Clinton had forced her to file a false affidavit. Broaddrick was afraid of lying to a federal grand jury, she says. After Starr gave her immunity from prosecution for perjury, she decided it was time to tell the full truth."
"Hillary shook her hand and thanked her for everything she had done for Bill. To Broaddrick, the gesture felt like a threat to stay silent. As attorney general and later governor, Bill Clinton was “the main person that regulated my business and my income,” Broaddrick said. “After she said what she did to me, I just thought, I will keep quiet.”
I'm still undecided about how I feel about this in terms of Hillary's candidacy because it seems like she's still mad that they haven't apologized to her. There's no evidence of the actual rape and its statute of limitations has passed, but it's hard to believe she'd run with this story for this long, though rape stigma was a lot higher back then. But her responses in the interview don't sound great either. But she also wants this to go away. But she also doesn't continue to step away from her current limelight. So much middle ground :/
---
it's weird that this election fits so perfectly in some conspiracy theory - left wing supports Clinton, censors anti-Clinton information, right wing supports Trump, spreads inconclusive anti-Clinton material - can't prove that there is actual censorship/anti-Clinton material because of the censorship...
The basic answer is that some of the claims appear more credible than others. There are three main accusers, of whom it seems by far the most credible — based on the publicly available evidence — is Broaddrick. Jones's claim was aired for years and faced several major problems (including the fact that she claimed the president's penis had a "distinguishing mark" that doctors and Monica Lewinsky said it did not have), and Willey repeatedly lied to federal investigators and changed her story dramatically between grand jury testimony and a deposition in the Jones case (among other issues).
"[Hillary] came directly to me as soon as she hit the door. I had been there only a few minutes, I only wanted to make an appearance and leave. She caught me and took my hand and said 'I am so happy to meet you. I want you to know that we appreciate everything you do for Bill.' I started to turn away and she held onto my hand and reiterated her phrase -- looking less friendly and repeated her statement — 'Everything you do for Bill'. I said nothing. She wasn't letting me get away until she made her point. She talked low, the smile faded on the second thank you. I just released her hand from mine and left the gathering."
On October 09 2016 12:00 Djzapz wrote: With all the absolutely insane statements Trump has made purposefully in this election, it's funny that it's some bullshit he said in private in a hot mic without his knowledge that seems to harm him the most. I'm a lot more concerned with the stuff he's said in public than some macho quip he made in a bus full of douchebags.
I mean he described sexually assaulting women and getting away with it because hes rich and famous. Thats pretty awful. Then again hes also been accused of rape multiple times, including of a 13 year old, so its not like any one should be shocked that hes a rapey piece of shit. I'm still not sure why Trump and surrogates think going after Bill Clinton when Trump is as bad or worse, and Bill isn't running for president is a good move, but its sure not going to end well for them.
I don't know about the accusations of rape and that other shady shit but anyway about the thing he said, it certainly is completely messed up, but this is a guy who has also publicly said we should kill torture the families of alleged terrorists. That (and the countless other examples of mad shit), to me, does more to suggest he's not a good choice for a president, than fucked up banter which describe situations which may or may not have happened.
My friends and I have some really fucked up banter that would ruin my chances to be considered as a political candidate for city council, so to me that's just less important than the other stuff he's said. I WILL agree however that the comments he made in 2005 do a damn fine job of confirming that his misogyny runs deep. So I'm not saying it's irrelevant, it's just an overt representation of what we knew about him. He was so willing to say sexist shit that we all knew he thought lowly of women. Now we know.
I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if I didn't know who he was, because like I said I've said fucked up shit that's not at all representative of who I am. But I think that fundamentally that clip does show who Trump really is.
On October 09 2016 12:00 Djzapz wrote: With all the absolutely insane statements Trump has made purposefully in this election, it's funny that it's some bullshit he said in private in a hot mic without his knowledge that seems to harm him the most. I'm a lot more concerned with the stuff he's said in public than some macho quip he made in a bus full of douchebags.
I mean he described sexually assaulting women and getting away with it because hes rich and famous. Thats pretty awful. Then again hes also been accused of rape multiple times, including of a 13 year old, so its not like any one should be shocked that hes a rapey piece of shit. I'm still not sure why Trump and surrogates think going after Bill Clinton when Trump is as bad or worse, and Bill isn't running for president is a good move, but its sure not going to end well for them.
I don't know about the accusations of rape and that other shady shit but anyway about the thing he said, it certainly is completely messed up, but this is a guy who has also publicly said we should kill torture the families of alleged terrorists. That (and the countless other examples of mad shit), to me, does more to suggest he's not a good choice for a president, than fucked up banter which describe situations which may or may not have happened.
My friends and I have some really fucked up banter that would ruin my chances to be considered as a political candidate for city council, so to me that's just less important than the other stuff he's said. I WILL agree however that the comments he made in 2005 do a damn fine job of confirming that his misogyny runs deep. So I'm not saying it's irrelevant, it's just an overt representation of what we knew about him. He was so willing to say sexist shit that we all knew he thought lowly of women. Now we know.
I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if I didn't know who he was, because like I said I've said fucked up shit that's not at all representative of who I am. But I think that fundamentally that clip does show who Trump really is.
Good opinion, thanks for sharing. It's nice to see some reflective and measured responses that I can agree in part with.
On October 09 2016 12:00 Djzapz wrote: With all the absolutely insane statements Trump has made purposefully in this election, it's funny that it's some bullshit he said in private in a hot mic without his knowledge that seems to harm him the most. I'm a lot more concerned with the stuff he's said in public than some macho quip he made in a bus full of douchebags.
I mean he described sexually assaulting women and getting away with it because hes rich and famous. Thats pretty awful. Then again hes also been accused of rape multiple times, including of a 13 year old, so its not like any one should be shocked that hes a rapey piece of shit. I'm still not sure why Trump and surrogates think going after Bill Clinton when Trump is as bad or worse, and Bill isn't running for president is a good move, but its sure not going to end well for them.
I don't know about the accusations of rape and that other shady shit but anyway about the thing he said, it certainly is completely messed up, but this is a guy who has also publicly said we should kill torture the families of alleged terrorists. That (and the countless other examples of mad shit), to me, does more to suggest he's not a good choice for a president, than fucked up banter which describe situations which may or may not have happened.
My friends and I have some really fucked up banter that would ruin my chances to be considered as a political candidate for city council, so to me that's just less important than the other stuff he's said. I WILL agree however that the comments he made in 2005 do a damn fine job of confirming that his misogyny runs deep. So I'm not saying it's irrelevant, it's just an overt representation of what we knew about him. He was so willing to say sexist shit that we all knew he thought lowly of women. Now we know.
I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if I didn't know who he was, because like I said I've said fucked up shit that's not at all representative of who I am. But I think that fundamentally that clip does show who Trump really is.
Yeah me and my friends have said some pretty awful shit, but I gotta say none of us have gotten close to describing and bragging about committing sexual assault. Theres standard guy locker room talk, theres pretty awful guy locker room talk, then theres that shit.
On October 09 2016 12:00 Djzapz wrote: With all the absolutely insane statements Trump has made purposefully in this election, it's funny that it's some bullshit he said in private in a hot mic without his knowledge that seems to harm him the most. I'm a lot more concerned with the stuff he's said in public than some macho quip he made in a bus full of douchebags.
I mean he described sexually assaulting women and getting away with it because hes rich and famous. Thats pretty awful. Then again hes also been accused of rape multiple times, including of a 13 year old, so its not like any one should be shocked that hes a rapey piece of shit. I'm still not sure why Trump and surrogates think going after Bill Clinton when Trump is as bad or worse, and Bill isn't running for president is a good move, but its sure not going to end well for them.
I don't know about the accusations of rape and that other shady shit but anyway about the thing he said, it certainly is completely messed up, but this is a guy who has also publicly said we should kill torture the families of alleged terrorists. That (and the countless other examples of mad shit), to me, does more to suggest he's not a good choice for a president, than fucked up banter which describe situations which may or may not have happened.
My friends and I have some really fucked up banter that would ruin my chances to be considered as a political candidate for city council, so to me that's just less important than the other stuff he's said. I WILL agree however that the comments he made in 2005 do a damn fine job of confirming that his misogyny runs deep. So I'm not saying it's irrelevant, it's just an overt representation of what we knew about him. He was so willing to say sexist shit that we all knew he thought lowly of women. Now we know.
I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if I didn't know who he was, because like I said I've said fucked up shit that's not at all representative of who I am. But I think that fundamentally that clip does show who Trump really is.
Yeah me and my friends have said some pretty awful shit, but I gotta say none of us have gotten close to describing and bragging about committing sexual assault. Theres standard guy locker room talk, theres pretty awful guy locker room talk, then theres that shit.
I also have not gone nearly that far on that specific topic of outrageous shit to say. But I've gone too far on many occasions Jaaaaasper, and on many topics. If my mom knew... oh God no.
As shitty as the said statements are, I don't think they're all that bad in the grand scheme of things? It's bullshit yes, but it's also a private conversation, also if you look at stuff like John Oliver segments, you see that there really isn't a lot of actually dirty dirt to dig up on the guy. He's an idiot, asshole, what have you, but I think it's being way overblown in a way which fits the "dishonest media" bill.
Especially since this is from literally 10 years ago. If the worst they can find on Trump is a few shitty words said in a private conversation 10 years ago, illegal polish workers on Trump Tower*, etc. then I'm inclined to believe that there isn't a whole lot of bad associated to Trump, barring his actual incompetency or bluntness.
*I still don't know why anyone gives a shit about that, since these are the same people who are denouncing Trump for wanting to go after illegals in the first place. This doesn't make sense. If illegal immigrants aren't supposed to be deported, then why are you giving Trump rap for giving them work in the first place?
From a neutral perspective it's really just everyone hounding against Trump and being remarkably lenient towards Hillary's own bullshit. For some reason being careless with classified information and stuff like Benghazi is blown over as "not a big deal" compared to dumb shit Trump does. It's silly. The FBI is also in the Clinton pocket, I think anyone who isn't fatally naive should be aware of that (clickclickclick). People died, but that's not as bad as Trump being a misogynist or saying dumb things (note: not actually DOING dumb things). I have interacted with people before, they say dumb things all the fucking time. You people act like violence towards terrorists is something only Trump condones when that is far, far from the case.
On October 09 2016 16:26 Incognoto wrote: As shitty as the said statements are, I don't think they're all that bad in the grand scheme of things? It's bullshit yes, but it's also a private conversation, also if you look at stuff like John Oliver segments, you see that there really isn't a lot of actually dirty dirt to dig up on the guy. He's an idiot, asshole, what have you, but I think it's being way overblown in a way which fits the "dishonest media" bill.
Especially since this is from literally 10 years ago. If the worst they can find on Trump is a few shitty words said in a private conversation 10 years ago, illegal polish workers on Trump Tower*, etc. then I'm inclined to believe that there isn't a whole lot of bad associated to Trump, barring his actual incompetency or bluntness.
*I still don't know why anyone gives a shit about that, since these are the same people who are denouncing Trump for wanting to go after illegals in the first place. This doesn't make sense. If illegal immigrants aren't supposed to be deported, then why are you giving Trump rap for giving them work in the first place?
From a neutral perspective it's really just everyone hounding against Trump and being remarkably lenient towards Hillary's own bullshit. For some reason being careless with classified information and stuff like Benghazi is blown over as "not a big deal" compared to dumb shit Trump does. It's silly. The FBI is also in the Clinton pocket, I think anyone who isn't fatally naive should be aware of that (clickclickclick). People died, but that's not as bad as Trump being a misogynist or saying dumb things (note: not actually DOING dumb things). I have interacted with people before, they say dumb things all the fucking time. You people act like violence towards terrorists is something only Trump condones when that is far, far from the case.
because with him, in this case it's not just the words, it's the implication that he has done it multiple times. Him talking really shitty about other women in the past has always been just that, with people usually going to answer that people just need to grow up, no damage done by calling someone Miss Piggy or whatever else.
You can't just brush this away as "just some words, noone got hurt" if it literally happened like that, which seems to be the case.
I'm fairly sure I saw either 1 or 2 stories of people claiming that it happened to them exactly like that the day it came out. Down to the eating tictacs before kissing part. Obviously just hearsay at this moment but I can see why this is getting treated differnetly if that's the case
I'm really tired of this because it seems like news agencies on both sides continue to have extremely conflicting reports on these scandals by Hillary.
The email scandal is either incompetence across the entire department or extreme carelessness by Hillary.
Benghazi is either incompetence across the entire department or extreme carelessness by Hillary.
Like I'm truly trying to find condemning evidence against Hillary but I can't. Do you guys even read some of these sources? They take ambiguous evidence and spin it into anything. A Republican agent? published a book about the FBI incident... Really s/he cared this much about it that s/he wrote a book? Like I can't imagine how that's reasonable or credible. I'm not sure why Bill Clinton delayed his plane to talk to someone for 30 minutes but is that the damning evidence apparently? I just don't understand how the leap is made.
This whole election just seems like people choosing what side they're on and finding what news sources that fit their beliefs. This is my first time and its really tiring trying to keep up, is it always like this?
The email issue is a definite screwup on Hillary's part, that against any other candidate would rightfully be the end of her campaign. Most of the other stuff is either bad policy or just the results of playing the political favor-trading game for too long in a way that isn't looked highly upon, but isn't a blatant and unambiguous screwup. Trump has his hands far further down that hole of shitty political favor trading as well. The issue here is that that fact doesn't exonerate Hillary for her own wrongdoing, and the fact that some people pursue genuine witch hunts against her doesn't mean that all her detractors are just stupid and wrong. Denialism happens on both sides.
And no, this election is definitely far worse than average on the scandal-chasing front.
On October 09 2016 18:22 kwizach wrote: For those unfamiliar with some of Mike Pence's views, here's a clip in which he discusses evolution and creationism:
On October 09 2016 17:16 Blisse wrote: I'm really tired of this because it seems like news agencies on both sides continue to have extremely conflicting reports on these scandals by Hillary.
The email scandal is either incompetence across the entire department or extreme carelessness by Hillary.
Benghazi is either incompetence across the entire department or extreme carelessness by Hillary.
Like I'm truly trying to find condemning evidence against Hillary but I can't. Do you guys even read some of these sources? They take ambiguous evidence and spin it into anything. A Republican agent? published a book about the FBI incident... Really s/he cared this much about it that s/he wrote a book? Like I can't imagine how that's reasonable or credible. I'm not sure why Bill Clinton delayed his plane to talk to someone for 30 minutes but is that the damning evidence apparently? I just don't understand how the leap is made.
This whole election just seems like people choosing what side they're on and finding what news sources that fit their beliefs. This is my first time and its really tiring trying to keep up, is it always like this?
I'm on the side which would most benefit the country.
I don't really want Trump elected, but can't help note the disparity between the treatment both candidates are getting. Hillary's scandals are being blown over and ignored. In contrast, anything and everything Trump does is blown out of proportion.
Then again, both of them are so bad that they almost deserve it.
When arguing trump vs Clinton, please don't brush aside Trump's incompetence and lack of emotional inhibition. What he has done proves that he cannot even remotely function at the level that Hillary is, even if she is a dirty politician. It's really sad that Hillary is in the running, I get that. Trump, however, has never had any more substance than fucking jello when it comes to doing the job that he is campaigning for. He can do great things by bringing issues to the table, but in no way should anyone want him at the table of people trying to solve it.
On October 09 2016 16:53 Incognoto wrote: I'm not saying what he did is OK.
I don't see any actual rape allegations either, just stuff which people suppose.
I'm pointing out the entirely unfairness between how much shit Hillary gets away with compared to Trump.
I'd imagine that if Hillary bragged about grabbing guys by the dick without their permission and trying to seduce a few married men- while she was already a serial cheater and on multiple husbands- she probably wouldn't get away with it either.
Keep in mind that every week, Trump says something bigoted and utterly inappropriate. Hillary actually has a filter for the most part (except for the "deplorables" comment, which she took plenty of criticism for).
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BxeNRmN.jpg)
