EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5551
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. 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. | ||
|
BallinWitStalin
1177 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Beauty is subjective though, not to mention the fact that ugly/ non-supermodel women can absolutely be raped or sexually assaulted or receive inappropriate advances. Trump should probably just keep his mouth shut and not repeatedly bring up all the women who are accusing him of these things. Its worse actually. If you're asked "Did you sexually assault her" The wrong response is "If she were prettier" Which is the implicit statement he makes when he says she's not pretty enough. | ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I think the moments of "Holy cow is he really running for president" would be similar, but Colbert wouldn't act nearly as outrageously offensive and sexually deviant as Trump. If he was fully and truly embodying "Stephen Colbert," the character, then he would. Obv Colbert the person is too good a person to go through with it | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:32 PassiveAce wrote: If he was fully and truly embodying "Stephen Colbert," the character, then he would. Obv Colbert the person is too good a person to go through with it A Colbert campaign would be entertaining, instead of train-wreck-entertaining. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:30 Plansix wrote: It is less than half, but it is some combination of dirt bad men and a much smaller number of not so great women. And it is significant. damn everyone's sarcastic shitpost radar has been totally fucked by Trumpers. At this point Im just doing it as a minor experiment to see if it gets picked up to amuse myself. On October 14 2016 03:31 BallinWitStalin wrote: You really think that matters in cases of sexual assault? As a lawyer? Would this be your defense, if you were defending someone accused of this in court? Ofcourse it matters, you think Drumpf would want to grope ugly bitches ? Heres another one, im just premeditating all the noise we can expect from deplorables. Remember he hangs out with super models and gets to see them naked. His statements were about sexually assaulting hot women, he never said he assaulted ugly women. So the ugly women are lying. Also while we are on the subject, Arm Rests are a like body armour that prevents sexual assault. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
"I can't believe that people are giving up on Trump because of locker room comments! It's something lots of guys do privately!" or "Bill Clinton did something just as bad or worse, why harp on Trump?" are looking at it from the wrong way. While you guys might be fully invested in Trump so that you are unconcerned with inappropriate remarks, but common remarks amongst some demographics and not entirely wrong, others who were uneasy about supporting Trump are using it as their excuse. They might have supported Trump for some of his policies and felt conflicted with some of his other policies - and find that this latest scandal is a great way to get out of supporting him. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:43 Nevuk wrote: So Lou Dobbs was busy retweeting personal information of some of Trump's accusers Whoever buys twitter should do us all a favor and shut it down. It would be a net gain for humanity. And she should file a lawsuit against him, just because this should be something you should be able to sue someone for in civil court. Publicly releasing personal information to people so they can be harassed or even harmed. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:32 PassiveAce wrote: If he was fully and truly embodying "Stephen Colbert," the character, then he would. Obv Colbert the person is too good a person to go through with it Even Colbert the personality had limitations of how far he was willing to go. I'm pretty sure Trump crossed some of those lines on the very first day of his campaign ("That mexican thing") and never looked back. | ||
|
Little-Chimp
Canada948 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:21 OuchyDathurts wrote: He talked about not being able to stop himself from kissing women. We're not talking the cultural mating dance back and forth at a dance club where both parties want it. We're talking I think that woman is so hot I have to kiss her, regardless of whether she wants it or not, and I don't have the self control to stop myself. Two completely different things. Go out to a bar, a club, the supermarket, the mall today, find the hottest chick there and just stroll up and kiss her. See how long it takes you to get your ass beat or handcuffs put on you. We'll wait to hear back about how that panned out. It doesn't matter if the pussy thing was said in relation to a married woman, a single woman, a virgin, a transgendered woman, or any other type of woman or person for that matter. If you say you grab someone by the genitals without consent you are a sexual predator, end of story. If you say you do it and get away with it because you're rich and powerful you're justifying sexual assault because you're rich and powerful. This isn't difficult dude. You don't just get to grope and kiss people because you want to and you being rich or famous doesn't suddenly grant you the right to either. There's plenty of gold diggers and freaks out there who will consensually do whatever you want with them. Go find one of them and knock yourself out. Don't force yourself on people, that's against the law. Fair points. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming these mating dances had occurred. But the way people argue in this thread you would think anyone who's tried to kiss someone and failed at the end of a date and anyone at a club who gets frisky without explicitly asking should be locked up or something. Again, if I was American I would vote for Hilary. However, I really don't like the thought of people's private conversations being possibly taken out of context to suddenly "prove" sexual assault. As holy as everyone in here pretends to be, everyone says some shit now and then that if you read it back you'd be like oh shit wtf. Obviously not everyone here is running for pres though. | ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:01 Little-Chimp wrote: Fair points. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming these mating dances had occurred. But the way people argue in this thread you would think anyone who's tried to kiss someone and failed at the end of a date and anyone at a club who gets frisky without explicitly asking should be locked up or something. Again, if I was American I would vote for Hilary. However, I really don't like the thought of people's private conversations being possibly taken out of context to suddenly "prove" sexual assault. As holy as everyone in here pretends to be, everyone says some shit now and then that if you read it back you'd be like oh shit wtf. Obviously not everyone here is running for pres though. How private is a conversation when you're with a "reporter" for a TV tabloid show and 7 other men? He states that he does these things, kissing and groping women, and he gets away with it. That is sexual assault and an admission that he serially does it. There's really not much else to it. No one is pretending to be holy. Everyone does a lot of stuff that's messed up. I'm crude, I'm an asshole, I'm blunt, I can be socially retarded sometimes. I've never sexually assaulted someone and I've never gloated about doing such a thing, nor have I been in the presence of someone who gloated about such a thing or there would be consequences for such gloating. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:01 Little-Chimp wrote: Fair points. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming these mating dances had occurred. But the way people argue in this thread you would think anyone who's tried to kiss someone and failed at the end of a date and anyone at a club who gets frisky without explicitly asking should be locked up or something. Again, if I was American I would vote for Hilary. However, I really don't like the thought of people's private conversations being possibly taken out of context to suddenly "prove" sexual assault. As holy as everyone in here pretends to be, everyone says some shit now and then that if you read it back you'd be like oh shit wtf. Obviously not everyone here is running for pres though. But you have to understand that in these are just pieces of a larger puzzle even if you are concerned about private conversations being exposed. On top of the private conversations you have numerous public indicators: Trump on Howard Stern, Trump's public comments on women during the campaign, Trump's comments on his daughter, and numerous previous lawsuits (one of which is in progress right now). | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21384 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:01 Little-Chimp wrote: Fair points. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming these mating dances had occurred. But the way people argue in this thread you would think anyone who's tried to kiss someone and failed at the end of a date and anyone at a club who gets frisky without explicitly asking should be locked up or something. Again, if I was American I would vote for Hilary. However, I really don't like the thought of people's private conversations being possibly taken out of context to suddenly "prove" sexual assault. As holy as everyone in here pretends to be, everyone says some shit now and then that if you read it back you'd be like oh shit wtf. Obviously not everyone here is running for pres though. We are talking the way we are because we are talking about audio that makes it clear that Trump is talking about moving on women without consent. We are talking about sexual assault because Trump is talking about sexual assault. Please don't step into a conversation without knowing what the conversation is about and then complain about how people are talking. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On October 14 2016 01:37 Little-Chimp wrote: Not a trump voter, but really surprised at how many people are taking these girls suddenly coming out of the woodwork at face value while eye rolling at the Bill Clinton accusations. Be real, Hilary is just getting down to trumps level in the pig shit wars Both accusations are credible. I honestly think both men are rapists. But only one of them is running for president. On October 14 2016 02:28 ticklishmusic wrote: Michelle's numbers would go down if she ran for office (her advocating for healthy eating -> stop telling parents what to do) but she's goddamn good in her own right. She's remarkably good. Wasn't there an interview of the Obama's law school professor where the interviewer said "Did you ever think Obama would be president" and they said something like "Yeah, I was just wrong about which one." | ||
|
CannonsNCarriers
United States638 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:43 Nevuk wrote: So Lou Dobbs was busy retweeting personal information of some of Trump's accusers I take that as strong evidence that Dobbs has a history of abusing women. Ailes liked him for some reason. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On October 14 2016 03:31 BallinWitStalin wrote: You really think that matters in cases of sexual assault? As a lawyer? Would this be your defense, if you were defending someone accused of this in court? Depending on the case, yep, I definitely could see myself making that argument in defense of a client accused of sexual assault. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:28 xDaunt wrote: Depending on the case, yep, I definitely could see myself making that argument in defense of a client accused of sexual assault. So your defense would be "but your honor, this woman is clearly too ugly to rape, I say this as a man, and I would only rape her if she was prettier, and my client is clearly a rapist of high tastes"? | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:33 hunts wrote: So your defense would be "but your honor, this woman is clearly too ugly to rape, I say this as a man, and I would only rape her if she was prettier, and my client is clearly a rapist of high tastes"? Clearly you're not cut out for being an attorney if that's the best that you can up with. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 14 2016 04:28 xDaunt wrote: Depending on the case, yep, I definitely could see myself making that argument in defense of a client accused of sexual assault. Would you have secured yourself an all male jury with a very primitive understanding of the common motivations behind sexual assault? On October 14 2016 04:35 xDaunt wrote: Clearly you're not cut out for being an attorney if that's the best that you can up with. Please, you know the bar is much lower that that. And I don’t think he was looking for a recommendation from the TL legal squad. | ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
All male jury in the deep south I could see it working | ||
| ||
