What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Autumn Wind said:
Regarding the debate, what's the consensus on Chris Wallace? I know he's Fox News, but is he one of the more unhinged ones? 
Click to expand...
He is OK for Fox, but not the reporter his father was. He has already stated that he is not his job as a moderator to do any fact checking, so don't expect him to confront Trump with any misstatement of facts made during the debate, no matter how blatant.

 
TobiasFunke said:
These particular stories came out because the women chose to tell them in response to Trump's denial on Sunday that he ever did the things be bragged about doing on the Access Hollywood tape.
Click to expand...
You know or should know that I have nothing but respect for you. Look this is not conspiratorial, it's a criticism of the press.

My comment was provoked by listening to NPR this morning, the host went through the litany of women who have said that Trump has assaulted them. At least one or two of them were reporters.

Why was Trump being a serial sexual masher/assaulter not relevant before now? Hasn't this always been relevant, important information?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tonydead said:
We are Anonymous
Click to expand...
They're holding back the video for now, but they did release the audio from it. Bill can be heard whispering:

Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you downNever gonna run around and desert youNever gonna make you cry, never gonna say goodbyeNever gonna tell a lie and hurt you

 
tonydead said:
We are Anonymous
Click to expand...
You think any of these maniacs would care?  

Hillary could line up 10 Trump supporters against a wall, execute them herself, and just about every one of the regular loons in this thread would vote for her.  So rape would be nothing to them. 

 
So I think the only think Trump has accused an opponent of that he hasn't done ten times worse himself is rig the elec-

oh no

oh this is bad

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You know or should know that I have nothing but respect for you. Look this is not conspiratorial, it's a criticism of the press.

My comment was provoked by listening to NPR this morning, the host went through the litany of women who have said that Trump has assaulted them. At least one or two of them were reporters.

Why was Trump being a serial sexual masher/assaulter not relevant before now? Hasn't this always been relevant, important information?
Click to expand...
Why wasn't it relevant or important for Bill Cosby before, when in fact there were women going on the record against him several years ago?

I don't doubt that the election has added something to the Trump story, but it's just a fact that sometimes these things can take years before they bust open.

 
RBM said:
You think any of these maniacs would care?  

Hillary could line up 10 Trump supporters against a wall, execute them herself, and just about every one of the regular loons in this thread would vote for her.  So rape would be nothing to them. 
Click to expand...
Wait, which candidate was it who bragged that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose a vote?

 
RBM said:
You think any of these maniacs would care?  

Hillary could line up 10 Trump supporters against a wall, execute them herself, and just about every one of the regular loons in this thread would vote for her.  So rape would be nothing to them. 
Click to expand...
Seriously, do you truly believe that Hillary supporters are as blindly fanatic as Trump supporters? Because I've yet to encounter any. 

Obama certainly had fans who loved him passionately, as did Reagan. In this cycle, there have been people who love Trump, and others who love Bernie Sanders. But Hillary doesn't inspire that sort of passion. (Conversely, a lot of people claim they hate Hillary, but I'm skeptical of this as well. I have a feeling that once she is elected she will not truly be hated by some conservatives in the way they hated Obama. But we'll see.) 

 
Autumn Wind said:
Why wasn't it relevant or important for Bill Cosby before, when in fact there were women going on the record against him several years ago?

I don't doubt that the election has added something to the Trump story, but it's just a fact that sometimes these things can take years before they bust open.
Click to expand...
I agree on Cosby. The press didn't investigate because he was a beloved tv star I guess?

Trump hit the scene politically last spring. He started outright attacking Bill Clinton as an "issue" last December.

Personally I think the character of our candidates is always an issue. This kind of thing should have been reported from the outset.

- eta - I admit to not being read up on this, but tehse were actual reporters, am I wrong? Reporters didn't think they should report what happened to them?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You know or should know that I have nothing but respect for you. Look this is not conspiratorial, it's a criticism of the press.

My comment was provoked by listening to NPR this morning, the host (Asher?) went through the litany of women who have said that Trump has assaulted them.

Why was Trump being a serial sexual masher/assaulter not relevant before now? Hasn't this always been relevant, important information?
Click to expand...
I appreciate that and the feeling is mutual, but I'm OK calling you out on stuff I don't like, mostly because you're far from the first person to make this timing argument so it's more about the line of reasoning than the poster.

I think I explained this as best as I could in the post.  It was relevant before now to the media, there was among other things a huge NY Times story back in May on Trump's treatment of women, as well as near-constant stories of insults and misogyny, which were a consistent story throughout the campaign.  The only thing that is "new" are the new allegations of assault. The Times reported what they had in May. The public mostly ignored it, but that's really not the Times' fault, it's ours.  The Guardian reported on Harth's claims in July and other outlets shared that, but again the public ignored it.  That's our fault, not the media's.

And the thing is, you can't really investigate claims of assault or inappropriate behavior unless the victim stands behind them.  Women are now making these claims, IMO, because (1) they were outraged that Trump denied behaving like the sexual predator he described himself as in the Access Hollywood tapes, and (2) coming out with stories like this in public is an incredibly difficult thing to do, you open yourself up to all kinds of awful stuff, so it's much easier to do once you realize you're not alone (think of the Cosby timeline). It's their right to share or not share them whenever they want, they are the victims.  The media should not be in the business of sharing their stories unless and until they want them shared.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You know or should know that I have nothing but respect for you. Look this is not conspiratorial, it's a criticism of the press.

My comment was provoked by listening to NPR this morning, the host went through the litany of women who have said that Trump has assaulted them. At least one or two of them were reporters.

Why was Trump being a serial sexual masher/assaulter not relevant before now? Hasn't this always been relevant, important information?
Click to expand...
Because a single woman, reporter or not, who is treated like that has no idea she's one of a string of victims and has the normal "what did I do to cause this?" doubts (check out Krista's earlier post )?  It's not until they hear him bragging about it and then denying it actually happened that they have a reason to go public with a personal embarrassment.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I appreciate that and the feeling is mutual, but I'm OK calling you out on stuff I don't like, mostly because you're far from the first person to make this timing argument so it's more about the line of reasoning than the poster.

I think I explained this as best as I could in the post.  It was relevant before now to the media, there was among other things a huge NY Times story back in May on Trump's treatment of women, as well as near-constant stories of insults and misogyny, which were a consistent story throughout the campaign.  The only thing that is "new" are the new allegations of assault. The Times reported what they had in May. The public mostly ignored it, but that's really not the Times' fault, it's ours.  The Guardian reported on Harth's claims in July and other outlets shared that, but again the public ignored it.  That's our fault, not the media's.

And the thing is, you can't really investigate claims of assault or inappropriate behavior unless the victim stands behind them.  Women are now making these claims, IMO, because (1) they were outraged that Trump denied behaving like the sexual predator he described himself as in the Access Hollywood tapes, and (2) coming out with stories like this in public is an incredibly difficult thing to do, you open yourself up to all kinds of awful stuff, so it's much easier to do once you realize you're not alone (think of the Cosby timeline). It's their right to share or not share them whenever they want, they are the victims.  The media should not be in the business of sharing their stories unless and until they want them shared.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Tobias, as always. - My response was in hang up and listen mode. I appreciate the follow -up. - SID

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Seriously, do you truly believe that Hillary supporters are as blindly fanatic as Trump supporters? Because I've yet to encounter any. 

Obama certainly had fans who loved him passionately, as did Reagan. In this cycle, there have been people who love Trump, and others who love Bernie Sanders. But Hillary doesn't inspire that sort of passion. (Conversely, a lot of people claim they hate Hillary, but I'm skeptical of this as well. I have a feeling that once she is elected she will not truly be hated by some conservatives in the way they hated Obama. But we'll see.) 
Click to expand...
No I think the hatred for Trump would be the reason. I don't think it's possible anyone actually likes/admires Hillary.

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
Trump's a POS but it's hilarious how quickly stories are believed about him but every single story about Clinton is presumed false unless she's convicted of something in court or someone has it on video tape.  Even then, the story gets spun into a misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
Is it really that surprising when there is audio of him admitting that committing sexual assault is his modus operandi?

 
timschochet said:
Seriously, do you truly believe that Hillary supporters are as blindly fanatic as Trump supporters? Because I've yet to encounter any. 

Obama certainly had fans who loved him passionately, as did Reagan. In this cycle, there have been people who love Trump, and others who love Bernie Sanders. But Hillary doesn't inspire that sort of passion. (Conversely, a lot of people claim they hate Hillary, but I'm skeptical of this as well. I have a feeling that once she is elected she will not truly be hated by some conservatives in the way they hated Obama. But we'll see.) 
Click to expand...
No mirrors in your house?

 
Courtjester said:
Call me the contrarian, but I think all this "he's done, it's over,  Clinton has this in the bag," is actually a bad thing for the Democrats.

Trump's core supporters aren't going anywhere – they will turn out in numbers.It is the Dems that need a decent turnout to ensure her victory, but do you get that enthusiastic response from the young and undecided by just selling the idea of how bad one candidate is, without touting your own?  If there is no sense of urgency to vote, what kind of numbers do you get? 

  I have a feeling something else is coming, because I can't see the networks, who rely so heavily on election night ratings, continuing this narrative that Clinton has this in the bag. They at least need to appear to manufacture a close election even if the odds say otherwise
Click to expand...
Trumps core supporters are going to struggle mightily reading the ballot.

 
krista4 said:
I don't know your posts much; we probably don't inhabit the same threads for whatever reason.  I suspect from the few I've noticed tonight that we are diametrically opposed, politically, but this isn't about that.  I don't care about Donald Trump.  I'm not angry at him.  And I don't "know" that the story is true anymore than you might suspect it's not.  But I just want to ask you - human-to-human - to do your best to set aside those feelings of suspicion to the extent you possibly can and re-read that story, focus on the words closely and especially on those that express the feelings of shame, of powerlessness, of the aftermath rather than the (alleged) actions themselves.........................

Believe it or not, I haven't even had a single glass of wine tonight, so I can't blame drunkenness for posting this. :)   Thanks for indulging me.
Click to expand...
K4, that was an unbelievably powerful and eye opening post.  One I will be saving for future reading for my four sons....well, assuming I'm still breathing when the twins are old enough to read this sort of post. ;)  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.joemygod.com/2016/10/13/cnn-panel-laughs-in-face-of-trump-spox-as-she-flails-to-defend-trump-against-assault-claims-video/

CNN Panel Laughs In Face Of Trump Spox As She Flails To Defend Trump Against Assault Claims [VIDEO]

According to Pierson, the woman’s claim that Trump moved the armrest to grope her couldn’t have happened because seats in first class have fixed armrests. Except, as you’ll see, back then they did not. Via Mediaite:

The Atlantic‘s Peter Beinart broke into uncontrollable laughter upon hearing Donald Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson go into a convoluted explanation on CNN about how he couldn’t have sexually assaulted a woman on a plane in the 1980’s.

Beinart was keeping it all together until Pierson unexpectedly starting rattling off airplane facts. “We’re talking about the early 1980s, Don. Seriously, back then, you had planes, what, a DC 9, DC 10, an MD-80, a 707, and maybe an L011?” she said.

“But she said specifically this was to New York,” Pierson braved on as Beinart began to laugh uncontrollably. “And this is what’s important. We can ex out the LC 11 and the DC 10. Guess what? The first-class seats have fixed armrests!”

Jon Ostrower ✔ @jonostrower 

So far, I’ve found photos of armrests stowing on 70s-80s vintage Braniff, National and TWA first class cabins.


11:05 PM - 12 Oct 2016

 
timschochet said:
I have a bad feeling that in the coming weeks what Saints wrote here is going to become conventional wisdom among conservatives and foes of Hillary Clinton: that the media, conspiring with the Clinton campaign, had damning information on Trump all along, allowed him to become the nominee, and then killed him off a month before the election in a coordinated action. 

Thia flies in the face of the completely chaotic way this election has gone from the beginning, but I'm betting we will hear this A LOT. 
Click to expand...
Maybe, nothing will convert the true believers. The Russian gov/media is conspiring against Clinton and supporting Trump to get him elected and they don't seem to mind that. If I'm Clinton, I continue to push that.

The Russian hack and Wikileaks dissemination needs to be painted as what it is, a modern day Watergate. There is no difference; burglars broke into the DNC and stole materials. Trump advocating Russian hacks and touting disinformation from the Kremlin is disturbing; either he is easily played and a pawn or he himself or his campaign is complicit. Either way, it's a story more powerful than the US press being mean to Trump, especially when there is audio of Trump admitting to doing exactly what these women are accusing him of. 

 
Ministry of Pain said:
A Putin ally has warned that if America does not vote for Trump they face a nuclear war threat...
Click to expand...
That guy isn't't taken very seriously in Russia. They call him the Russian Trump and it isn't a compliment.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I appreciate that and the feeling is mutual, but I'm OK calling you out on stuff I don't like, mostly because you're far from the first person to make this timing argument so it's more about the line of reasoning than the poster.

I think I explained this as best as I could in the post.  It was relevant before now to the media, there was among other things a huge NY Times story back in May on Trump's treatment of women, as well as near-constant stories of insults and misogyny, which were a consistent story throughout the campaign.  The only thing that is "new" are the new allegations of assault. The Times reported what they had in May. The public mostly ignored it, but that's really not the Times' fault, it's ours.  The Guardian reported on Harth's claims in July and other outlets shared that, but again the public ignored it.  That's our fault, not the media's.

And the thing is, you can't really investigate claims of assault or inappropriate behavior unless the victim stands behind them.  Women are now making these claims, IMO, because (1) they were outraged that Trump denied behaving like the sexual predator he described himself as in the Access Hollywood tapes, and (2) coming out with stories like this in public is an incredibly difficult thing to do, you open yourself up to all kinds of awful stuff, so it's much easier to do once you realize you're not alone (think of the Cosby timeline). It's their right to share or not share them whenever they want, they are the victims.  The media should not be in the business of sharing their stories unless and until they want them shared.
Click to expand...
I agree with you to an extent but a story here or there got buried under the avalanche of positive news on Trump.   I posted a link to a study that showed only 12% of the time the media spent talking about Trump was issues and most of it is was positive in nature. 

Regarding the bolded, I think this election shows better than anything the power of the media to influence people.  You want to blame the people, that's fair, but don't underestimate how difficult it is for people to overcome the power of the media.

Watch the documentary The Century of the Self.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Pretty sure our resident MRA type is complaining about Krista's post. 
Click to expand...
I'm not complaining nor being an MRA. 

I'm simply pointing out it's typically self-important, overwrought, and that thought experiments like "Imagine if you can..." are often a sign of condescension. It also, of course, happens to be directed at one side of the political aisle when there are plenty (were plenty) of chances to post stuff like this or talk about stuff like this in presidential elections and elections past.

I also know I don't support anything like what these men have done and don't act that way personally. But we used to call it "having manners and having respect."

Anyway, 1992 called. It wants its lecture back.  

 
General Malaise said:
K4, that was an unbelievably powerful and eye opening post.  One I will be saving for future reading for my four sons....well, assuming I'm still breathing when the twins are old enough to read this sort of post. ;)  
Click to expand...
I was wondering the other day why everyone always says "this will hurt him with women" after the fat shaming, and again after the ##### grabbing tape, and now the allegations.  Why is it not also hurting him with men?   We care about women, right? 

I think Krista's post along with other stuff I've been reading on social media shed some light for me on this.  As hard as it is for me to hear and see, they live it every day. 

 
RBM said:
timschochet said:
Seriously, do you truly believe that Hillary supporters are as blindly fanatic as Trump supporters? Because I've yet to encounter any. 

Obama certainly had fans who loved him passionately, as did Reagan. In this cycle, there have been people who love Trump, and others who love Bernie Sanders. But Hillary doesn't inspire that sort of passion. (Conversely, a lot of people claim they hate Hillary, but I'm skeptical of this as well. I have a feeling that once she is elected she will not truly be hated by some conservatives in the way they hated Obama. But we'll see.) 
Click to expand...
No I think the hatred for Trump would be the reason. I don't think it's possible anyone actually likes/admires Hillary.
Click to expand...
I don't hate Trump. I am scared that he may become President, but it is not worth my time to hate somebody like him. I really dislike a lot of the things he does and says, but no hate

 
Jeremy said:
I was wondering the other day why everyone always says "this will hurt him with women" after the fat shaming, and again after the ##### grabbing tape, and now the allegations.  Why is it not also hurting him with men?   We care about women, right? 

I think Krista's post along with other stuff I've been reading on social media shed some light for me on this.  As hard as it is for me to hear and see, they live it every day. 
Click to expand...
Many of the men voting for Trump think this behavior is fine. Not going to say all but the fact that so many are still with him means it's quite a few.

 
rockaction said:
I'm not complaining nor being an MRA. 

I'm simply pointing out it's typically self-important, overwrought, and that thought experiments like "Imagine if you can..." are often a sign of condescension. It also, of course, happens to be directed at one side of the political aisle when there are plenty (were plenty) of chances to post stuff like this or talk about stuff like this in presidential elections and elections past.

I also know I don't support anything like what these men have done and don't act that way personally. But we used to call it "having manners and having respect."

Anyway, 1992 called. It wants its lecture back.  
Click to expand...
Sorry for mischaracterizing how you were being an #######. 

 
rockaction said:
I'm not complaining nor being an MRA. 

I'm simply pointing out it's typically self-important, overwrought, and that thought experiments like "Imagine if you can..." are often a sign of condescension. It also, of course, happens to be directed at one side of the political aisle when there are plenty (were plenty) of chances to post stuff like this or talk about stuff like this in presidential elections and elections past.

I also know I don't support anything like what these men have done and don't act that way personally. But we used to call it "having manners and having respect."

Anyway, 1992 called. It wants its lecture back.  
Click to expand...
why you being a d!k?

 
Joe Summer said:
Maybe he's just tired and needs some rest?
Click to expand...
Yeah, people may be reading too much in to this. However, the Fox appearance was to coincide with an appearance by the Clinton accusers that Trump trotted out at the last debate - so he must be really tired if he is going to miss that.

 
timschochet said:
Seriously, do you truly believe that Hillary supporters are as blindly fanatic as Trump supporters? Because I've yet to encounter any. 

Obama certainly had fans who loved him passionately, as did Reagan. In this cycle, there have been people who love Trump, and others who love Bernie Sanders. But Hillary doesn't inspire that sort of passion. (Conversely, a lot of people claim they hate Hillary, but I'm skeptical of this as well. I have a feeling that once she is elected she will not truly be hated by some conservatives in the way they hated Obama. But we'll see.) 
Click to expand...
There was a lot of talk, mostly from his supporters, that there was going to be a "shy Trump" effect in this election.  That people who won't admit to liking Trump to others or even themselves will find themselves voting for Trump when the curtain is pulled. 

What about the "shy Clinton" effect?  Nearly every anti-Trumper  on this board qualifies their posts by saying "I can't stand Hillary either, but..."  Or "I'm not voting for either candidate, but..."  How many of those people actually do like her, but it's not fashionable to admit it.  She's kind of become the Nickelback of politics.  Everyone hates them, but some of the people saying that are singing along in their car.  Somebody's buying those albums. 

I think a number of those "I'm not voting for either candidate, but Trump is worse" folks will go to Clinton when the curtain is closed. 

 
Jeremy said:
There was a lot of talk, mostly from his supporters, that there was going to be a "shy Trump" effect in this election.  That people who won't admit to liking Trump to others or even themselves will find themselves voting for Trump when the curtain is pulled. 

What about the "shy Clinton" effect?  Nearly every anti-Trumper  on this board qualifies their posts by saying "I can't stand Hillary either, but..."  Or "I'm not voting for either candidate, but..."  How many of those people actually do like her, but it's not fashionable to admit it.  She's kind of become the Nickelback of politics.  Everyone hates them, but some of the people saying that are singing along in their car.  Somebody's buying those albums. 

I think a number of those "I'm not voting for either candidate, but Trump is worse" folks will go to Clinton when the curtain is closed. 
Click to expand...


It's possible to view someone as a person who will be an effective leader but not like them personally. 

There are a lot of her supporters though, mostly women, who actually do like her tremendously. 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Yo Mama
**** OFFICIAL FFA 2025-2026 Fake NBA Draft **** - Happy Ranks-Giving!!
19 20 21
Replies
1K
Views
14K
Master of Subservience
Master of Subservience
DA RAIDERS
Pick a fantasy team for the Tour de France. There will be prizes!
Replies
35
Views
3K
DA RAIDERS
DA RAIDERS
kutta
***Official 2025 Footballguy T-Shirt Exchange - OCT 12 SHIPPING DEADLINE (extended 2 weeks)***
3 4 5
Replies
230
Views
7K
Kanil
Kanil

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top