Sabertooth
Footballguy
Fake News!So what, in your opinion, should be "the big story"?
Fake News!So what, in your opinion, should be "the big story"?
I honestly believe Trump would order attacks against US citizens by the Army before he'd resign.Tim, do you actually think Trump could be forced to resign? By whom? His family and closest advisors can't even get him to stop posting asinine crap on the internet that makes him look like he has dementia. You honestly think it is realistic that a bunch of women re-surface these allegations again and he says, "Oops. My bad," and walks away?
I doubt it.Tim, do you actually think Trump could be forced to resign? By whom? His family and closest advisors can't even get him to stop posting asinine crap on the internet that makes him look like he has dementia. You honestly think it is realistic that a bunch of women re-surface these allegations again and he says, "Oops. My bad," and walks away?
I understood you the first time. There is no moral difference between “not prepared to disenfranchise those who support him” and “I support him.”I think I have explained myself about as clearly as I can. I will reiterate one more time to help.
Trump was elected despite people knowing about his past. I do not support what he did, but there is nothing new here. I am not prepared to disenfranchise those who supported him despite knowing his flaws.
I understood you the first time. There is no moral difference between “not prepared to disenfranchise those who support him” and “I support him.”I think I have explained myself about as clearly as I can. I will reiterate one more time to help.
Trump was elected despite people knowing about his past. I do not support what he did, but there is nothing new here. I am not prepared to disenfranchise those who supported him despite knowing his flaws.
I think he could be, but it's a huge hypothetical.Tim, do you actually think Trump could be forced to resign? By whom? His family and closest advisors can't even get him to stop posting asinine crap on the internet that makes him look like he has dementia. You honestly think it is realistic that a bunch of women re-surface these allegations again and he says, "Oops. My bad," and walks away?
This isn’t confusing. If you don’t support removing Trump for his actions against women, then you don’t find those actions to be disqualifying. Jonessed can try to hide behind “I don’t want to disenfranchise voters” but that is an irrelevant argument.
do what now?I understood you the first time. There is no moral difference between “not prepared to disenfranchise those who support him” and “I support him.”
I may have missed y'alls back and forth, but when you say:This isn’t confusing. If you don’t support removing Trump for his actions against women, then you don’t find those actions to be disqualifying. Jonessed can try to hide behind “I don’t want to disenfranchise voters” but that is an irrelevant argument.
It's confusing. I'm not looking to take away the right to vote of those who support Trump, but that doesn't mean I support Trump.There is no moral difference between “not prepared to disenfranchise those who support him” and “I support him.”
Of all your crazy blanket statements this has to be the alpha of them allThis isn’t confusing. If you don’t support removing Trump for his actions against women, then you don’t find those actions to be disqualifying. Jonessed can try to hide behind “I don’t want to disenfranchise voters” but that is an irrelevant argument.
I'm not sure what you are driving at but I think your argument is crazy. To take a non-dramatic example, I don't think people should cheat on their wife but if we had found out that Obama cheated on Michelle I wouldn't call for him to be impeached and that doesn't mean I support people committing adultery. This is a slippery slope you are trying to go down.This isn’t confusing. If you don’t support removing Trump for his actions against women, then you don’t find those actions to be disqualifying. Jonessed can try to hide behind “I don’t want to disenfranchise voters” but that is an irrelevant argument.
I'm surprised he's not jumped on the chance to politicize this morning's bombing in NYC to sow further division based on fear-mongering.I honestly believe Trump would order attacks against US citizens by the Army before he'd resign.
People don't really understand her personal and family history. If they did they would #### bricks. By people I mean trump voters.Haley has taken advantage of the somewhat independent nature of her post to position herself for the inevitable Presidential run in 2024.
I use the same language to distinguish between a capable candidate who is running against a candidate I prefer (such as Romney in 2012) and a candidate who I could not vote for under any circumstances (such as Trump in 2016). Certain positions or behavior are so offensive or abhorrent to me that they disqualify a candidate from my consideration.And Tim, can you clarify what you mean by disqualifying? To me, disqualifying is when you don't meet the specific criteria to run for the office - like not being a citizen or being 35. I get the impression that's not what you mean by it.
That's what I'm assumed he meant. And it's valid for people to do that - I think we all do on some level.I use the same language to distinguish between a capable candidate who is running against a candidate I prefer (such as Romney in 2012) and a candidate who I could not vote for under any circumstances (such as Trump in 2016). Certain positions or behavior are so offensive or abhorrent to me that they disqualify a candidate from my consideration.
Starting to see and hear more and more from interviews in Alabama where people say groping was perfectly fine 40 years ago.That's what I'm assumed he meant. And it's valid for people to do that - I think we all do on some level.
I will say that don't think most of the people who will vote for Moore (for example) are saying that something like he did with the 14-year old is not disqualifying, I think they are lying to themselves about how true it is or truly believe it's a lie.
And FTR, I would consider what Moore has done and what Trump has done disqualifying - to use your and Tim's word - but I don't think that matters and isn't the same as thinking he should be removed from office for it. Now, if they are investigated and charges are brought OR they impeach him after investigating then I'm all for that. Maybe that's saying the same thing - I don't know enough about it and only skimmed your nerdy impeachment thread (mainly because I'm too dumb to follow it).
Thats kindof my overall point on this. Its disingenuous to take norms/standards of today (past couple of months) and retroactively apply them to peoples actions from 10,20,30 years ago. Right or wrong I just dont think you can do that. Note: I am not talking about anything illegal just behavior in general.Starting to see and hear more and more from interviews in Alabama where people say groping was perfectly fine 40 years ago.
Kyle GriffinVerified account @kylegriffin1Interesting SHS briefing. Looked rattled. Kind of confirmed the allegations are true.
She is a special kind of stupidKyle GriffinVerified account @kylegriffin1
Question on accusations of sexual misconduct against Trump: “You said he has denied them. Can you say whether or not they are false?” Sarah Sanders: “I'm not going to respond.”
tweet with video
You realize the Mueller investigation will likely get to business/finances/taxes...right?This is the stuff.
Quit chasing your Russian conspiracy theories and go here. Go for the family business/taxes.
Oh BS...sorry...this is just completely incorrect.It’s so obvious. But most people do what they are told to do and the media tells people that the big story is Russia, so the big story is Russia.
Compared to a little sexual harassment, interference in a national election is by far the bigger story.It’s so obvious. But most people do what they are told to do and the media tells people that the big story is Russia, so the big story is Russia.
Really? That's laughably bad.Starting to see and hear more and more from interviews in Alabama where people say groping was perfectly fine 40 years ago.
Yes.. a positive side bar result of the Russia conspiracy investigation that would of course have nothing to do with the Russia conspiracy.You realize the Mueller investigation will likely get to business/finances/taxes...right?
and that its not really a conspiracy theory at all.
Sure he may have murdered 17 nurses but you have him right there on camera running a red light.Compared to a little sexual harassment, interference in a national election is by far the bigger story.
Finally something I can agree with Trump on.
Russian interference in our election is more nationally relevant. Definitely the bigger issue. But you won't hang this on Trump.Compared to a little sexual harassment, interference in a national election is by far the bigger story.
I hadn't even seen these tweets before I wrote the above. So predictable:Hopefully after that disgusting tweet this morning, women’s voices are louder than ever.
The traps are laid in plain sight, the playbook open for all to see. Trump's opposition keeps tripping over them."Despite thousands of hours wasted and many millions of dollars spent, the Democrats have been unable to show any collusion with Russia - so now they are moving on to the false accusations and fabricated stories of women who I don't know and/or have never met. FAKE NEWS!" Trump wrote on Twitter at 7:10 a.m. ET.
Yes, they did. They saw an innocent man, because Trump denied all the stories and promised to provide exculpatory evidence and to sue his accusers. This, plus his general undermining of mainstream media, gave them a path to denial and they took it. Polls have shown this time and time again. Here's one showing that only 34% of Republicans think the accusations against Trump are credible.I’m not OK with, but I didn’t help elect him. I’m not about to disenfranchise those who did. Obviously they see things differently.
He won. It’s time to accept it.
Or even just obstruction of justice. Let's leave Russia out of it. Let's assume the whole story is that Flynn told Trump he lied to the FBI. Trump tried to get Comey to drop the charges out of loyalty to Flynn. And Trump eventually fired Comey, in part to protect Flynn.Compared to a little sexual harassment, interference in a national election is by far the bigger story.
You and Dodds do yourselves no favors by pretending to have some keen inside knowledge that you're never quite willing to spell out for everyone else. If you won't put it out there, why should any of us believe either of you?The traps are laid in plain sight, the playbook open for all to see. Trump's opposition keeps tripping over them.
Good luck. Trump supporters on this board universally refuse to engage on this subject.100% serious question for any/all Trump supporters.
We've seen media execs (Weinstein) lose their jobs, actors (Spacey, Andy ****, Masterson, etc) lose their jobs, TV hosts (Lauer, Charlie Rose), and elected officials fired/resigned (Franks, Rosen, Conyers). Not all of these men have admitted any wrongdoing, and Trump has openly called for investigation into some of them, called for/applauded their firing, etc.
What logical rationale is there for Trump to be excluded from investigation and/or not expected to resign? He believes it is warranted in these other cases, he has admitted to some of the wrongdoing (the Billy Bush tape, his own comments on Howard Stern confirming the allegations about going backstage at his beauty pageants, as some of his accusers have claimed).
Can any Trump followers give a rational justification for him to not only not resign, but also not be subject to an investigation?
It's not just on this board, it's everywhere. The response is to deflect and say something Bill, Hillary or Obama did or believe was done.Good luck. Trump supporters on this board universally refuse to engage on this subject.
If we ever wanted to chase them off, all we'd have to do is change every thread title to reference the allegations of Trump's sexual misconduct.
About 20 years ago Bill Clinton did something. So now it's hypocritical to speak out now because we didn't speak out then. Or something, something.100% serious question for any/all Trump supporters.
We've seen media execs (Weinstein) lose their jobs, actors (Spacey, Andy ****, Masterson, etc) lose their jobs, TV hosts (Lauer, Charlie Rose), and elected officials fired/resigned (Franks, Rosen, Conyers). Not all of these men have admitted any wrongdoing, and Trump has openly called for investigation into some of them, called for/applauded their firing, etc.
What logical rationale is there for Trump to be excluded from investigation and/or not expected to resign? He believes it is warranted in these other cases, he has admitted to some of the wrongdoing (the Billy Bush tape, his own comments on Howard Stern confirming the allegations about going backstage at his beauty pageants, as some of his accusers have claimed).
Can any Trump followers give a rational justification for him to not only not resign, but also not be subject to an investigation?
Don't forget Billy Bush lost his job over the tape100% serious question for any/all Trump supporters.
We've seen media execs (Weinstein) lose their jobs, actors (Spacey, Andy ****, Masterson, etc) lose their jobs, TV hosts (Lauer, Charlie Rose), and elected officials fired/resigned (Franks, Rosen, Conyers). Not all of these men have admitted any wrongdoing, and Trump has openly called for investigation into some of them, called for/applauded their firing, etc.
What logical rationale is there for Trump to be excluded from investigation and/or not expected to resign? He believes it is warranted in these other cases, he has admitted to some of the wrongdoing (the Billy Bush tape, his own comments on Howard Stern confirming the allegations about going backstage at his beauty pageants, as some of his accusers have claimed).
Can any Trump followers give a rational justification for him to not only not resign, but also not be subject to an investigation?
We, as a nation, had to hold Billy Bush accountable for listening to Donald Trump bragging about sexual assault.Don't forget Billy Bush lost his job over the tape
That is, if you can find someone who admits they voted for him in the first placeTobiasFunke said:Good luck. Trump supporters on this board universally refuse to engage on this subject.Bayhawks said:100% serious question for any/all Trump supporters.
We've seen media execs (Weinstein) lose their jobs, actors (Spacey, Andy ****, Masterson, etc) lose their jobs, TV hosts (Lauer, Charlie Rose), and elected officials fired/resigned (Franks, Rosen, Conyers). Not all of these men have admitted any wrongdoing, and Trump has openly called for investigation into some of them, called for/applauded their firing, etc.
What logical rationale is there for Trump to be excluded from investigation and/or not expected to resign? He believes it is warranted in these other cases, he has admitted to some of the wrongdoing (the Billy Bush tape, his own comments on Howard Stern confirming the allegations about going backstage at his beauty pageants, as some of his accusers have claimed).
Can any Trump followers give a rational justification for him to not only not resign, but also not be subject to an investigation?
If we ever wanted to chase them off, all we'd have to do is change every thread title to reference the allegations of Trump's sexual misconduct.
Trump lied? I'm shocked.People @people 53m53 minutes ago
.@realDonaldTrump claims he 'never met' accusers like PEOPLE's Natasha Stoynoff, but we have the photo
http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-natasha-stoynoff-photo-proof/?utm_campaign=peoplemagazine&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_twitter_peoplemag
Whoah.Dude he went after Luc Robitallies wife??? that is where I draw the line!!!
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/luc-robitailles-wife-stacia-alleges-trump-made-aggressive-advances-elevator-150356866.html
I just hope these women keep coming forward....and they keep the pressure on him and other politicians....drain the swamp indeedWhoah.
If anyone's still convinced that the accusers are lying about all of this, I know Stacia Robitaille personally. If it makes any difference, I don't believe for an instant she would lie about this.
I have serious doubts that anyone is convinced of this.Whoah.
If anyone's still convinced that the accusers are lying about all of this, I know Stacia Robitaille personally. If it makes any difference, I don't believe for an instant she would lie about this.
Seriously?I have serious doubts that anyone is convinced of this.