UPNetwork

UPNetwork (http://forums.upnetwork.net/index.php)
-   Debate (http://forums.upnetwork.net/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   American Politics (http://forums.upnetwork.net/showthread.php?t=4569)

deoxys 10-14-2016 12:09 AM

My friend just sent me this as if it's a good reason to not vote for Clinton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhi83oRIuA

Rangeet 10-14-2016 02:43 AM

Holy fuck, I make a 3000 word post and Trump makes sure it's woefully out of date about three hours later.

Mozz 10-14-2016 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deoxys (Post 771582)
My friend just sent me this as if it's a good reason to not vote for Clinton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhi83oRIuA

IMO, there will be more foreign conflict under a Clinton presidency than a Trump one. This includes further escalations in the proxy war in Syria, further sales of arms to the Saudis to kill Yemenis, and other fun uses of time, money, and lives.

deoxys 10-14-2016 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mozz (Post 771557)
WRT Clinton, he has settled out of court on at least one case, and others were brought throughout the years, so not all at the absolute worst possible time. He also has flown on Jeffery Epstein's plane several times. Would think that WJC is worse than Trump, neither are great, but WJC's actions >> Trump's, for now.[/B]

For the sake of fairness.

Quote:

"Trump’s camp has immediately denied all the accusation and denied all connection to Epstein, even though he told New York magazine in 2002 that “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

The Epstein connection goes both ways.

Mozz 10-14-2016 09:51 AM

Fair enough, Epstein is a fucking weird dude and certainly a criminal.

Blastoise 10-14-2016 02:43 PM

i don't know where this goes, but enjoy pictures of Trump as our lord and savior Hanjo:

http://www.trumpisnotateamplayer.com

Shuckle 10-14-2016 05:16 PM

The campaign trail is stressful and his strategies aren't working. Clinton is having her fair share of issues - the rumor is that she's having medical troubles, and a stressful campaign is definitely not going to help with that.

With the second debate come and gone, it's far too late for Trump to fix his image in time for the election. He is clearly planning to retire after his campaign is over, though. Even if he doesn't recoup any of his campaign costs, he has his retirement savings and his children's incomes to support him until his death.

By now everyone has their votes sounded out. It would take something absolutely huge and attention-grabbing to affect any part of the outcome. There is 1 debate left, and this is Trump's last chance to redeem himself in the eyes of 90% of the country. It...doesn't look likely. Maybe if he had a cooler head or a more secure game plan, but Hillary's gonna absolutely fucking unload everything she's got and I don't think Trump has an answer to that.

Kind of a shame to see one of the most interesting candidates in Presidential history crash and burn so spectacularly. I have no doubt we'll see tighter and more interesting races on the Republican side, now that the RNC has been alerted to the fact that even their voter base thinks they're a farce and that the base is willing to vote for the first non-RNC candidate to hop along and yell "VOTE FOR ME. I'M NOT THOSE GUYS."

I think if Trump was running Democrat we'd all like him. I really do. The ability to point out and offer solutions to problems that LGBT people, black people, immigrants, etc. face - as well as the forced softening of stances like Build-A-Wall and Muslim Travel Ban - is something that liberals would really value, I think.

And God knows half the people on the Democrat side wanted Bernie instead of Hillary. I'm sure at least some of them were NeverHillary, too, and are only voting for her because they're afraid of Trump.

Thoughts on this? Would you vote for a Democrat Trump who, instead of ranting about illegal immigrants, rants about how transphobia needs to be ended, women's rights need to be secured, and the justice system needs to be fixed right away?

Stealthy 10-14-2016 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deoxys (Post 771385)
Regardless, it doesn't matter, he's dangerous either way. I just think there is definitely some degree that people think he is the literal Antichrist come to usher in the Apocalypse, but you're giving him way too much credit if you do.

Anybody who thinks Donald Trump is the Antichrist is clearly thinking of the wrong guy. It's really rude to give Trump the title and legacy somebody else worked so hard on.

Blastoise 10-14-2016 10:36 PM

It's kind of amazing: I was the contrarian Republican shithead in high school and I've gone more left over time, and now it's the laid-back stoner punk bad drummer I knew who's frothingly posting Breitbart articles nonstop while claiming he doesn't vote for Democrats or Republicans (possibly less on principle and more due to prior drug convictions). I think the Norns got their threads of the Wyrd tangled up somewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 771642)
With the second debate come and gone, it's far too late for Trump to fix his image in time for the election. He is clearly planning to retire after his campaign is over, though. Even if he doesn't recoup any of his campaign costs, he has his retirement savings and his children's incomes to support him until his death.

Yes, if the election hadn't dragged the Trump brand through the mud, and if the spotlight of attention hadn't drawn focus to some of Trump's shady dealings that he could have probably kept on the down low if he had been happy with being a 2nd-string reality TV show celebrity. Even before the election there were legitimate questions regarding how much of the foundation of Trump's wealth was built on sand.

Quote:

Kind of a shame to see one of the most interesting candidates in Presidential history crash and burn so spectacularly. I have no doubt we'll see tighter and more interesting races on the Republican side, now that the RNC has been alerted to the fact that even their voter base thinks they're a farce and that the base is willing to vote for the first non-RNC candidate to hop along and yell "VOTE FOR ME. I'M NOT THOSE GUYS."
Problem is that this already happened: we called it the Tea Party. Trump was merely the final boss in the progression of a 150+ year old party trying to cast itself as the scrappy outsider.

Quote:

I think if Trump was running Democrat we'd all like him. I really do. The ability to point out and offer solutions to problems that LGBT people, black people, immigrants, etc. face - as well as the forced softening of stances like Build-A-Wall and Muslim Travel Ban - is something that liberals would really value, I think.
Quote:

Thoughts on this? Would you vote for a Democrat Trump who, instead of ranting about illegal immigrants, rants about how transphobia needs to be ended, women's rights need to be secured, and the justice system needs to be fixed right away?
Maybe, but the fundamental problem is that you're describing a parallel universe Harry Turtledove Donald Trump, not the IRL Donald Trump defending against sexual harassment accusations on the basis that his accusers were too ugly to rape. Even if you assume Trump would have kept to the progressive talking points and avoided nationalist race baiting if he had thrown in with the Democratic party, unlike the Republican primary he would have been competing with Sanders who has the same general thrust but significantly less personal baggage.

Shuckle 10-14-2016 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blastoise (Post 771678)
Maybe, but the fundamental problem is that you're describing a parallel universe Harry Turtledove Donald Trump, not the IRL Donald Trump defending against sexual harassment accusations on the basis that his accusers were too ugly to rape. Even if you assume Trump would have kept to the progressive talking points and avoided nationalist race baiting if he had thrown in with the Democratic party, unlike the Republican primary he would have been competing with Sanders who has the same general thrust but significantly less personal baggage.

I mean Bill Clinton's been getting away with pretty much exactly that for decades, and was even impeached for it. Not that he's exactly the darling of the Democratic Party, but we're putting up with Hillary knowing full well it means Bill is coming along for the ride.

Unlike Clinton, Trump has a long and consistent track record of supporting LGBT rights, too. None of the Democratic candidates were huge civil rights supporters, either, so his "history" of racism (cases that didn't reach verdicts, a few rumors, and the birther movement...not a great argument) doesn't really stand out as the massive negative it is due to the fact that he would be in the Democratic race and would gain nothing by saying anything about a Muslim travel ban or a wall across the border. He'd be up there ranting about the corrupt justice system. Cops would be saying things vaguely reminiscent of the posts in this thread, but instead of "LGBT and minorities in this country are afraid of Trump" it would be "Cops and whites are afraid of Trump." It would still not be true, but they'd be saying it.

Also keep in mind that the Democratic campaign team is way more experienced, as well. Bitch all you like about how Trump's been firing his campaign managers, those are the Republican campaign managers and they're probably the ones telling him to keep pandering to right wing voters while alienating himself more and more from the groups he should be trying to make amends with.

Honestly if you go back to the beginning of the election you had Republicans literally calling him out on not being conservative. Is it really so hard to believe that his descent into Republican talking point madness has nothing to do with his pre-existing personal beliefs?

Rangeet 10-14-2016 11:42 PM

I mean, Bill Clinton is insanely, insanely charismatic, and he had absolutely skyrocketing approval rates. I think something like 66% at the peach of the Lewinsky scandal. He survived all that BECAUSE he was one of the most popular Presidents who presided over a really good time for America, and because most people didn't really necessarily think it was relevant to his presidency.

But Donald Trump has offered little apart from his own character, so it's hardly surprising that this hits him much harder than it would hit Bill Clinton- not to mention the world progresses a lot in 20 years.

Also, I'm sorry but...none of the Democratic candidates were huge civil rights supporters? Sanders was literally arrested at a civil rights protest.

It really doesn't say anything at all good about Trump if, despite having pretty great support, he goes back to the Republican corner instead of trying to be more progressive and picking up some independents. His fanatical supporters would only say stuff about 45D chess anyway, so he's not losing them.

Emi 10-15-2016 12:06 AM

Not really sure why we're comparing Bill to Trump here. As far as I'm aware (and do correct me if I'm wrong), the big "issue" with Bill comes from the Lewinsky scandal. He had an extramarital affair. It probably involved some sexual harassment, I imagine, but maybe it didn't. I'm not familiar with the details on it. But I'm still struggling to figure out how an extramarital affair is equivalent to bragging about being able to sexually harass and assault women by using his celebrity status. How it is the equivalent of his completely terrible defenses when accused. These weren't things said once he got on the campaign trail, they were things he said long before then.

You can't blame people for judging on his character (not to mention that the man was always notoriously very loud and crass, which on that virtue alone would make me really hesitant to vote for him even if he was a Democrat), because its right there. Whether you're a Republican or a Democrat does not immediately speak on that front.

Quote:

Bitch all you like about how Trump's been firing his campaign managers, those are the Republican campaign managers and they're probably the ones telling him to keep pandering to right wing voters while alienating himself more and more from the groups he should be trying to make amends with.
I know for a fact this isn't true. He fired someone and then hired a well-known person from fucking Breitbart, and since then that person as far as I know hasn't been fired. Look at Mike Pence and what he said after the GOP withdrew their support. Do you really think those are the kind of people he fired?

Rangeet 10-15-2016 12:22 AM

Not content with merely making part 1 of that post woefully out of date, part 2 is also now way out of date.

I really have no words that would be an adequate reaction to this occurring in a first world country.

Edit: Aaaand the GOP doubles down on fascism.

Shuckle 10-15-2016 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rangeet (Post 771687)
I mean, Bill Clinton is insanely, insanely charismatic, and he had absolutely skyrocketing approval rates. I think something like 66% at the peach of the Lewinsky scandal. He survived all that BECAUSE he was one of the most popular Presidents who presided over a really good time for America, and because most people didn't really necessarily think it was relevant to his presidency.

So you agree, then, that a Democratic Trump with higher approval rates would be able to basically ignore sex scandals?

Remember, we're talking about a Trump on YOUR TEAM. This parallel universe Trump is fighting racism and campaigning against Bernie and Hillary.

Quote:

Also, I'm sorry but...none of the Democratic candidates were huge civil rights supporters? Sanders was literally arrested at a civil rights protest.
I phrased it wrong. Neither candidate was a standout civil rights supporter, and both candidates were assumed to be big supporters of civil rights. If Trump had campaigned for the Blue Team, you'd assume it of him too.
Quote:

It really doesn't say anything at all good about Trump if, despite having pretty great support, he goes back to the Republican corner instead of trying to be more progressive and picking up some independents.
So we are in agreement then?

Quote:

His fanatical supporters would only say stuff about 45D chess anyway, so he's not losing them.

Also, minor minor nitpick, I'm not a Trump supporter. Trump's supporters like when he goes back to the Republican corner because they see it as him spouting truth.

Quote:

Not really sure why we're comparing Bill to Trump here. As far as I'm aware (and do correct me if I'm wrong), the big "issue" with Bill comes from the Lewinsky scandal. He had an extramarital affair. It probably involved some sexual harassment, I imagine, but maybe it didn't. I'm not familiar with the details on it. But I'm still struggling to figure out how an extramarital affair is equivalent to bragging about being able to sexually harass and assault women by using his celebrity status. How it is the equivalent of his completely terrible defenses when accused. These weren't things said once he got on the campaign trail, they were things he said long before then.
You do not know enough about Bill Clinton's escapades, but that's okay - it was before your time. It's before my time, too, so I can't give you the full story or the correct kind of impact, but it was pretty wild from everything I've heard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_C...ct_allegations
Quote:

You can't blame people for judging on his character (not to mention that the man was always notoriously very loud and crass, which on that virtue alone would make me really hesitant to vote for him even if he was a Democrat), because its right there. Whether you're a Republican or a Democrat does not immediately speak on that front.
Many Republicans are avoiding judgment on his character because they agree with him or otherwise want a Republican President (see also: Bernie Bros and their reluctant Hillary votes).

Quote:

I know for a fact this isn't true. He fired someone and then hired a well-known person from fucking Breitbart, and since then that person as far as I know hasn't been fired. Look at Mike Pence and what he said after the GOP withdrew their support. Do you really think those are the kind of people he fired?
Both the RNC and the DNC coordinate their respective campaigns for the presidential race. Trump does not have complete control over his campaign management and has been working closely with the RNC to determine his policy stances and general strategy. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either suckered in by a rumor or trying to sucker you in on a rumor.

deh74 10-15-2016 01:44 PM

The sexual assault allegations against Bill Clinton were certainly wild, but that's all they were. A wild, salacious story meant to stir up controversy and discredit the President, which has somehow gone through a routine of mental gymnastics that would make Simone Biles proud in order to try and slander Hillary as well.

I don't really like discussing conspiracy theories, so I intend for this to be all I say on this topic, just as I won't be saying anything about Benghazi, Vince Foster, EMAILS, or any other trumped up non-issues that the GOP has seen fit to use to try and break the Clintons for the past twenty years.

But since I can't resists, here's a little thing.
-Juanita Broaddrick: Literally testified under oath that the President made no unwelcome sexual advances towards her, so there is no grounds for this to be taken seriously.
-Paula Jones: Case dismissed by judge, the President settled on appeal in order to make the circus stop so he could get on with doing his job, a concept which the Republicans seem to be completely unfamiliar with.
-Kathleen Willey: Even fucking Kenneth Starr determined that she was lying about the alleged assault.
And since somebody's going to bring this up...
-Kathy Shelton seems to be angry that Hillary Clinton has the integrity to do her job even when she doesn't want to, and the skill to adequately represent her client in court even when being forced to do so by threat of disbarment. These are actually both positive traits to have in a President and while I have sympathy for Ms. Shelton as a fellow sexual assault survivor, her allegations against Secretary Clinton are a complete exaggeration.

deoxys 10-16-2016 01:48 AM

"The Left Deserves Better Than Jill Stein"

Shuckle 10-16-2016 08:48 AM

@deh

The fact that you're willing to go through any kind of mental gymnastics to justify Clinton's sexual history while playing up Trump's is pretty much exactly my point. Your party alignment is huge when deciding whether or not you are willing to overlook their flaws.

Emi 10-16-2016 10:14 AM

>mental gymnastics
>literally bringing up facts from the wikipedia article about the cases

jesus shuckle

Snorby 10-16-2016 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 771777)
@deh

The fact that you're willing to go through any kind of mental gymnastics to justify Clinton's sexual history while playing up Trump's is pretty much exactly my point. Your party alignment is huge when deciding whether or not you are willing to overlook their flaws.

https://media.giphy.com/media/73NikSAd8515e/giphy.gif

deh74 10-16-2016 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 771777)
@deh

The fact that you're willing to go through any kind of mental gymnastics to justify Clinton's sexual history while playing up Trump's is pretty much exactly my point. Your party alignment is huge when deciding whether or not you are willing to overlook their flaws.

Oh, sorry. When I said mental gymnastics, I was referring to you going through mental gymnastics in order to slander the 42nd President of the United States for crimes that it has been determined time and time again that he did not commit, and his wife had no part in enabling or covering up. I'll try to be more clear next time I have to come pop your little bubble of conspiracy.

Shuckle 10-16-2016 12:14 PM

Oh suddenly I remember why I decided to stop posting on the Debate forum!

Really I thought we could keep up the nice discussions from the other day, but I guess it's Dogpile on the Shuckle Day now!

Juanita Broaddrick was afraid of the media circus that would surround her family and didn't testify under oath that the rumors were unfounded - she signed an affadavit. As this board well knows, there is often a lot of hatred for rape accusers, and it can be extremely difficult for a woman to come forward and accuse a man of rape without fear of significant backlash or violence. Unless you didn't know that, in which case, now you do!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones

Quote:

Judge Susan Webber Wright granted President Clinton's motion for summary judgment, ruling that Jones could not demonstrate that she had suffered any damages. As to the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, Wright ruled that Jones failed to show that Clinton's actions constituted "outrageous conduct" as required of the tort, alongside not showing proof of damages caused by distress.[...]On November 13, 1998, Clinton settled with Jones for $850,000, the entire amount of her claim, but without an apology, in exchange for her agreement to drop the appeal. Robert S. Bennett, Clinton's attorney, still maintained that Jones's claim was baseless and that Clinton only settled so he could end the lawsuit and move on with his life. In March 1999, Judge Wright ruled that Jones would only get $200,000 from the settlement and that the rest of the money would pay for her legal expenses.
Basically: He didn't want to acknowledge that the assault happened and got lucky that she didn't have any serious grievances. If she'd had an actual case...

Kathleen is a liar and a bitch with a long history of lying for attention.

Kathy Shelton has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, that's a Hillary thing and I feel the same way about it as you do.

And you left out Monica~

So yes. Mental gymnastics.

deh74 10-16-2016 12:52 PM

Yes Shuckle, I, as a two time sexual assault victim who tried and failed to initiate legal proceedings both times am very much aware of the hatred for rape victims and it is in no small part because of people who make false accusations, especially after making a statement under oath that nothing happened.

If Paula Jones had an actual case then Bill Clinton would be a rapist, just like how if I had gone out and blown up a church last month I would be a terrorist. However, Paula Jones had no case to make against Bill Clinton and I did not blow up a church, so Bill Clinton is not a rapist and I am not a terrorist.

I addressed Kathleen Willey because she is the third of Bill Clinton's accusers, not because you specifically brought her up.

Kathy Shelton was covered by myself to preempt anybody who wanted to bring that up, not specifically you. I am glad that you share my views on Ms. Shelton's accusations though.

Monica Lewinsky has never said anything that remotely insinuates that the relationship between her and the President was anything but a consensual relationship between two adults, even if a power imbalance existed that made the relationship a bit questionable. Because of this, there is and was no reason for her to be discussed.

And one more thing. When you say something that other people disagree with, you can expect them to respond. That is not dogpiling, that is simply multiple people disagreeing with you. Dogpiling would have been multiple people plotting to attack you, which is not the case here since I'm unaware of any such plot that may exist. So please refrain from throwing out such accusations in the future.

Stealthy 10-16-2016 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stealthy (Post 771144)
Stop. Feeding. The Troll.


deh74 10-16-2016 04:13 PM

As long as we stop throwing false accusations at the 42nd President of the United States I will have no reason to feed the "troll", although I disagree with the assessment of Shuckle as a troll.

deoxys 10-16-2016 07:52 PM

@thread

http://38.media.tumblr.com/0f73e8f6e...4k5po1_500.gif


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.