Women Are Defeating Donald Trump

[Maru]

Election Update: Women Are Defeating Donald Trump
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-women-are-defeating-donald-trump/

A series of national polls released on Tuesday showed Hillary Clinton leading Donald Trump by margins ranging from 5 to 11 percentage points — except for the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times tracking poll, which defiantly continues to show Trump up by 2 points. There isn’t yet enough data from after Sunday night’s debate to really gauge its impact, however. For that matter, the polls may not yet have fully caught up to the effects of the release on Friday of a 2005 videotape, which showed Trump making vulgar comments about women and condoning unwanted sexual conduct toward women. For the time being, Clinton’s lead is holding at about 6 percentage points in our polls-only model, which gives her an 84 percent chance of winning the White House. Clinton’s chances are 80 percent in our polls-plus forecast.

But while we’re in something of a wait-and-see mode, one demographic split caught my eye. That was from a Public Religion Research Institute poll conducted on behalf of The Atlantic...

http://i.imgur.com/zvQF2vC.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/v7rnkwt.png?1


Well, between the sexist tape and Hillary being the first woman of a major party to run for president, I guess it's not entirely surprising.

[Ammi]

...Maru, could you have a little chat with your US males, please...all of that red is quite worrying ..what he said should disturb everyone/whatever their gender...

[Jamie89]

...Maru, could you have a little chat with your US males, please...all of that red is quite worrying ..what he said should disturb everyone/whatever their gender...

This :laugh: Get on it, Maru!

[kirklancaster]

Election Update: Women Are Defeating Donald Trump
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-women-are-defeating-donald-trump/



http://i.imgur.com/zvQF2vC.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/v7rnkwt.png?1


Well, between the sexist tape and Hillary being the first woman of a major party to run for president, I guess it's not entirely surprising.

:laugh: Very informative Maru. I have just watched a BBC news item about an American family, which supports your 'If Men Only Voted' poll. The mother was voting Clinton, but Father and son were both voting Trump.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

[kirklancaster]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

:laugh: :dog: RUN LT. RUN. :hee:

[Amy Jade]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

It highlights that it would be even more dangerous to leave the men to vote alone. What a horrid outcome it would be :omgno:

[the truth]

It highlights that it would be even more dangerous to leave the men to vote alone. What a horrid outcome it would be :omgno:

it was a man who fought for and finally got the female vote in the uk

[MB.]

Yeah, it's not as if any women fought for suffrage or anything

[the truth]

...Maru, could you have a little chat with your US males, please...all of that red is quite worrying ..what he said should disturb everyone/whatever their gender...

not as disturbing as the 1 million innocent iraqis killary voted to illegally bomb to smitherseens..oh and syria and libya...she is horrific regardless of gender

[bots]

Donald Trump is defeating Donald Trump

[Niamh.]

Donald Trump is defeating Donald Trump

truth ^

[Crimson Dynamo]

truth ^

Not quite, the reason that he is actually where he is is because of Donald Trump. No one gave him a prayer from day 1, no polsters no political commentators and no media outlets

yet there he is

He ripped up the rule book like him or not

[Niamh.]

Not quite, the reason that he is actually where he is is because of Donald Trump. No one gave him a prayer from day 1, no polsters no political commentators and no media outlets

yet there he is

He ripped up the rule book like him or not

The reason he got there and the reason why his popularity is fading fast are one and the same

[arista]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote


I hope things change in the final weeks

[Crimson Dynamo]

The reason he got there and the reason why his popularity is fading fast are one and the same

What evidence is there to suggest this?

[Niamh.]

What evidence is there to suggest this?

His Mouth

[bots]

What evidence is there to suggest this?

The reason that Trump hasn't said all the words that people want to hear so that they would forgive him and move on is because his own ego and arrogance wont allow him to do it. So while those traits got him to this position, they could equally be his downfall.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The reason that Trump hasn't said all the words that people want to hear so that they would forgive him and move on is because his own ego and arrogance wont allow him to do it. So while those traits got him to this position, they could equally be his downfall.

and yet somehow he won the last debate by quite a margin

:shrug:

[bots]

and yet somehow he won the last debate by quite a margin

:shrug:

i agree, i think he was a clear winner in the debate, but winning or losing a debate doesn't dictate the result.

[Withano]

and yet somehow he won the last debate by quite a margin

:shrug:

Lol define won, he acted like a confused child. Then again, thats what his fans like.

[UserSince2005]

proof women should have been never given the vote?

[UserSince2005]

women better fall in line with their man and vote correctly.

[Niamh.]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

proof women should have been never given the vote?

tell me again what qualities you admire in Donald trump? I get why you like him so much now :hehe:

[Brother Leon]

Let's be real. Neither one is great for Women(despite the whole I'm With her rubbish), but Hilary is still a far better option Than Trump. I just find the very small selection of women who think she is flawless and anyone that dares speak against her must be sexist absolutely irritating.

[Niamh.]

Let's be real. Neither one is great for Women(despite the whole I'm With her rubbish), but Hilary is still a far better option Than Trump. I just find the very small selection of women who think she is flawless and anyone that dares speak against her must be sexist absolutely irritating.

Yes I totally agree with that. Bernie would have been the best option imo

[Mokka]

Let's be real. Neither one is great for Women(despite the whole I'm With her rubbish), but Hilary is still a far better option Than Trump. I just find the very small selection of women who think she is flawless and anyone that dares speak against her must be sexist absolutely irritating.

I think most people do not find her flawless... but the dialogue against her does tend towards sexism and sexist undertones at times...

You are rt, there is a small section out there that will cry sexist over anything.... kind of like thetruth crying injustice to males every time we point out Trump's flaws :hehe:

[GiRTh]

Yes I totally agree with that. Bernie would have been the best option imo
Agree but didnt HRC call him sexist? Her reliance on that argument is quite disturbing.

Trumps only guaranteed demographic are the deplorables HRC talked about. To them Trump is like the hand grenade they are going to throw into the mix in Washington. They dont really care if he does good or does bad they just want him to shake things up.

[Niamh.]

Agree but didnt HRC call him sexist? Her reliance on that argument is quite disturbing.

Trumps only guaranteed demographic are the deplorables HRC talked about. To them Trump is like the hand grenade they are going to throw into the mix in Washington. They dont really care if he does good or does bad they just want him to shake things up.

I'm not sure but I'll take your word for that, she must have thought she'd hit the jack pot then when Trump was her rival if that's her favourite argument :laugh:

[GiRTh]

I'm not sure but I'll take your word for that, she must have thought she'd hit the jack pot then when Trump was her rival if that's her favourite argument :laugh:Her followers more than her and it was after she interrupted him in a debate and he then interrupted her for interrupting him. :laugh:

[Brother Leon]

Yeah. Her followers labelled him sexist all the time for daring to interrupt her in a debate :laugh: Tbf, Hilary herself didn't say that...she just labelled his supporters Sexist :laugh:

[Amy Jade]

Judging by a majority of his supporters on here alone she has a point.

[the truth]

I think most people do not find her flawless... but the dialogue against her does tend towards sexism and sexist undertones at times...

You are rt, there is a small section out there that will cry sexist over anything.... kind of like thetruth crying injustice to males every time we point out Trump's flaws :hehe:

im not biting lol

[the truth]

Agree but didnt HRC call him sexist? Her reliance on that argument is quite disturbing.

Trumps only guaranteed demographic are the deplorables HRC talked about. To them Trump is like the hand grenade they are going to throw into the mix in Washington. They dont really care if he does good or does bad they just want him to shake things up.

killary DID call bernie sexist, simply because she interrupted his answer and he interrupted her back? she then got her massive team of radical feminists to slander him all across the internet as a mysoginist sexist pig...He should have taken legal action. The irony is bernie is not remotely sexist and would have done infinitely more for women and all working class and disabled and sick people than the neo-con corporate puppet warmongering liar killary clinton

[the truth]

Yeah. Her followers labelled him sexist all the time for daring to interrupt her in a debate :laugh: Tbf, Hilary herself didn't say that...she just labelled his supporters Sexist :laugh:

she doesnt have to say it herself, the corporations she works for pay for the negative adverts against her opponents so they do the lies and slandering for her

[Liberty4eva]

When Hillary opens up the boarders to millions of Syrians like Merkel did, it's going to be the women who find their every day lives most affected. In more and more places, the German women find that they can't safely be out at certain times of day that once were safe and they can't wear certain kinds of clothes that they once could wear. And when you need the 2nd amendment to protect yourselves? Hillary will corrode that constitutional right with her judicial appointments. And when they turn to the men for protection they'll learn that all the men have been turned into spineless jellyfish.

If the women hand over the election to Hillary what will happen will be sad and unfortunate... but I won't say undeserved. The saying goes you get the government you deserve. Women are more swayed by emotion than men and right now they are being manipulated from many corners of the media.

[Maru]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

http://i.imgur.com/0U1W5Xz.gif

:laugh: :dog: RUN LT. RUN. :hee:

http://i.imgur.com/KP5yMdd.gif

It highlights that it would be even more dangerous to leave the men to vote alone. What a horrid outcome it would be :omgno:

hmmmm wondering now if I need to be suspicious of my husband's vote :think:

Women would be better at running the world confirmed http://i.imgur.com/qQvaOmh.png :laugh:

[Tom4784]

Confirmation that men are trash.

[user104658]

I always knew it would be the females who would beat off Trump in the end.

[Jessica.]

Not quite, the reason that he is actually where he is is because of Donald Trump. No one gave him a prayer from day 1, no polsters no political commentators and no media outlets

yet there he is

He ripped up the rule book like him or not

What about his small loan of a million dollars?

[Maru]

proof women should have been never given the vote?

I thought your signature was in your post and so kept looking at the line of people for "problematic women" (aka "proof") who were voting... I was thinking this was the oddest (and yet coolest) voting line ever... looks like a polling station in Galveston, TX :laugh:

https://rwrrblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/veterans_g2.jpg

Still it didn't make any sense at first. The women are obviously having too much fun, but it also appears the men are also having some fun as well though some of the men are looking forward (and somewhat more seriously), so I just started checking to see if it had something to do with women "breaking" the line ... :laugh:

Sign of the times that we'd be looking for the slightest hint of context in everything. :laugh::laugh:

[jaxie]

Confirmation that men are trash.

If I were a male forum member my next words would be "How dare you."

As a female I'll just remind you that calling men trash is as sexist as anything Trump said. :nono:

[jaxie]

Agreed, it really highlights the danger of giving women the vote

:nono: Shame on you and for the record it was fought for, starved for, died for. Not given.

[jaxie]

proof women should have been never given the vote?

See my response to LT. :nono:

Then go look your mother in the eye and say that again. Go on I dare you.

[Tom4784]

If I were a male forum member my next words would be "How dare you."

As a female I'll just remind you that calling men trash is as sexist as anything Trump said. :nono:

I'm a man, I speak from experience.

[kirklancaster]

Only on TIBB:

Write a truthful post about SOME benefit scroungers -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL Benefit claimants scroungers.

Write a truthful post about SOME immigrants/refugees being covert terrorists -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL immigrants/refugees terrorists.

Write a truthful post about SOME men indulging in 'Locker Room' sexist banter about women -- Get misrepresented and berated for claiming that ALL men do so.

But it is perfectly fine to claim that ALL men are trash, or that ALL UKIP supporters ar xenophobic racists, or that ALL Trump supporters are xenophobic sexist pigs, or that ALL Brexiteers are brainwashed, dumbo's who don't understand the issues.

Only on TIBB.

[Crimson Dynamo]

:nono: Shame on you and for the record it was fought for, starved for, died for. Not given.

wait, you mean they can vote?

:shocked:


The worlds gone mad

[Niamh.]

Only on TIBB:

Write a truthful post about SOME benefit scroungers -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL Benefit claimants scroungers.

Write a truthful post about SOME immigrants/refugees being covert terrorists -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL immigrants/refugees terrorists.

Write a truthful post about SOME men indulging in 'Locker Room' sexist banter about women -- Get misrepresented and berated for claiming that ALL men do so.

But it is perfectly fine to claim that ALL men are trash, or that ALL UKIP supporters ar xenophobic racists, or that ALL Trump supporters are xenophobic sexist pigs, or that ALL Brexiteers are brainwashed, dumbo's who don't understand the issues.

Only on TIBB.

tbf though LT did say ALL men for this one

[Crimson Dynamo]

Only on TIBB:

Write a truthful post about SOME benefit scroungers -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL Benefit claimants scroungers.

Write a truthful post about SOME immigrants/refugees being covert terrorists -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL immigrants/refugees terrorists.

Write a truthful post about SOME men indulging in 'Locker Room' sexist banter about women -- Get misrepresented and berated for claiming that ALL men do so.

But it is perfectly fine to claim that ALL men are trash, or that ALL UKIP supporters ar xenophobic racists, or that ALL Trump supporters are xenophobic sexist pigs, or that ALL Brexiteers are brainwashed, dumbo's who don't understand the issues.

Only on TIBB.

:clap1:


well said Kirk

[Crimson Dynamo]

tbf though LT did say ALL men for this one

and stick by it

no wait, the ones who lie deffo dont do it...

[jaxie]

I'm a man, I speak from experience.

:hehe: That kind of works with my theory that you are also joeysteele.

[Crimson Dynamo]

:hehe: That kind of works with my theory that you are also joeysteele.

and jack


Its a 3-way multi


:fan:

[kirklancaster]

and jack


Its a 3-way multi


:fan:

:laugh2::laugh:

[Northern Monkey]

Only on TIBB:

Write a truthful post about SOME benefit scroungers -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL Benefit claimants scroungers.

Write a truthful post about SOME immigrants/refugees being covert terrorists -- Get misrepresented and berated for calling ALL immigrants/refugees terrorists.

Write a truthful post about SOME men indulging in 'Locker Room' sexist banter about women -- Get misrepresented and berated for claiming that ALL men do so.

But it is perfectly fine to claim that ALL men are trash, or that ALL UKIP supporters ar xenophobic racists, or that ALL Trump supporters are xenophobic sexist pigs, or that ALL Brexiteers are brainwashed, dumbo's who don't understand the issues.

Only on TIBB.To use a well used expression around these parts.....

Spill that tea:clap1:

[Niamh.]

and stick by it

no wait, the ones who lie deffo dont do it...

I'm sorry I didn't realise you had been in Locker Rooms with everyman in the world :hee:

[user104658]

and stick by it

no wait, the ones who lie deffo dont do it...

I don't do it, and I have literally **** all reason to lie about that on an anonymous forum :shrug:.

[Niamh.]

Michelle for President tbh

3d-u9sRy6NA

[Tom4784]

Michelle for President tbh

3d-u9sRy6NA

Here for it.

[Jamie89]

Michelle for President tbh

3d-u9sRy6NA

:clap1: cancel the current election and give it to Michelle

[Jack_]

I know she's said she wouldn't but I really hope Michelle runs one day

[Alf]

Michelle "I hate White Americans" Obama

[Niamh.]

Michelle "I hate White Americans" Obama

What makes you think she hates white Americans?

[Liam-]

Proof that women are the superior sex

[Alf]

What makes you think she hates white Americans?Just little things she's said in the past.

How only during her husband presidency, is the first time in her life she's been proud of America.

How the Whitehouse was built by only Black slaves (which is untrue).

[Niamh.]

Just little things she's said in the past.

How only during her husband presidency, is the first time in her life she's been proud of America.

How the Whitehouse was built by only Black slaves (which is untrue).

They're not very good examples of her hating white Americans tbf

[Tom4784]

Just little things she's said in the past.

How only during her husband presidency, is the first time in her life she's been proud of America.

How the Whitehouse was built by only Black slaves (which is untrue).

Ah, so wild baseless assumptions then.

[Alf]

Ah, so wild baseless assumptions then.That's right

It's my life and I can think what I want.

[jaxie]

Ah, so wild baseless assumptions then.

So sayeth the expert? :hehe:

[Ithinkiloveyoutoo]

I'm a man, I speak from experience.

Since when are you a man? :amazed:


I'm not surprised at the OPs post. Still seeing a lot of support for this Puto everywhere

[Ithinkiloveyoutoo]

Yes I totally agree with that. Bernie would have been the best option imo

Si

[GiRTh]

Just little things she's said in the past.


Trump has said many 'little things' in the past about Mexicans and women. :shrug:

[Alf]

Trump has said many 'little things' in the past about Mexicans and women. :shrug:So does that make you think he dislikes Mexicans an Woman? Just as I think Michelle Obama dislikes White Americans for what she says?

If you think yes, then what's your point?

[GiRTh]

So does that make you think he dislikes Mexicans an Woman? Just as I think Michelle Obama dislikes White Americans for what she says?

If you think yes, then what's your point?No, you are the one who made an accusation against Michelle Obama and what you based it on., I made no accusation. So do you think we should take your logic to Trump and all the 'little things' he's said about Mexicans and women?

[Alf]

No, you are the one who made an accusation against Michelle Obama and what you based it on., I made no accusation. So do you think we should take your logic to Trump and all the 'little things' he's said about Mexicans and women?If you want to, it's up to you what logic you want to take.

I don't believe that Trump has any inside hatred for Mexicans or Woman, he only talks about keeping out people here illegally, that's just about protecting his country, and what he get's up to with women doesn't really effect me, so I'm not that bothered.

But Michelle can't stop bringing up race when she speaks, bringing up things that happened over a century ago, hinting at some sort of White privilege that's going on, I see a real anger inside her when she's talking about this.

So I have an opinion on her, and it's opinion not an accusation.

[GiRTh]

If you want to, it's up to you what logic you want to take.

I don't believe that Trump has any inside hatred for Mexicans or Woman, he only talks about keeping out people here illegally, that's just about protecting his country, and what he get's up to with women doesn't really effect me, so I'm not that bothered.

But Michelle can't stop bringing up race when she speaks, bringing up things that happened over a century ago, hinting at some sort of White privilege that's going on, I see a real anger inside her when she's talking about this.

So I have an opinion on her, and it's opinion not an accusation.So Trump doesnt mean it but Michelle does? :facepalm: You know I'm gonna ask for evidence that she 'Cant stop bringing up race' and in that please define 'cant stop bringing up'?

There are quite a few ultra right wing sites that promote this idea so will be intrigued to see what you find. :thumbs:

[Maru]

If you want to, it's up to you what logic you want to take.

I don't believe that Trump has any inside hatred for Mexicans or Woman, he only talks about keeping out people here illegally, that's just about protecting his country, and what he get's up to with women doesn't really effect me, so I'm not that bothered.

But Michelle can't stop bringing up race when she speaks, bringing up things that happened over a century ago, hinting at some sort of White privilege that's going on, I see a real anger inside her when she's talking about this.

So I have an opinion on her, and it's opinion not an accusation.

I have to call BS. If it doesn't matter to you (which is balony by the way), then why bother posting in a thread about female voting demographics and Donald Trump?

How does this topic even connect with white privilege?

Either **** or get off the can. You're derailing a thread for some unknown purpose... and I don't think it has **** all to do with your opinion on M. Obama's opinion on white people. :rolleyes:

[Alf]

I have to call BS. If it doesn't matter to you (which is balony by the way), then why bother posting in a thread about female voting demographics and Donald Trump?

How does this topic even connect with white privilege?

Either **** or get off the can. You're derailing a thread for some unknown purpose... and I don't think it has **** all to do with your opinion on M. Obama's opinion on white people. :rolleyes:To answer your first question, I just posted what I thought was a throw away comment about Michelle Obama, after I'd seen a couple of posts championing Michelle Obama for next president.

But it got a few backs up, and I was told to explain (even though those who championed her was not asked to explain their reason they want her for president)

So for your next part, I didn't start the talking about Michelle Obama, and just posted a small little comment which was jumped on for an explanation, so how did I derail the thread?

Now go away you interfering busy body.

[Alf]

So Trump doesnt mean it but Michelle does? :facepalm: You know I'm gonna ask for evidence that she 'Cant stop bringing up race' and in that please define 'cant stop bringing up'?

There are quite a few ultra right wing sites that promote this idea so will be intrigued to see what you find. :thumbs:No!

[GiRTh]

No!:conf:

[Alf]

:conf:It means I wont be providing you any evidence, I probably could but I don't think it would change anything, we'd both still stick to our own opinions, and I can't be arsed.

[GiRTh]

It means I wont be providing you any evidence, I probably could but I don't think it would change anything, we'd both still stick to our own opinions, and I can't be arsed.What is my opinion on what? So far I haven't expressed an opinion on whether Michelle Obama hates white America. You did that. :thumbs:

[Alf]

What is my opinion on what? So far I haven't expressed an opinion on whether Michelle Obama hates white America. You did that. :thumbs:Sometimes I use my instincts, and the fact you seem to want to question me because I have an opinion on her, makes me think that you disagree with me, making you being of the differing opinion.

It's just what my instincts tell me, I could be wrong.

[GiRTh]

Sometimes I use my instincts, and the fact you seem to want to question me because I have an opinion on her, makes me think that you disagree with me, making you being of the differing opinion.

It's just what my instincts tell me, I could be wrong.If I read this right are you saying you make baseless assumptions? Correct me if I'm wrong and I apologize if I am wrong but thats what it looks like you're saying. :shrug:

[Alf]

If I read this right are you saying you make baseless assumptions? Correct me if I'm wrong and I apologize if I am wrong but thats what it looks like you're saying. :shrug:Yes, it's not a crime is it?

[GiRTh]

Yes, it's not a crime is it?Of course its not a crime :thumbs:

[Maru]

A Comprehensive Guide to Donald Trump's Women Problems This Election Season (Fortune)

October 14, 2016, 3:40 PM EDT

In the past 24 hours, at least eleven women have accused Donald Trump of sexual harassment or assault.

While the candidate has vehemently denied these charges—and even threatened to sue the New York Times for reporting on two of the allegations—this is only the most recent scandal involving women to crop up during Trump’s presidential bid.

Given the extraordinary nature of this campaign, you could be forgiven for having lost track of some of those incidents. Here’s a timeline that walks through the various insults and allegations that come up during the course of the race.

August 2015: Megyn Kelly

During the first Republican primary debate, Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly asked Trump about his comments about women, “You’ve called women you don’t like ‘fat pigs,’ ‘dogs,’ ‘slobs’ and ‘disgusting animals,’” she said, to which Trump responded: “Only Rosie O’Donnell.”

The day after the debate, Trump criticized Kelly’s style, saying she treated him unfairly: “She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions,” Trump said, adding, “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever”—a remark some observers read as a reference to menstruation.

The scuffle led to a nine-month-long feud, during which Trump called Kelly an “overrated anchor,” “crazy Megyn,” and “very bad at math,” among other things. The two apparently made peace during Kelly’s primetime special in May 2016. “I like our relationship right now,” Trump said toward the end of their conversation.

September 2015: Carly Fiorina

A Rolling Stone article chronicled Trump’s commentary about his primary opponents, including former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, the only woman gunning for the Republican nomination. “Look at that face!” he said about Fiorina while watching a replay of an earlier debate. “Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!”

Fiorina’s campaign retaliated with a web campaign ad showing Fiorina speaking at a Republican women’s event. “Ladies, look at this face,” Fiorina said in the ad. “And look at all your faces. The face of leadership. This is the face of a 61-year-old woman. I am proud of every year and every wrinkle.”

Subscribe to the Broadsheet, Fortune’s daily newsletter on the world’s most powerful women.

March 2016: Punishment for abortions

In an interview with MSNBC host Chris Matthews, Trump said that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who get abortions, should the procedure be banned in the U.S. He later walked the statement back, issuing a press release that stated that “the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman.”

April 2016: The ‘woman card’

During his Super Tuesday victory speech, the GOP candidate accused Hillary Clinton of playing up her gender during the campaign. “She’s got nothing else going,” Trump said during a press conference after the speech. “And frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5% of the vote. The only thing she’s got going is the woman’s card.”

The Clinton campaign quickly spun the comments into a slogan, offering physical “woman cards” to donors and using the hashtag #womancard when speaking about platform issues pertaining to women (e.g. equal pay and paid parental leave).

May 2016: New York Times exposé

The New York Times published the results of a six-week, 50-interview investigation into Donald Trump’s treatment of women. The women’s accounts “reveal unwelcome romantic advances, unending commentary on the female form, a shrewd reliance on ambitious women, and unsettling workplace conduct,” according to the Times.

The Trump campaign disputed many of the details of the Times’ investigation: “A lot of things get made up over the years,” he told the publication. “I have always treated women with great respect. And women will tell you that.”

June-August 2016: Staffer sexism

A Huffington Post investigation revealed that in May, three-fourths of Donald Trump’s campaign staff was male and that female staff members made 35% less than their male counterparts. In August, Trump appointed a 13-person economic advisory team that included six men named Steve—but not a single woman. He later added several women to the group.

September 2016: Alicia Machado

During the first presidential debate, Hillary Clinton called out her opponent for his treatment of former Miss Universe Alicia Machado. “He called the woman Miss Piggy,” she said. “Then he called her ‘Miss Housekeeping,’ because she was Latina. Donald, she has a name.”

October 2016:

The Apprentice: The AP published an investigation into the billionaire’s treatment of women on his reality TV show, The Apprentice. According to the publication, he “rated female contestants by the size of their breasts and talked about which ones he’d like to have sex with.”

Access Hollywood: The Washington Post released tapes of Donald Trump talking to Access Hollywood host Billy Bush about groping and kissing women without their consent. “When you’re a star, you can do anything you want,” he says.

Assault allegations: Following the release of the tapes and the candidate’s statement during the second presidential debate that he never actually did any of the things he had talked about (he called it “locker room talk”), more than ten women have come forward with accusations of harassment and assault.

Source:
A Comprehensive Guide to Donald Trump's Women Problems This Election Season
http://fortune.com/2016/10/13/donald-trump-women-timeline/

[Tom4784]

Since when are you a man? :amazed:


I'm not surprised at the OPs post. Still seeing a lot of support for this Puto everywhere

For 26 years or so :amazed:

[Maru]

To answer your first question, I just posted what I thought was a throw away comment about Michelle Obama, after I'd seen a couple of posts championing Michelle Obama for next president.

But it got a few backs up, and I was told to explain (even though those who championed her was not asked to explain their reason they want her for president)

So for your next part, I didn't start the talking about Michelle Obama, and just posted a small little comment which was jumped on for an explanation, so how did I derail the thread?

Now go away you interfering busy body.

While I appreciate the time you're taking to respond to those comments therein, an inflammatory statement about supposed views on white privilege has naught to do with the OP, which is about voting demographics in the US.

Michelle's speech has everything to do with this discussion since she is a not only coming from an informed position, but she herself represents the female vote seeing as she is not only a US citizen, but is an active female voter. I don't necessarily agree with others that she should be president as I don't think inspirational speeches are enough to prepare someone for the presidency. However, I don't see how some idle conjecture about her views on white privilege aka alleged racist views has anything to do with this topic...

That said, one of your quotes...

and what he get's up to with women doesn't really effect me, so I'm not that bothered.

It's like setting up a large fire in the center of a live protest and then turning to people and saying "Well I don't care actually care about what the protesters are talking about... I just didn't like your choice in speakers". Bullocks.

I don't think Michelle Obama was the trigger behind your "throw away comment". I think you made the post to derail the thread because you didn't like the discussion, and for what purpose, I won't even try to surmise.

[Maru]

Donald Trump's lead in my state is shrinking...

New poll: Trump lead shrinks in Texas, within margin of error
http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/texas-news/new-poll-trump-lead-shrinks-in-texas-within-margin-of-error/335896258

For perspective, Mitt Romney won Texas by 16 points in 2012, John McCain won this state by 13 points in 2008, George W. Bush carried his home state by 23 points in 2004, and 22 points in 2000 when he was elected to his first term.

Where Texas Republicans Stand on Donald Trump
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/10/09/where-texas-republicans-currently-stand-donald-tru/

The surfacing of a 2005 clip showing Donald Trump speaking lewdly about women has caused many Republicans to drop their support for their party's presidential nominee. Here's how the controversy is unfolding in Texas.

Texas hasn't been blue since 1976. If Trump loses TX, that would be huge. It's entirely possible too. Many people I know around my age, especially minorities, were never really actively engaged voters so that could change this election. Trump didn't win the primary either.

The biggest irony of all, with all his talk of being anti-immigration and fixing borders (something that is always an issue here), would be to lose in the state of Texas because of the female vote. :laugh: I don't see how he could ever live that down.

[GiRTh]

1nBuJh_FpXk

[Ammi]

..so the 19th amendment is women's right to vote and the joking..(or not joking..:laugh:..)..is about repealing that..?...I loved Michelle Obama's inspirational speech...:love:..she referred to political stances and said this shouldn't be a Republic V Democratic thing, this should be a human thing../speaking of basically sexual assaulting another person...it's the same with gender as well...I think I said that in another thread...this shouldn't be a gender thing either...what he said was his 'practised methods' is offensive to everyone and worrying, no matter what the gender.../sexual assault is a human thing...

[Jamie89]

:worry: I know a lot (most?) of the people saying to repeal the 19th are just joking, but some of them aren't. Maybe that's not important because there's no danger of it ever happening anyway, but I think the fact that the idea of it is gaining traction is more symbolic than anything. Symbolic of the undertones of this campaign, and the influence of Trump, and the thoughts and feeling of some (some!) of his supporters. And if this is his influence at this stage, what would his influence be as president? There are a lot of impressionable people who will look up to him as president and follow his lead, being a leader and all. And we know that he thinks it's fine to show a complete lack of disrespect for women. Most men don't though so why any of those men would want him to be their representative is something I don't understand at all.

[Ammi]

:worry: I know a lot (most?) of the people saying to repeal the 19th are just joking, but some of them aren't. Maybe that's not important because there's no danger of it ever happening anyway, but I think the fact that the idea of it is gaining traction is more symbolic than anything. Symbolic of the undertones of this campaign, and the influence of Trump, and the thoughts and feeling of some (some!) of his supporters. And if this is his influence at this stage, what would his influence be as president? There are a lot of impressionable people who will look up to him as president and follow his lead, being a leader and all. And we know that he thinks it's fine to show a complete lack of disrespect for women. Most men don't though so why any of those men would want him to be their representative is something I don't understand at all.

..yeah like the possibility of a grim, sleezy reality TV person becoming the President of the USA...ooooops, Jamie...:worry:.../how these things can pick up traction in uncertain/fearful and frustrating times for countries...

[Jamie89]

..yeah like the possibility of a grim, sleezy reality TV person becoming the President of the USA...ooooops, Jamie...:worry:.../how these things can pick up traction in uncertain/fearful and frustrating times for countries...

:laugh: it's just bizarre isn't it, the whole thing. It would have been a great concept for a parody/comedy sketch or something, but to think it's actually modern day america... :worry: Can't get my head round it.

[Mokka]

me Jamie and Ammi rt now

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/genderlitutopiadystopia/images/d/dc/Tumblr_me7wd1wxH31r8vo7wo1_500.png/revision/latest?cb=20130115040828

[Jamie89]

me Jamie and Ammi rt now

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/genderlitutopiadystopia/images/d/dc/Tumblr_me7wd1wxH31r8vo7wo1_500.png/revision/latest?cb=20130115040828
:joker: the pitchforks being just out of shot

[Ammi]

...:laugh:..I can't actually recall now what came first, the chicken or the egg..(I'm not even American..)...but it's just been like a haze of a nightmare that's become a reality...I guess with the extreme of the most possible 'establishment' candidate being so dubious of character herself...there would inevitably be an opposing extreme to that because the whole concept just initiates those extremes rising...

[Mokka]

:joker: the pitchforks being just out of shot

Never let them know you're pack'n :wink:

[Maru]

1nBuJh_FpXk

If this is primarily from the internet, then it's hard for me to take as seriously. Though I'm sure there is a fringe out there that takes it all very seriously. I haven't met any crazy voters from either side yet. None at my husband's job and I don't see that many bumper stickers tbqh (and I love to look at bumper stickers seeing as I'm a designer).

Part of me wants to go to a rally to see who the are people are still going to these revelations have come out, on the other hand I don't want to caught in angry mob.

Anyway, Russian hackers. It's a real thing. :laugh: Though seriously...

Since the election began, when I would sometimes read internet comments, there would be random waves of anti-Clinton/Obama commentary in articles that had jack all to do with politics. I have seen so many accounts with a full time jobs worth of posts and fudged histories... some you had to dig to find evidence of being fake, but you could tell right away they were propaganda accts.

I doubt a lot of the stuff I read online, especially comments, because it's a very real thing that these campaigns are paying people to make and post from fake accounts to make it seem as if a movement is stronger than it actually is. They will sit and argue too and I'm sure it pays to run campaigns in this way...

Also 4chan and reddit love to get in on the trolling fun. The internet is the wild west.

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/21/1518537/-Clinton-SuperPac-Admits-to-Paying-Internet-Trolls

It looks like Russia hired internet trolls to pose as pro-Trump Americans
http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7

How an army of pro-Donald Trump trolls are taking over Reddit
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-donald-trumps-army-trolls-took-over-reddit

[Ammi]

If this is primarily from the internet, then it's hard for me to take as seriously. Though I'm sure there is a fringe out there that takes it all very seriously. I haven't met any crazy voters from either side yet. None at my husband's job and I don't see that many bumper stickers tbqh (and I love to look at bumper stickers seeing as I'm a designer).

Part of me wants to go to a rally to see who the are people are still going to these revelations have come out, on the other hand I don't want to caught in angry mob.

Anyway, Russian hackers. It's a real thing. :laugh: Though seriously...

Since the election began, when I would sometimes read internet comments, there would be random waves of anti-Clinton/Obama commentary in articles that had jack all to do with politics. I have seen so many accounts with a full time jobs worth of posts and fudged histories... some you had to dig to find evidence of being fake, but you could tell right away they were propaganda accts.

I doubt a lot of the stuff I read online, especially comments, because it's a very real thing that these campaigns are paying people to make and post from fake accounts to make it seem as if a movement is stronger than it actually is. They will sit and argue too and I'm sure it pays to run campaigns in this way...

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/21/1518537/-Clinton-SuperPac-Admits-to-Paying-Internet-Trolls

It looks like Russia hired internet trolls to pose as pro-Trump Americans
http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-internet-trolls-and-donald-trump-2016-7

How an army of pro-Donald Trump trolls are taking over Reddit
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-donald-trumps-army-trolls-took-over-reddit


..I'll look at your links a bit later in the day when I have more time Maru as I have to get off now...but wasn't it Reddit also that were asking for people to share the vid with Hilary's 'rapist enabler', slanted in editing video in the other thread..?..

[Maru]

..I'll look at your links a bit later in the day when I have more time Maru as I have to get off now...but wasn't it Reddit also that were asking for people to share the vid with Hilary's 'rapist enabler', slanted in editing video in the other thread..?..

There are a few groups at different sites, though Reddit is maybe the most popular. The Reddit article has statistics and its just amazing how much it's pickIng up.

I guess another question would be... without the internet would a Trump candidacy even be possible... the media held the narrative with lock and key. It took numbers to get ideas and more pressure than it was probably worth to spread... now it only takes a few clicks and a willing botnet.

For me, the tension in the US became obvious after 911 but since that coincided with the rise of the net, I guess it could also be that we are all exposed to increasingly oppressive rhetoric in larger doses. Some Americans become very sensitive when they feel their version of the nation's self-image is being attacked and under siege by what they consider to be a toxic force imposing on their idealist visions for the US. Once you put someone into a defensive posture, it's very difficult to get them to come down from their position... especially on the net of all places. We all generally live in a filter bubble thanks to click baity social media algorhythms, tailored search results via Google and now an army of propaganda pushers.

It is incredibly difficult to get through all that noise to try to find a voter who is receptive to such messaging without playing to their deepest emotional sensivities. It's probably much easier to just talk to voters in person to level with them on how their views are contributing to the sexism, etc than over the net where most content served to them is meant to coddle them and cater to their views, not differ from them and challenge them.

[bots]

if you watch the American comedy shows, any of the topical shows, they are all ridiculing Trump for all its worth, some are even dedicating 50%+ of their shows to it. They are so one sided and bias in their condemnation, its shocking.

Both Hilary and Donald are dreadful candidates, but the establishment machine is working at 200% to sway the vote for their preferred choice. Is that really a democracy to use as an example to others?

I don't care how bad a candidate Trump is, a democracy should provide balance and perspective on both candidates equally, and nothing could be further from reality.

[Alf]

While I appreciate the time you're taking to respond to those comments therein, an inflammatory statement about supposed views on white privilege has naught to do with the OP, which is about voting demographics in the US.

Michelle's speech has everything to do with this discussion since she is a not only coming from an informed position, but she herself represents the female vote seeing as she is not only a US citizen, but is an active female voter. I don't necessarily agree with others that she should be president as I don't think inspirational speeches are enough to prepare someone for the presidency. However, I don't see how some idle conjecture about her views on white privilege aka alleged racist views has anything to do with this topic...

That said, one of your quotes...



It's like setting up a large fire in the center of a live protest and then turning to people and saying "Well I don't care actually care about what the protesters are talking about... I just didn't like your choice in speakers". Bullocks.

I don't think Michelle Obama was the trigger behind your "throw away comment". I think you made the post to derail the thread because you didn't like the discussion, and for what purpose, I won't even try to surmise.Whatever turns you on.

[reece(:]

The fact there still is Trump supporters is both worrying and dumbfounding.

[Tom4784]

if you watch the American comedy shows, any of the topical shows, they are all ridiculing Trump for all its worth, some are even dedicating 50%+ of their shows to it. They are so one sided and bias in their condemnation, its shocking.

Both Hilary and Donald are dreadful candidates, but the establishment machine is working at 200% to sway the vote for their preferred choice. Is that really a democracy to use as an example to others?

I don't care how bad a candidate Trump is, a democracy should provide balance and perspective on both candidates equally, and nothing could be further from reality.

Probably because there's no upsides to Donald Trump unless you're a bigot. It's not like Hillary hasn't been getting bad press though

it's probably too difficult to try to put a positive spin on anything Trump related and to do so would be just as manipulative as making him out to be the terrible candidate that he is. At least the latter is factual.

[kirklancaster]

Probably because there's no upsides to Donald Trump unless you're a bigot. It's not like Hillary hasn't been getting bad press though

it's probably too difficult to try to put a positive spin on anything Trump related and to do so would be just as manipulative as making him out to be the terrible candidate that he is. At least the latter is factual.

:clap1: :laugh::laugh::laugh: THANK YOU.

You have just PROVED me RIGHT on what I have claimed in posts on several different threads.

So ANYONE who does not believe in being so simplistic and naive as to agree that Trump is The Devil Incarnate - 100% ALL BAD and without one redeeming feature - is a BIGOT. :laugh:

Yeah, OK.

[Alf]

:clap1: :laugh::laugh::laugh: THANK YOU.

You have just PROVED me RIGHT on what I have claimed in posts on several different threads.

So ANYONE who does not believe in being so simplistic and naive as to agree that Trump is The Devil Incarnate - 100% ALL BAD and without one redeeming feature - is a BIGOT. :laugh:

Yeah, OK.It's funny that he's only become The Devil since running for the presidency. I don't remember him being The Devil when he presented The Apprentice.

I think it's only because he's running against a woman, if he was running against another man, I don't think many on here would be that bothered.

[bots]

Probably because there's no upsides to Donald Trump unless you're a bigot. It's not like Hillary hasn't been getting bad press though

it's probably too difficult to try to put a positive spin on anything Trump related and to do so would be just as manipulative as making him out to be the terrible candidate that he is. At least the latter is factual.

Its difficult to tell with Trump, some of his policies are good, others ridiculous, others plain fantasy. Hilary's under examination, while she may have considered the policies and issues in greater depth, it doesnt make them any more meritful (new made up word alert) in the scheme of things, it just depends where your political beliefs sit.

Both candidates have mountains of crap that can be thrown at them ... they have both been around for years, its there for anyone to see. That's not been reflected in the televised debates, and its not being reflected in the media coverage.

I think there is a real danger of Trump winning because of this clear unfairness. It will consolidate his support, but whether he wins or loses, the USA needs to go back to the drawing board on its method of presidential selection as it has become a laughing stock.

[Alf]

:clap1: :laugh::laugh::laugh: THANK YOU.

You have just PROVED me RIGHT on what I have claimed in posts on several different threads.

So ANYONE who does not believe in being so simplistic and naive as to agree that Trump is The Devil Incarnate - 100% ALL BAD and without one redeeming feature - is a BIGOT. :laugh:

Yeah, OK.Dezzy just likes calling people bigots, it gives him a feeling of superiority.

[Tom4784]

:clap1: :laugh::laugh::laugh: THANK YOU.

You have just PROVED me RIGHT on what I have claimed in posts on several different threads.

So ANYONE who does not believe in being so simplistic and naive as to agree that Trump is The Devil Incarnate - 100% ALL BAD and without one redeeming feature - is a BIGOT. :laugh:

Yeah, OK.

He literally only got as far as he did because of his comments on immigrants and muslims. If he never made those statements then he wouldn't have made the ticket.

People only like Trump for three reasons, he appeals to their bigoted opinions, or they are generally ignorant and believe that he should be president because he's 'different and not a politician' or, like many users on this site, they support him because they think it's funny to do so.

The rest of your post is pure exaggeration and silliness. I don't know what your problem is lately Kirk but sort it out.

[Jamie89]

It's funny that he's only become The Devil since running for the presidency. I don't remember him being The Devil when he presented The Apprentice.

I think it's only because he's running against a woman, if he was running against another man, I don't think many on here would be that bothered.

I guess people hold more importance to the character of someone running for president than they do someone who presents a reality TV show.

if you watch the American comedy shows, any of the topical shows, they are all ridiculing Trump for all its worth, some are even dedicating 50%+ of their shows to it. They are so one sided and bias in their condemnation, its shocking.

Both Hilary and Donald are dreadful candidates, but the establishment machine is working at 200% to sway the vote for their preferred choice. Is that really a democracy to use as an example to others?

I don't care how bad a candidate Trump is, a democracy should provide balance and perspective on both candidates equally, and nothing could be further from reality.

I don't know about american shows but I'd agree that there's been more negative attention focused on Trump. I do think that it's his own doing though and not a conspiracy or anything like that. When things like that tape happens, and people coming forward and accusing him of assault, of course they're going to cover it. Just like when Hillary's email scandal happened that was covered too. And tbh, he's just an easier target for parody. Nothing to do with politics, just as a person :laugh: and those shows are out to entertain.

Russell Brand made a video about the recent debate that's actually really funny and he makes fun out of both of them, he's just kind of mocking the whole election and makes some really good/funny points so I'd recommend it to people...

Rix8sBPMTj0

[Crimson Dynamo]

please

russell brand should never be used as an argument for anything


seriously?

[Jamie89]

please

russell brand should never be used as an argument for anything


seriously?

I wasn't using it as an argument for anything, I was sharing it because some people might be interested in watching it for the reasons I gave (which were related to the post I was replying to). Don't know why I should have had to explain any of that but there you go

[Jack_]

You don't have to explain yourself Jamie. I watched the video last night and it was amusing and actually non-partisan, but Russell Brand propagates anti-establishment politics and encourages people to seek out news that isn't spoon fed to people via the mass media, so of course he's going to be reviled

When someone tries to challenge the status quo, they are ridiculed by those who either don't want things to change or don't understand why they need to change

[kirklancaster]

You don't have to explain yourself Jamie. I watched the video last night and it was amusing and actually non-partisan, but Russell Brand propagates anti-establishment politics and encourages people to seek out news that isn't spoon fed to people via the mass media, so of course he's going to be reviled

When someone tries to challenge the status quo, they are ridiculed by those who either don't want things to change or don't understand why they need to change

So you are a Nigel Farage fan, then Jack? :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

You don't have to explain yourself Jamie. I watched the video last night and it was amusing and actually non-partisan, but Russell Brand propagates anti-establishment politics and encourages people to seek out news that isn't spoon fed to people via the mass media, so of course he's going to be reviled

When someone tries to challenge the status quo, they are ridiculed by those who either don't want things to change or don't understand why they need to change


:laugh2:


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/02/18/article-2561756-0030411300000258-859_306x462.jpg

[Jack_]

So you are a Nigel Farage fan, then Jack? :laugh:

Nope, but I understand why he (and Trump) are popular, and in actual fact a lot of the reasons anti-establishment figureheads and movements have become so popular are largely the same, it's just that the solutions they offer up differ depending on your political persuasion. It may seem strange at face value but people like Trump, Sanders, Farage and Corbyn have more in common than one might think, because they're addressing the same issues but with different answers

[bots]

So you are a Nigel Farage fan, then Jack? :laugh:

i was going to say .... isn't that what Trump is doing now .... challenging the status quo :laugh:

[Mokka]

i was going to say .... isn't that what Trump is doing now .... challenging the status quo :laugh:

I wouldn't call rolling the country back on women's rights to vote or to health care in abortions, making sexism normalized....again, and encouraging segregation of society based on race challenging the status quo. I would call that the status quo of 50% of Americans that we see rear it's ugly head every election cycle.

[Northern Monkey]

Nope, but I understand why he (and Trump) are popular, and in actual fact a lot of the reasons anti-establishment figureheads and movements have become so popular are largely the same, it's just that the solutions they offer up differ depending on your political persuasion. It may seem strange at face value but people like Trump, Sanders, Farage and Corbyn have more in common than one might think, because they're addressing the same issues but with different answers

Very true.

[bots]

I wouldn't call rolling the country back on women's rights to vote or to health care in abortions, making sexism normalized....again, and encouraging segregation of society based on race challenging the status quo. I would call that the status quo of 50% of Americans that we see rear it's ugly head every election cycle.

i'm not a trump supporter, but he is challenging the establishment, and he has an absolute right to do that in a democracy, its just that the usa pays lip service to democracy, nothing more

[Mokka]

i'm not a trump supporter, but he is challenging the establishment, and he has an absolute right to do that in a democracy, its just that the usa pays lip service to democracy, nothing more

Did I say he didn't have the right to do it? Like I said, it happens every election cycle. Was it not the Tea Party the last two elections spouting the same illogical theories? It is a part of the democracy they have and want in America

[Maru]

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.

[Crimson Dynamo]

i'm not a trump supporter, but he is challenging the establishment, and he has an absolute right to do that in a democracy, its just that the usa pays lip service to democracy, nothing more

what is surprising is that the very people who decry him cannot seem to see past his personality and see what he actually represents - change

no wonder people like clinton get votes

Obama won on a "change" ticket and the young lapped it up

He brought no change, nothing but the status quo

you could not make it up

and still they are going on about a convo on a bus in 2005 :joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.


evidence?

[Jamie89]

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.

Brilliant post Maru :worship:

[GiRTh]

People keep bringing up the candidates the status quo, but the truth is, the vast majority of Americans don't appear to agree on what the status quo actually is. That's why you hear a lot of talk about left/right wing media twisting and manipulating perception... the truth is, neither represents the status quo, both parties have become increasingly irrelevant, which is why they HAVE to rely on divisive political rhetoric to make the case for their relevance. Once they're voted back in, it's back to same ol' same ol'.

There is no single majority perception anymore.. America has become very mixed and many people are in denial of this fact... they keep trying to force their vision of what the US actually is, but it won't stick in people's mind because 1) It's not seated in fact and 2) Both visions are too restrictive to truly represent an increasingly mixed population and an all inclusive minority population.

I would argue there are some things Clinton specifically is not going along with the status quo on, and then there are some things that Trump is more inline with good ol' boy politics on. On other issues, it's flipped around. However, Trump is not anti-status quo candidate when looking at the entire picture... the brand he is trying to sale to the American public may disagree, but looking at the issues and positions, this does not appear to be the case.

Anyway, you have to look at the issues. Not whether their personality or not clicks with you. As a female US voter, Trump will never get my vote because not only is his business record highly suspect (something he could easily clear up by releasing tax returns), but his actual understanding of how foreign politics and economies actually work isn't even college level.

The last major issue I have is obviously his sexist commentary and his treating alleged sexual harassment victims as "not pretty enough" to be sexually harassed on the campaign trail... it just goes backwards in time with regards to everything that has been accomplished in the US.

Not to mention, his brand and way of carrying himself as a leading image of the US would be a massive catastrophe for US foreign policy.:clap1:

[Maru]

He literally only got as far as he did because of his comments on immigrants and muslims. If he never made those statements then he wouldn't have made the ticket.

People only like Trump for three reasons, he appeals to their bigoted opinions, or they are generally ignorant and believe that he should be president because he's 'different and not a politician' or, like many users on this site, they support him because they think it's funny to do so.

The rest of your post is pure exaggeration and silliness. I don't know what your problem is lately Kirk but sort it out.

Kirk makes a good point. I think you may be too entrenched in your views to see the forest for the trees. Most of your posts have been heavily influenced by emotion and tinged with anger/outrage. Clearly others in this section have the same issue as well, but you are intelligent and do have a point a lot of times. However, It’s just impossible to argue with anyone when it comes to how they feel.

Feelings are specifically personal to you and your experiences as a person. I notice when people argue with your viewpoints, you take it as them deconstructing you as a person than hearing your views. You hold your views and so close to your heart, it makes it very difficult to separate you from them. You’ve shown a thin skin at times when people try to bring up the flaws in your argument and it's a shame. Not just kirk, but I and others have casually or not so casually have tried to have conversations with you, but you often take it very personally. Usually that results in you going the moral/self-righteous route, rather than taking in what others have said to you as something valid and worth listening to and recognizing. Maybe you don’t value their viewpoint, but it can come off as mean-spirited to use up their time with arguments if you don’t actually care to have one from any other POV. What you feel doesn't have to change…

Anyway… back on the point which kirk made, not everything in life is so black and white. If I had a choice to vote for a candidate that didn't engender any of the qualities I find abhorrent in a human being, I would no ****ing question vote them in and spread the word. However, the people we often have a choice of vetting are often not even remotely close to what we envision as being best for America. Maybe their smoke and mirrors campaign makes you feel that way... but again, it's feeling... when they're voted in, the real facts show that to not be the case. They have their own interests and they put those issues first.

So instead, we have to vote for those who are most likely to represent our interests and put them first.

Speaking on Trump's positions, I don't fully understand the phenomenon tbqh. Even I didn't take him seriously for a long time because I thought it was a reality TV villain posing as an actual political candidate... I didn't even think he'd win the primary.

Now here we are, he's a menace, but then this campaign has become gone downhill on so many levels, that not only is Trump's face covered in mud, but the media, Hillary and various other groups... Trump has fully and skillfully trolled the entire US political system. That said, I see some of Hillary's responses and manipulation of the viewpoints that have so many voters engaged (from Trump's demographics), that I get pissed off... every single one of those mother ****ers, Trump, Hillary, media, everyone... is trying to paint with broad brushstrokes and really have no ****ing clue the ire they've tapped into.

I don't think most people know what a status quo even looks like in the US. Every election cycle feels like a cognitive dissonance for me. I know other voters who feel the same. We are just so disenchanted with our govt... this has been going on for so long too. We had a gridlocked Congress when Obama when was voted in, as you recall... Republicans blocked Democrats... Democrats block Republicans.... same song and dance.

Some people are just fed up they are more than willing to vote the nuclear option. I guess because the political dogma here is so banal and low-level that Trump's sexism and overt disdain of certain demographics in this country really pale in comparison... most political stories now are all about scandals, self-victimization, throwing people under the bus, sex scandals with Congressional pages, booty on the side... you name it... we have become so desensitized. I think some people will hold onto even the mildest hope that Donald Trump can shake up this broken country (though I disagree and agree with you, he's just trash)... but that just isn't the way everyone feels here at home. If we could Build-A-Bear a politician straight into office, we would do it in a heartbeat over the likes of Hillary or Trump...

Look at the primary voting %’s at some point if you ever have a chance. I think it was NYT’s that mentioned that only 9% of the total population voted Donald Trump/Clinton onto the ticket. 9%. It’s hilarious to me that people are ranting and raging on the telly about how they can’t believe once again the status quo left them with such a **** ticket when almost no one votes in primaries…

To put it in perspective, in my county, Harris (which is the largest pop in TX) encompasses most of Houston and surrounding areas, Hillary Clinton received 156,729 votes… Trump received 147,721 votes… Harris County’s population is 4.3 million… their combined vote, 304450… That’s 14% of the total pop which is quite dismal. I vote in primaries and thankfully Cruz won my state.

Perhaps if Trump wins and royally screws everybody over, people will wake up and we will se a surge in primary participate. However, so many minorities and especially minority female voters opt out of getting involved entirely for “personal reasons”. Which is quite sad because these groups are being already under-represented.

So that said, it’s very hard to paint with such broad brushstrokes when considering the polls. We have such a poor showing at primaries and even some generals have this issue. I know some people that only vote every 8 years and will vote straight ticket the rest of the ballot. They stay home with the assumption during the midterms and always assume that the incumbent will be re-elected… I really don’t understand that kind of voter.

[Maru]

evidence?

Tbqf, both presidencies could be potentially damaging to our national security. They both will likely divide the nation further and this could weaken our standing abroad (and further empower terrorist ideological forces such as ISIS).

Trump is all impulse, no self-control which will have the worst result. What he has done to the atmosphere of this country in the past 1 1/2yr can't remotely compare to what he could do in 4yr as president. Whether you agree with his views or not, he has no limits when it comes to protecting his fragile ego. I wouldn't put it past him to start ghetto 3AM Twitter wars with other nations and their "departments"... ISIS and other groups that don't fall in line with his rhetoric will use this to their advantage to pull apart at the country. We've already seen a surge in countries/interest groups hiring trolls on the internet to write blogs/make commentary on the internet to increase the public's resentment towards our own government.

I figure it will happen one of two ways...

Either Trump will say or do something abroad that will get us in a world of trouble.

Or the disease will start from within, he will damage the public's trust and faith in democracy... which makes it ripe for our foreign enemies and other malicious groups to come in, fan this controversy and further divide the nation and cause chaos.

Granted, Hillary could do the same as well if she were to make some terrible decisions and then act in secrecy. She will lose the public trust and she already is disliked by much of the population. However, Hillary is at least self-aware enough to know when to shut her mouth and to handle these divisions in a sensitive manner. Sensitivity and self-awareness doesn't even seem to be in Donald Trump's vocabulary.

[jaxie]

Kirk makes a good point. I think you may be too entrenched in your views to see the forest for the trees. Most of your posts have been heavily influenced by emotion and tinged with anger/outrage. Clearly others in this section have the same issue as well, but you are intelligent and do have a point a lot of times. However, It’s just impossible to argue with anyone when it comes to how they feel.

Feelings are specifically personal to you and your experiences as a person. I notice when people argue with your viewpoints, you take it as them deconstructing you as a person than hearing your views. You hold your views and so close to your heart, it makes it very difficult to separate you from them. You’ve shown a thin skin at times when people try to bring up the flaws in your argument and it's a shame. Not just kirk, but I and others have casually or not so casually have tried to have conversations with you, but you often take it very personally. Usually that results in you going the moral/self-righteous route, rather than taking in what others have said to you as something valid and worth listening to and recognizing. Maybe you don’t value their viewpoint, but it can come off as mean-spirited to use up their time with arguments if you don’t actually care to have one from any other POV. What you feel doesn't have to change…

Anyway… back on the point which kirk made, not everything in life is so black and white. If I had a choice to vote for a candidate that didn't engender any of the qualities I find abhorrent in a human being, I would no ****ing question vote them in and spread the word. However, the people we often have a choice of vetting are often not even remotely close to what we envision as being best for America. Maybe their smoke and mirrors campaign makes you feel that way... but again, it's feeling... when they're voted in, the real facts show that to not be the case. They have their own interests and they put those issues first.

So instead, we have to vote for those who are most likely to represent our interests and put them first.

Speaking on Trump's positions, I don't fully understand the phenomenon tbqh. Even I didn't take him seriously for a long time because I thought it was a reality TV villain posing as an actual political candidate... I didn't even think he'd win the primary.

Now here we are, he's a menace, but then this campaign has become gone downhill on so many levels, that not only is Trump's face covered in mud, but the media, Hillary and various other groups... Trump has fully and skillfully trolled the entire US political system. That said, I see some of Hillary's responses and manipulation of the viewpoints that have so many voters engaged (from Trump's demographics), that I get pissed off... every single one of those mother ****ers, Trump, Hillary, media, everyone... is trying to paint with broad brushstrokes and really have no ****ing clear the ire they've tapped into.

I don't think most people know what a status quo even looks like in the US. Every election cycle feels like a cognitive dissonance for me. I know other voters who feel the same. We are just so disenchanted with our govt... this has been going on for so long too. We had a gridlocked Congress when Obama when was voted in, as you recall... Republicans blocked Democrats... Democrats block Republicans.... same song and dance.

Some people are just fed up they are more than willing to vote the nuclear option. I guess because the political dogma here is so banal and low-level that Trump's sexism and overt disdain of certain demographics in this country really pale in comparison... most political stories now are all about scandals, self-victimization, throwing people under the bus, sex scandals with Congressional pages, booty on the side... you name it... we have become so desensitized. I think some people will hold onto even the mildest hope that Donald Trump can shake up this broken country (though I disagree and agree with you, he's just trash)... but that just isn't the way everyone feels here at home. If we could Build-A-Bear a politician straight into office, we would do it in a heartbeat over the likes of Hillary or Trump...

Look at the primary voting %’s at some point if you ever have a chance. I think it was NYT’s that mentioned that only 9% of the total population voted Donald Trump/Clinton onto the ticket. 9%. It’s hilarious to me that people are ranting and raging on the telly about how they can’t believe once again the status quo left them with such a **** ticket when almost no one votes in primaries…

To put it in perspective, in my county, Harris (which is the largest pop in TX) encompasses most of Houston and surrounding areas, Hillary Clinton received 156,729 votes… Trump received 147,721 votes… Harris County’s population is 4.3 million… their combined vote, 304450… That’s 14% of the total pop which is a quite dismal. I vote in primaries and thankfully Cruz won my state.

Perhaps if Trump wins and royally screws everybody over, people will wake up and we will se a surge in primary participate. However, so many minorities and especially minority female voters opt out of getting involved entirely for “personal reasons”. Which is quite sad because these groups are being already under-represented.

So that said, it’s very hard to paint with such broad brushstrokes when considering the polls. We have such a poor showing at primaries and even some generals have this issue. I know some people that only vote every 8 years and will vote straight ticket the rest of the ballot. They stay home with the assumption during the midterms and always assume that the incumbent will be re-elected… I really don’t understand that kind of voter.

You are a very smart, wise, and observant lady Maru. You put most of that in the first couple of paras a lot more kindly and sensitively than I would have! I hope it's received well. I fear not.

[Maru]

You are a very smart, wise, and observant lady Maru. You put most of that in the first couple of paras a lot more kindly and sensitively than I would have! I hope it's received well. I fear not.

Hope for the best, expect the worst. My husband's motto at work :laugh:

[jaxie]

Hope for the best, expect the worst. My husband's motto at work :laugh:

I feel the US needs a strong leader at the moment. Particularly with how aggressively Putin seems to be behaving in the last few years. I don't think either of the candidates is a potentially strong leader, and I don't think Obama has been either.

In an ideal world who would you like to see as President and why, it doesn't have to be a current candidate, just someone you think would be a good leader?

[Maru]

I feel the US needs a strong leader at the moment. Particularly with how aggressively Putin seems to be behaving in the last few years. I don't think either of the candidates is a potentially strong leader, and I don't think Obama has been either.

In an ideal world who would you like to see as President and why, it doesn't have to be a current candidate, just someone you think would be a good leader?

Oh wow, that's such a difficult question to answer. Anyone who takes the job will have their hands full just dealing with whatever mess has been left behind by the previous administration. I think I remember reading somewhere Obama had taken up smoking again after having quit :laugh:

If I could Build-A-Bear a president, it would be someone who is a great parent, but who is also very practical, fair-minded, the opposite of an adversarial figure who is very receptive to the voting public and doesn't solely engage only when there is a David and Goliath story going around the media. Despite the disenchantment, the upside is that the population is actively engaged in the future of this country. This is a great thing and that energy can be tapped and worked with in a very positive matter if by the right hands... it's been a while since we've had a president who speaks to the public.

That said, Obama's 2004 DNC speech (the one that likely led to him being elected) is one of my favorite of all time.

_fMNIofUw2I

The pundits, the pundits like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue States: red states for Republicans, blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states.

There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.

[kirklancaster]

I cannot quote ALL your posts Maru but there is no need - Suffice it for me to say, that they are ALL brilliantly written, so well thought out, and irresistibly readable, and the points which you make in them are so difficult to rebut.

I personally think, that you are a very welcome addition to this forum - the intellectual quality of which, has been enriched by your joining.

Thank you.

[Maru]

Issues in Hillary Clinton’s Past Leave Her Muted in Furor Over Donald Trump (NYT)

In the past week, as a swirl of sexual assault accusations against Donald J. Trump has prompted a loud national discussion about male power and women’s rights, the first woman to be a major party’s presidential nominee was barely heard from.

Though Hillary Clinton has stood at the center of feminist debates for more than two decades, she has at times been an imperfect messenger for the cause. That has never been more apparent than now, as her old missteps and her husband’s history have effectively paralyzed her during a moment of widespread outrage.

The most impassioned speeches on the topic have come not from her, but from the first lady, Michelle Obama, who said Mr. Trump’s words had “shaken me to my core,” and from President Obama and others. When Mrs. Clinton herself spoke, she quickly changed the subject to other groups of people Mr. Trump had insulted, and she tried to lighten the mood with a joke about watching cat videos.

“It makes you want to turn off the news. It makes you want to unplug the internet or just look at cat GIFs,” Mrs. Clinton told donors in San Francisco on Thursday, making her first remarks on Mr. Trump’s treatment of women since several came forward to accuse him.

“I’ve watched a lot of cats do a lot of weird and interesting things,” she said, drawing a few laughs. “But we have a job to do. And it’ll be good for people and for cats.”

The virtual silence from Mrs. Clinton speaks volumes about the complicated place she has occupied as a 1960s Wellesley feminist who stayed as a devoted wife to her husband through infidelities and humiliation.

Forcefully denouncing sexual assault would most certainly provoke ugly attacks on Bill Clinton and Mrs. Clinton’s role in countering the women who accused him of sexual misconduct. That painful past haunted Mrs. Clinton last Sunday when Mr. Trump invited some of her husband’s accusers to the second presidential debate.

In the days since, Mrs. Clinton has had to once again navigate the messy crosscurrents of politics, symbolism and her ambition to shatter “that highest, hardest glass ceiling” of being elected the first female president.

Now, when the collective voice of American women and victims of sexual assault seems to be letting out a cathartic scream, Mrs. Clinton has deferred to another first lady to speak for her. At the San Francisco fund-raiser on Thursday, she pointed to Mrs. Obama’s speech earlier that afternoon when the first lady placed her hand on her heart and spoke out for the many who were outraged.

Speaking to college students in New Hampshire, Mrs. Obama called Mr. Trump’s lewd remarks about how he had forced himself on women “disgraceful” and “intolerable.”

“I can’t believe I’m saying that a candidate for president of the United States has bragged about sexually assaulting women,” Mrs. Obama said as a crowd of young women watched with silent and somber expressions. “I can’t stop thinking about this — it has shaken me to my core.”

Mrs. Clinton has every political reason to avoid wading into the discussion of sexual assault that has riled a nation and thrown her Republican rival’s candidacy into chaos. Not known as a naturally emotive public speaker, Mrs. Clinton risks stumbling if she embraces the issue at a time when polls show that she is in her strongest position yet to defeat Mr. Trump on Nov. 8. She has played it safe, all but disappearing from the campaign trail until the next debate in Las Vegas on Wednesday.

But then again, two decades ago, it was Mrs. Clinton, who, as a 47-year-old first lady in a powder pink suit, defied her husband’s West Wing advisers and captured the attention of women worldwide by declaring, “Human rights are women’s rights, and women’s rights are human rights once and for all.”

Last summer, Mrs. Clinton began her campaign by declaring that she wanted to create “an America where a father can tell his daughter: ‘Yes, you can be anything you want to be. Even president of the United States.’”

Since then, allegations of sexual harassment have led to the ouster of Roger Ailes as chairman of Fox News; college campuses have been shaken by the six-month jail sentence given to Brock Turner, a former Stanford University student found guilty of sexual assault; and women continue to come forward with allegations against Mr. Trump.

At the same time, Mrs. Clinton, so close to becoming the first woman to win the White House amid national outrage over reports of her rival’s male lechery, has all but abandoned gender as an issue.

On Thursday, Mrs. Clinton appeared to get choked up on the set of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” when, during a taping, Ms. DeGeneres played a portion of Mrs. Obama’s speech.

But Mrs. Clinton quickly composed herself and, in a remarkable post-gender punt, pivoted to a laundry list of other constituencies whom she said Mr. Trump had offended.

“It’s not just what Trump has said about women, as terrible as that has been,” Mrs. Clinton told Ms. DeGeneres. It’s “what he has said about immigrants and African-Americans and Latinos and people with disabilities and P.O.W.s and our military and Muslims and everybody.”

On Friday, without mentioning the accusations against Mr. Trump, Mrs. Clinton told volunteers in Seattle: “This election is incredibly painful. I take absolutely no satisfaction in what is happening on the other side with my opponent.”

Asked if Mrs. Clinton would be speaking more directly about the issue, Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign’s communications director, noted that Mrs. Clinton had confronted Mr. Trump at the last debate about the recently released 2005 video in which he bragged about groping women. “You should expect that she’ll continue to do that,” Ms. Palmieri said.

Mrs. Clinton has battle wounds from wading into gender in the past. In 1992, she seemed an affront to stay-at-home mothers when she defended her legal career, saying, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies.” As a working mother in the White House, Mrs. Clinton redefined the role of first lady when she tried, and subsequently failed, to overhaul health care, but she also played the role of a traditional wife when she stayed with Mr. Clinton despite his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

In hacked emails released by WikiLeaks this week, Mrs. Clinton was shown in an interview transcript pondering, at length, the many complexities of running to be the first female president.

“When I ran the last time, the research was pretty clear that there was a resistance to a woman president, not just among Republicans and independents, but among Democrats,” she said in one of the thousands of emails obtained by hackers who illegally breached a top aide’s account. “They didn’t think a woman was qualified, could do the job, didn’t see a woman as commander in chief,” Mrs. Clinton continued.

So, in 2008, she played up her fortitude and tried essentially to run as if she were a man. Eight years later, Mrs. Clinton talks regularly about being a mother and a grandmother, and she doesn’t shy away from embracing her potential to make history. She has also promised that as president she would advance policies that would help women, including doubling the child care tax credit, increasing the minimum wage and pushing for 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave.

And yet Mrs. Clinton has found in her second presidential campaign that young women aren’t particularly moved by her promise to make history. Many of them voted instead for Mrs. Clinton’s primary opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Thinking about her current campaign, Mrs. Clinton said in the transcript, “You know, I mean, I’m damned if I do, I’m damned if I don’t.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/us/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-donald-trump.html