[user104658]

Originally Posted by Mitchell

Nope, but Hillary got cheated on, so its fine obviously.

I don't even think she was "cheated on" tbqfh, the Clintons have and have always had a "power marriage" based on a hell of a lot more than just sex. Frankly, she probably knew fine well that he was getting "sneaky" BJ's at work, and not only would I imagine she "tolerated it", I'd go as far as to say there's a good chance they talked about his exploits quite openly . However, I would imagine part of this would have been a frequent reminder of "FFS Bill, make sure the press don't find out!" and then a stern talking to when they did. She would obviously have to pretend to be "shocked and horrified" and to "forgive him", when the reality is, I doubt either of them considered the encounters he was having to be much more than "advanced masturbation".

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't even think she was "cheated on" tbqfh, the Clintons have and have always had a "power marriage" based on a hell of a lot more than just sex. Frankly, she probably knew fine well that he was getting "sneaky" BJ's at work, and not only would I imagine she "tolerated it", I'd go as far as to say there's a good chance they talked about his exploits quite openly . However, I would imagine part of this would have been a frequent reminder of "FFS Bill, make sure the press don't find out!" and then a stern talking to when they did. She would obviously have to pretend to be "shocked and horrified" and to "forgive him", when the reality is, I doubt either of them considered the encounters he was having to be much more than "advanced masturbation".

I have always actually thought this too T.S. Bill has been just too much of a 'serial womaniser' and cheat for Hilary NOT to have known AND sanctioned it, and I think that she really WOULD have added some sort of 'caveat' such as "just make sure you are discreet and the press don't get hold of this Bill"

I think their relationship must be one of 'compulsive indiscretion' and 'futile acceptance' - much like Tom Jones's longstanding 'marriage'.

Would not do for me.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I have always actually thought this too T.S. Bill has been just too much of a 'serial womaniser' and cheat for Hilary NOT to have known AND sanctioned it, and I think that she really WOULD have added some sort of 'caveat' such as "just make sure you are discreet and the press don't get hold of this Bill"

I think their relationship must be one of 'compulsive indiscretion' and 'futile acceptance' - much like Tom Jones's longstanding 'marriage'.

Would not do for me.

..this makes me think of the harshness and coldness of Hilary that I've always felt even when she's said all of the right things...one of the things that I've loved is Barack and Michelle's relationship and that obvious adoration for each other.....I've never felt that with Hilary and Bill...

[bots]

Lets face it Hillary is not what one can describe as a gentle soul. Most women would have taken their husband to the cleaners if they behaved as he did, and on top of that she is a lawyer too. She should have torn him apart, and there is only one reason she didn't, she wanted to leverage Bill's popularity and influence and that is exactly what she is done, and why she is now standing for president. Trump is a buffoon, he isn't a very nice guy, but he is not even close to Hillary on the nasty scale.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Lets face it Hillary is not what one can describe as a gentle soul. Most women would have taken their husband to the cleaners if they behaved as he did, and on top of that she is a lawyer too. She should have torn him apart, and there is only one reason she didn't, she wanted to leverage Bill's popularity and influence and that is exactly what she is done, and why she is now standing for president. Trump is a buffoon, he isn't a very nice guy, but he is not even close to Hillary on the nasty scale.

Not that I like the woman (because I don't really) but her staying with Bill for her own reasons doesn't make her a terrible person, it's not like taking him to the cleaners would have made her more honourable Maybe they had an open relationship or a relationship of convenience, that alone doesn't make her a nasty person. It wouldn't be for me but each to their own imo

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Not that I like the woman (because I don't really) but her staying with Bill for her own reasons doesn't make her a terrible person, it's not like taking him to the cleaners would have made her more honourable Maybe they had an open relationship or a relationship of convenience, that alone doesn't make her a nasty person. It wouldn't be for me but each to their own imo

I think it's fairly obvious that she's always had her eye on the Whitehouse.I'd agree with Bots.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I think it's fairly obvious that she's always had her eye on the Whitehouse.I'd agree with Bots.

So what though?

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So what though?

I dunno i'm just agreeing with Bots

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I dunno i'm just agreeing with Bots

OK

[bots]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So what though?

because she is a cold, calculating, nasty so and so. I'm not defending trump for one moment, but she gets way to easy a ride, she is truly awful too.

[Ammi]

..I've often felt that Trump himself didn't expect to get this far and for it to be a real possibility and it's hard to know if he really wants it or not.. so it would be better for someone who did really want it and had been very focused on it.../better for a country I would have thought...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

because she is a cold, calculating, nasty so and so. I'm not defending trump for one moment, but she gets way to easy a ride, she is truly awful too.

Because Trump is so revolting and in your face about it probably. Shame Bernie didn't make it

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

because she is a cold, calculating, nasty so and so. I'm not defending trump for one moment, but she gets way to easy a ride, she is truly awful too.

...versus someone who brings intolerance and prejudices to the fore...a tough choice of voting there..(by the very nature of achieving that type of 'top job', I would have thought there would have had to be an element of calculating in all...)...politics is a nasty game...

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Because Trump is revolting and in your face about it probably. Shame Bernie didn't make it

..maybe missing the cold and calculating factor...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..maybe missing the cold and calculating factor...

although having said that Obama certainly didn't come across as cold or calculating, quite the opposite but maybe it's these changing times making people search for that in their leaders. I think that's what fear does to people

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I dunno i'm just agreeing with Bots

[bots]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..I've often felt that Trump himself didn't expect to get this far and for it to be a real possibility and it's hard to know if he really wants it or not.. so it would be better for someone who did really want it and had been very focused on it.../better for a country I would have thought...

that perception has a lot to do with the way the media are portraying him. Someone that isn't part of the establishment and would therefore be useless. The bias toward Hillary in both these debates has been shocking, i think that's why Trump retains his support. They want to give the establishment a bloody nose. Its not about the details, its about protesting against the machine.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

that perception has a lot to do with the way the media are portraying him. Someone that isn't part of the establishment and would therefore be useless. The bias toward Hillary in both these debates has been shocking, i think that's why Trump retains his support. They want to give the establishment a bloody nose. Its not about the details, its about protesting against the machine.

In a nutshell BOTS, and the anti-Trump bias in those debates has been disgusting - and I'm not defending Trump either.

[Johnnyuk123]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

[/B]

In a nutshell BOTS, and the anti-Trump bias in those debates has been disgusting - and I'm not defending Trump either.

I actually want them to do more bias against Trump. Cos the more they do it the more votes he gets. People ain't stupid, they can see right through the clinton desperation tactics. She's spent millions slagging him off and still can't get clear in the polls.

[bots]

One to ponder. If Hillary does win and carries on the way they have been for the next 4 or 8 years, not learning lessons from this election, what's going to happen then. They may be subjected to someone much worse than Trump, that will win. That's the likely scenario with this number of dissatisfied voters.

[Crimson Dynamo]

women only put up with cheating for 2 reasons and they are often connected

power

money

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

women only put up with cheating for 2 reasons and they are often connected

power

money

I agree, but you missed one L.T. - when they are serial cheaters themselves.

This latter means that the reasons for marrying in the first place had nothing to do with Love, Respect, Care etc and a whole lot to do with the first two you list.

Which brings me neatly back to the type of women which I outlined as being the type to move in Trump's and and other 'High Profile (Thanks BOTS ) men's world, who gladly suffer being groped/sexually assaulted used/abused, because - in their calculating minds - it is acceptable and part of the price they are willing to pay to be moved closer to their objective of being elevated into that world.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I agree, but you missed one L.T. - when they are serial cheaters themselves.

This latter means that the reasons for marrying in the first place had nothing to do with Love, Respect, Care etc and a whole lot to do with the first two you list.

Which brings me neatly back to the type of women which I outlined as being the type to move in Trump's and and other 'High Profile (Thanks BOTS ) men's world, who gladly suffer being groped/sexually assaulted used/abused, because - in their calculating minds - it is acceptable and part of the price they are willing to pay to be moved closer to their objective of being elevated into that world.

Like that woman who was actually the topic of conversation in that audio released? Oh no that's right she turned him down

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Like that woman who was actually the topic of conversation in that audio released? Oh no that's right she turned him down

No Niamh - NOT like THAT woman at all, because she obviously does not belong to that category of women who I have been referring to.

Why do I feel that I am ever on the defensive here?

I have made my point very clear over several posts.

I am and have been, referring to a specific type of woman who has different moral values than other 'ordinary' women.

I am not defending Trump, merely trying to explain that in his world - a totally alien world to that inhabited by we 'ordinary' mortals - the type of woman exists who DO tolerate sexual behaviour from Rich, Powerful and Famous men which would send any 'ordinary' woman running.

And they 'tolerate' and accept such behaviour because, in their calculations, being subjected to such behaviour - being 'moved on' - is moving them closer to their objective of being elevated INTO that world of the Rich, Powerful, and Famous.

Some very famous actresses of the distant and not so distant past have accepted such behaviour from powerful Directors and Film Studio Moguls on the infamous 'Casting Couch', as a means of 'making it to the top of the movie world', and there was no shortage of young women - some stunningly beautiful and intelligent - who lived within the Playboy Mansion, who were quite willing to answer Hugh Hefner's summons at any time of night and day.

Hugh Hefner! A revolting grey corpse of a man who made my skin crawl just looking at him.

And then there are the superficially 'glamorous barflies who allow themselves to be passed from footballer to footballer because they think it will elevate themselves into the glamorous life of the pro footballer's WAG.

These women do not frequent the local Working Men's Clubs or ordinary pubs and clubs of their native towns and cities - they MOVE to the places where the Rich, Powerful and Famous can be found.

I'm sorry, but in my opinion, such women are as equally culpable as the Trumps out there, because they are empowering them and enabling them to indulge in their sexist behaviour.

In these circumstances, 'sexploitation' is a 'two way street', because these women are really exploiting the sexual tendencies of such men, just as surely as those men are exploiting them.

Of course, there will be times when Trump gets reversals - when he sexually assaults a woman who does NOT belong in the category which I am referring to, and it is then that such women should make a formal complaint to the police.

[Johnnyuk123]

I'm with Kirk on this one 100%
I am fed up of these wag wannabee types of women who throw themselves at me trying to sexploit me just because I have a few quid in my back pocket.