I mean, Clinton was accused of sexual assault and rape by multiple people, and then proceeded to have a sexual relationship with an intern who worked under him. While I think some of the clamor over Clinton was overblown, if he was a Republican in 2018 people would be advocating for his imprisonment, without question.
Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon
- Thread starter kithnou
- Start date
- Status
I mean, Clinton was accused of sexual assault and rape by multiple people, and then proceeded to have a sexual relationship with an intern who worked under him. While I think some of the clamor over Clinton was overblown, if he was a Republican in 2018 people would be advocating for his imprisonment, without question.
Charlie Sweet
Player Valuation: £35m
I think there are many parallels here with those that voted for Brexit.
In my entire personal and professional network of contacts I know of only two people that voted to leave the EU. One was an old engineer guy I had in a project team how "came out" at a dinner over a few drinks and another was the mother of a school friend who was no surprise as she never held back her views hating foreigners even at the best of times.
Too many folks are one issue voters. As soon as he said he was anti-abortion (despite being okay with it previously) he had a set voters no matter what.
Republicans rightly pressured Dems to denounce Weinstein and return his donations. Wonder what they are going to do with Steve Wynn’s
And tbf to the women who voted for Trump despite his Access Hollywood and assault accusations there were valid concerns that Clinton hasn’t always been the female champion she claimed.
And tbf to the women who voted for Trump despite his Access Hollywood and assault accusations there were valid concerns that Clinton hasn’t always been the female champion she claimed.
Last edited:
Is it, in fact, derangement to be angry with someone who characterizes a group of immigrants from a specific country as not their best but criminals, drug dealers and rapists? No, it's not and such anger at similar comments has been leveled at Steve King, David Duke, Louis Farrakhan and others. What Trump said was a gross mischaracterization. Despite the outcry across the political spectrum at the offensive terminology, it was repeatedly used in order to drum up emotional reaction from elements of US society. Candidate Trump did not earn massive applause lines at rallies by saying "the President and Congress have the right to control border policy and what is being done now has massively curtailed illegal immigration across our borders so we will continue to do what has proven effective and expand those programs and create new ones where experts in policy direct us a need has arisen." He said Mexicans bring crime. They bring drugs. They rape. They kill. Build The Wall. If they insult me, build it higher.
Demonization of the Mexican people is nothing new. Demonization has been used to drum up support for all sorts of odious policy (from lynchings to the war on drugs) and there is no reason for people of Mexican birth or Mexican heritage to forget such practice.
It is perfectly clear you wish to hold on to the word inherent as some sort of semantic cudgel. Fine. Would you agree support for the wall is likely to have purpose or implication other than border security? Motivation was a key subject for you earlier. Does it remain so and is it fair/honest/logical/appropriate to apply such filter to policy as well as intent behind construction of the wall such as described by Trump?
Because that is what "the hive" of over 100 million people is concerned about.
First paragraph - It's derangement to pretend that there aren't a host of reasons people (including me) may support a wall. As noted, I'm not tied to the wall, but I certainly don't think that if I conclude it's a wise choice, that choice is by nature racist/disparaging/etc. I can agree with most of your recapping of how Trump incited prejudice during the campaign, and that that type of rhetoric played a key role in his popularity, however.
The need to impute that on everyone who supports a policy supported by Trump, however, is mindless.
Second - No comment or disagreement, but I'm not sure of the relevance.
Third - I don't blame you for looking to the intent behind the wall that Trump and/or Trump supporters may have and letting that impact your position on the policy. I do that as well, and it's colored my thoughts on the wall, actually.
My comments on the "hive" do not relate to the idea of Trump's degradation of Mexicans. Is there some kernel of truth in Trump's comments? Yes, of course. Are his comments boorish, overbroad, and intended to incite prejudice and motivate the lowest common denominator to become passionate about a policy objective? Yes.
Rather, my comments relate to the inability of those who oppose Trump for who he is or what he says to distinguish between Trump, Trump's most nefariously-minded supporters and those who support Trump or Trump's policies as a means to a desired end. Some would probably respond by expressing their opinion that Trump is so awful that supporting him or anything he wants to do for any reason is simply unacceptable. And with regard to people of that sort, any constructive discussion is impossible.
I will agree imputing of ANYONE's characteristics/actions/words on others is silly (except for Kopites and Sooners). That gets to the very heart of the foolishness of Trump's comments about Mexicans. It also is to be applied, in my view, to your hive reference - which I understood full well. I simply applied the term in another manner.
On a personal level, I may not be the most objective observer on the matter. My family has owned property on the Mexican border for more than 100 years. Presently, eminent domain is a serious concern. Also, I am married to a woman of Mexican heritage and studied Mexican and American history as a concentration in college. The implementation of policy and the rhetoric around it have had a direct impact on me, my family, my property and my community.
That is not meant to be an appeal to authority. It is me being honest about my motivation/viewpoint.
Man, you're not tied to the wall, you don't like trump. It is a bit like arguing with jello 
Great news that Bombardier won the US trade tariff case. Thousands of UK jobs safe.
Less than 24 hours apart Sean changes his mind on NYT sources and credibility.
Man, you're not tied to the wall, you don't like trump. It is a bit like arguing with jello
I can go full trumpkin for sport if it'll help
DanEFC92
Player Valuation: £90m
DanEFC92
Player Valuation: £90m
- Status