Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why shouldn't she play the 'woman card'? Cruz is busy playing the 'evangelical Christian' card and hanging out with the likes of Kim Davis; Trump is busy pretending he is a church-going Christian and waving around the Bible he knows nothing of; Christie has been playing the "I know everything about 9/11 card"; Rubio is playing the "I'm a young, good-looking Hispanic that deserves to be President card" . . .
Economy: <sarcasm> Wall Street loves her! </sarcasm> If you thought Wall Street got away with robbery during the 2008 debacle, Hillary is not going to do anything about it. Come to think about it, neither did Obama.
Education: Saying how she is going to give free everything without details on how to pay for it
I could search for articles that put a negative spin on everything Trump has said he plans to do as President, but why bother?
Using Donald's own criteria, all I need to know is that Hillary honored the marriage vows she made before God and Trump didn't.
Trump broke his vows, Trump is a liar, the grounds of his divorce was cruel and inhumane treatment. Not irreconcilable differences......CRUEL AND INHUMANE treatment. That alone says a lot about how Trump treats women, doesn't it?
And, if we are going to give credence to every accusation made against Bill or Hillary, we should also give credence to Ivana's rape allegation against Donald Trump. A rape allegation that she has tried to downplay AFTER the divorce settlement that also contains a gag order on Ivana discussing their marriage.
Gee, I wonder why Donald insisted on a gag order?
I would love to hear what Ivana could tell us about Donald's character if she was free to do so.
When Billionaire Donald Trump's young Brazilian Supermodel wife was interviewed on TV, she was asked, "Would you have married him if he wasn't rich?" She smiled and replied, "Would he have married me if I wasn't beautiful?"..
If Trump were to get elected, we will have the typical old, superficial, rich man, married to beautiful, young, gold digger as our first family. What will his advice to young American women be? "Stay in school, work hard, and start businesses BUT you only have to do that if you're not hot." "If your beautiful enough like my wife, you can skip all that hard work nonsense, go snag yourself a rich, old dude, and make sure you pop out at least one kid to ensure the gravy train keeps flowing. God bless America!
I just wonder if he will trade her in for a newer model while in office. He does NOT like aging women.
Kirsten Powers weighs in with this article at USA Today. She appears to be one of the few leftists who identify themselves as feminists who really are advocates for ALL women and not just those who share their leftist political priorities:
The pendulum has swung, and we are moving toward a presumption that women are telling the truth regarding claims of unwanted sexual advances. So much so, that Hillary Clinton recently tweeted, “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported."
If true, then presumably that would apply to Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey, who have accused her husband of sexual assault and perhaps even Paula Jones who claims Bill Clinton touched her without her consent. Notably, in today’s paradigm, feminists argue that accusers should be believed even if they have been discredited. Most recently, in the wake of Rolling Stone’s retraction of its University of Virginia rape story, feminists rallied to the defense of the discredited accuser, “Jackie.†Feminist writer Jessica Valenti insisted, “I choose to believe Jackie. I lose nothing by doing so, even if I’m later proven wrong — but at least I will still be able to sleep at night.†Liberal commentator Zerlina Maxwell argued in The Washington Post that,“We should believe, as a matter of default, what an accuser says. Ultimately, the costs of wrongly disbelieving a survivor far outweigh the costs of calling someone a rapist.â€
This is the backdrop for Donald Trump’s recent broadside against Clinton, in which he chided her for her husband’s “terrible record of women abuse.†Whatever Trump’s failings, he understands cultural shifts. We are a society that has a blessedly lower tolerance for sexual assault and harassment than in prior years. This is good news for America, but bad news for the Clintons. History has caught up with them at the worst possible moment.
Notice how Kirsten has laid out the standards that the feminist left has applied to this issue as the measure that should be applied to Hillary and Bill Clinton. Also, let's not forget that Hillary has aligned herself with these expectations when she said recently that sexual assault victims have the right to be believed.
So, Hillary Clinton is playing fast and loose again with politically correct pejoratives, this time berating Donald Trump as a 'sexist'. Of course with her history of attacking and silencing women who dared to speak out about her husband's sexually abusive and predatory practices, she has even less moral authority on this than Mitt Romney did in attacking Obamacare after his sponsorship of 'Romneycare' in Massachusetts when he was governor.
What we see here is Donald Trump deconstructing the central pillar of Hillary Clinton's campaign - that her credentials as a politically correct woman entitle her to the presidency and because of the protections that the "rules" of political correctness provide, she is untouchable and therefore inevitable.
Even if Trump does not win the Republican nomination - and I do not believe he will - he has shown the way for any other Republican nominee, if they are willing to follow his lead on this (no, they do not need to use terms like 'schlonged'). Of course if the Republican nominee refuses, the Republicans will lose again, because they cannot win while deferring to politically correct rules of engagement that are written by and inherently provide favoritistic treatment to the Democrats at Republicans expense.
Trump has shown how to neutralize Hilary Clinton's use of political correctness and the invocation of the "Woman's card." And with that realization, Hillary and her campaign team should be afraid. Very afraid.
Oh, you haven't seen anything yet. Just wait until there's a debate (if there is one) between Trump and Clinton.
She'll effect the same persona as when she and Rick Lazio debated when she ran for NY senator--that of a put-upon female afraid as Lazio (all 130 pounds of him) approached her on stage.
Bring on the fainting couch, but only one--for Hillary, who'll milk that poor little me is a victim of bully Trump for all it's worth.
Oh, you haven't seen anything yet. Just wait until there's a debate (if there is one) between Trump and Clinton.
She'll effect the same persona as when she and Rick Lazio debated when she ran for NY senator--that of a put-upon female afraid as Lazio (all 130 pounds of him) approached her on stage.
Bring on the fainting couch, but only one--for Hillary, who'll milk that poor little me is a victim of bully Trump for all it's worth.
If that happens, you could well be right. Although for a run at the presidency, I think that would be a mistake.
To be fair, I do not believe that there will ever be such a debate, as I do not believe either of these two will be their party's nominee for president. In fact, I have tried to fix a wager* for $1 with several people here on this board against the proposition that neither one of these two will be their party's nominees. So far, no takers.
So would you like to take that bet? I am offering to bet that neither Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be their party's nominees. You would be betting that at least one of them will be.
* - A) I don't believe in large bets. B) This is a message board bet, so unless we somehow meet, it is not likely to be paid. So, we could consider it a figurative placeholder for such a bet, with payment to be made if we ever meet, and if not, then the loser can just publicly recognize that the winner won in a post here on this board.
Last edited by Spartacus713; 01-06-2016 at 09:25 AM..
I just wonder if he will trade her in for a newer model while in office. He does NOT like aging women.
I'll bet Ivana could tell us a LOT.
Bill never traded in Hillary and there is ample proof that he likes younger women. Perhaps he hasn't because she know where he buried the bodies and has to much on him, plus he wants another chance to be relevant.
Bill never traded in Hillary and there is ample proof that he likes younger women. Perhaps he hasn't because she know where he buried the bodies and has to much on him, plus he wants another chance to be relevant.
Here's what I think about Bill and Hillary - though I don't live their marriage so who knows. Just my opinion.
I think what attracted Bill to Hillary was her brain; she never was a great beauty. I think her brain is what keeps them married. While he may no longer be madly in love ~ I think he likes her smarts. It may be more than fine with her that he looks elsewhere for sex. Lots of women just lose that drive as they age and certainly she has plenty to keep her busy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
