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.
I wonder that if actual, solid, beyond reasonable doubt evidence comes out that Trump was involved or knew of dealing with Russia and he is impeached....if any of the hardcore Trumpers would admit they were wrong about him.
I'm talking damning, smoking gun evidence. To where "Fake News" couldn't be used because there was direct evidence that Trump was involved or at least aware. Would his most hardcore supporters have the humility to eat crow? Or would they continue to beat the Trump drum, saying that it was the Deep State and that Trump is being wronged.
There's gotta be at least SOME Trumpers who would jump ship and join reality with the rest of us.....right???
We're dealing with people who absolutely despise Hillary Clinton based on assumptions and conspiracy theories and false equivalencies, yet Trump can do and say things outright and those very same people won't hold him accountable for anything.
The emails revealed that the DNC preferred Clinton. BFD. The voters still chose the ultimate candidate. Why didn't the people vote for Bernie? Where were all those supposed Bernie supporters during the primaries? He could've easily beat her had all that support really been there.
Honestly, it's hard to believe people are still complaining about Bernie losing the nomination when the very ideological purity those voters demanded helped ensure the disaster that is Donald Trump. We have bigger problems now.
Its not as simple as that. There was something called the Clinton Victory Fund where Clinton would hold these lucrative fundraisers with wealthy Hollywood liberals and others and the DNC allowed her only give a fraction of a percent to down ballot candidates. Bernie was forced to divide up his fundraising with down ballot candidates giving her a huge financial advantage. More money means more advertising and a bigger campaign organization. It was a secret deal she had with the DNC that came out in the emails:
Again with the false equivalencies. You guys really love those things. Remind me when Bill admitted to sexual assault, please. He committed infidelity, and is hardly a role model on being a good husband, but where did he admit to sexual assault outright the way that Trump did?
I'm sorry, but could you fill me in on when Trump "admitted to sexual assault?" Because if you're referring to the ubiquitous "p*ssy grabbing" quote, he was most certainly NOT admitting to sexual assault. He was rather obnoxiously bragging that his celebrity status allowed him to do such a thing if he wanted to because women attracted by his fame and money allowed it.
Is there another incident that you're referring to, perhaps? I'm all ears.
Its not as simple as that. There was something called the Clinton Victory Fund where Clinton would hold these lucrative fundraisers with wealthy Hollywood liberals and others and the DNC allowed her only give a fraction of a percent to down ballot candidates. Bernie was forced to divide up his fundraising with down ballot candidates giving her a huge financial advantage. More money means more advertising and a bigger campaign organization. It was a secret deal she had with the DNC that came out in the emails:
So just to say it was fair and square is naive. I am not a Bernie person but its lousy what the DNC did to him.
I don't expect fair and square. I expect legal. And it was. That still doesn't explain why the people didn't come out to vote for him, especially considering he didn't have any of the supposed baggage that Clinton did. She had a built-in segment of the population that absolutely hates her guts.
I'm sorry, but could you fill me in on when Trump "admitted to sexual assault?" Because if you're referring to the ubiquitous "p*ssy grabbing" quote, he was most certainly NOT admitting to sexual assault. He was rather obnoxiously bragging that his celebrity status allowed him to do such a thing if he wanted to because women attracted by his fame and money allowed it.
Is there another incident that you're referring to, perhaps? I'm all ears.
That's your assumption. If you go by what he said, he was admitting to a crime. Given that there was no investigation into that, we don't really know if it happened or if it was really just bragging. I tend to come down on the side of taking it seriously because it's a serious potential crime. The fact that his supporters didn't care one bit and sought only to make excuses for it, as you're doing now, tells me all I need to know about them.
No. It's because we actually believe Clinton would have been worse.
I can tell you one thing. My IRA wouldn't be up 12% this year if Clinton had won.
The truth is they are both bad in their own way. We had to choose the version of bad we wanted. I chose the one that had the best shot at getting America working again and addressing issues like illegal immigration and the costs associated with it. I didn't like either candidate. Still don't. I just chose the version of bad I wanted of the two that were presented.
ETA: ...and yes I still believe I made the right choice even though I would have voted for just about anyone besides these two if there had been another option.
That's your assumption. If you go by what he said, he was admitting to a crime. Given that there was no investigation into that, we don't really know if it happened or if it was really just bragging. I tend to come down on the side of taking it seriously because it's a serious potential crime. The fact that his supporters didn't care one bit and sought only to make excuses for it, as you're doing now, tells me all I need to know about them.
Right. So you were referring to the p*ssy grabber quote after all and you have deemed his words just as harmful as an act of sexual assault itself. In fact, you've indicted and convicted him all without benefit of pesky facts.
I suspect you've never been sexually assaulted. If you had you'd know the god damn difference between someone bragging about having the money and fame to get away with lewd behavior and someone actually sexually assaulting you, let me tell you.
Your inability to discern the difference between the two is all I need to know. Thank you for your reply.
No, because its a very possible reality. Secret email servers, smashing iPhones, corruption allegations of the past, all just the tip of the ice-burgh I'm sure, its not the Russia ice-burgh but might just be one of similar size and shape. Both candidates are/were just two big Titantics waiting to smash into their respective ice-burghs that were to be unleashed by a bunch of senators and congresspeople who would dig in their heels and stab their own mothers in the back for political gain.
I don't expect fair and square. I expect legal. And it was. That still doesn't explain why the people didn't come out to vote for him, especially considering he didn't have any of the supposed baggage that Clinton did. She had a built-in segment of the population that absolutely hates her guts.
He did not relate well with the minority voters. Especially the black vote. In Vermont he really did not have to court the black vote and he seemed uncomfortable in that role and made some missteps.
She cleaned up in the south and other states with large black population and that was really the difference.
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.
