Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

You have no problem with Trump ogling a then 12-year old Paris Hilton or at the time a 17-year old future wife?

Or raping a 13 year old? Does anyone doubt that poor woman's claims, especially with this audio?

Anonymous wrote:So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

You have no problem with Trump ogling a then 12-year old Paris Hilton or at the time a 17-year old future wife?

Anonymous wrote:So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

Clinton was a lawyer tasked with defending someone. She did not want to take the case and tried to get off of it, but was ordered by a judge to be his public defender. If you don't believe that everyone deserves a defender in court then go work to change the legal system.

And the laughter story is not true. She laughed after talking about his passing a polygraph test, "which forever destroyed my faith in polygraph." That's not laughing at the case, that's a laugh about the stupidity of polygraphs.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

Anonymous wrote:So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

You must find delight in being thought unintelligent. This has been explained to you on about twenty separate threads, yet still you struggle.

OP, I think I couldn't vote at all if roles were reversed and we had audio of Hillary saying something like this (or more likely a male counterpart; women can be sexual predators but I think it looks a little bit different). Would I vote for a Romney instead? No, I still have problems with the way he'd govern (anti-choice policies and nominees, and probably continuing trickle down and tax cuts for the wealthy BS), so I'd probably abstain.

Anonymous wrote:So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

Everyone deserves an attorney that will defend them vigorously. Cornerstone of American justice system

As others have said, the recording is part of a pattern of mysogyny. If I'd managed to tolerate everything up to this point and excuse it or overlook it, would this be the straw that broke the camel's back? I don't know, because it's hard to imagine overlooking every other mysogynistic thing he's said and done prior to this.

I would vote for a reasonable republican like Kasich. If someone like Cruz were the candidate, I would abstain or vote 3rd party.

So, Democrats, you have no problem with what Hillary did to a twelve year old rape victim? Painting her as a "temptress"? Laughing about it later?

She says that she has always been there for women and children--except for this one?

OP, the thing you have to keep in mind is that this isn't just a one-off statement. This represents a pattern of how he treats women. There are reports after reports about his crass comments on women, made throughout his life.

One of the things I once read in an article was really eye-opening: it was that at his military school, Playboy magazine was revered as holding up an ideal lifestyle for men and every student wanted to be Hugh Hefner. One of his classmates said, in essence, most of us moved on and evolved, but Trump has been stuck in that moment. Hugh Hefner has been his role model for decades.

Yeah, I'd probably abstain. Maybe write in.

Name one company, anyone, that would allow the behavior (harrassment, bankruptcies, bigotry, threats) that Trump has exhibited regardless whether he was an employee or CEO. Even FOX had to kick Ailes to the curb.

Trump wouldn't have to jump ship. He'd be thrown overboard.

If Democrats had a candidate as disgusting and dangerous as Trump who was running against someone like Mitt Romney (whose political views I do not like or agree with) I would absolutely vote for the Republican.

Anonymous wrote:I probably wouldn't vote

+1. Would never vote for Trump, and if Bill Clinton were running now, I wouldn't vote for him either.

I probably wouldn't vote

I have to begin by saying that I detest Trump and am not a Republican so am in no way defending him, but I find it curious that Democrats find it so appalling that Republicans would still vote for Trump after all of his appalling statements. It seems to me that most people are going to vote for the candidate whose policies most align with their own views regardless of whether they find the person to have good moral character or not. My mother is a Republican who is incredulous that Trump is the nominee, and can't stand the thought of voting for him (she was a Kasich supporter), but still plans to even in light of the leaked video. Basically it just comes down to the fact that she thinks despite being a baffoon, Trump's policies would be better for the country. I mean how many Bernie supporters, would have said, "Eff it, I'm voting for Cruz" if Bernie had been caught saying what Trump said?