Anonymous wrote:These posts are getting tedious. Honestly, if we voted for Trump three times (in my and husband's case), it's because we are voting for policy, not personality. After the past four years, this country is in desperate need of policy changes. I don't like Trump from a personality standpoint, but I'm not inviting him to dinner or to play golf.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I came of age at a time when I was told that perjury over a BJ was no big deal. That personal conduct could be separated from professional conduct in the role of the president.

Then you read about what Saint JFK was up to and other historical stars of the left and the right … and I guess I internalized those lessons that private conduct is separate from the presidency. I mean Hillary Clinton stayed married to at best a sexual abuser and at worst to someone that grabbing women by… and she did it for political expediency. HRC was out there defending a sexual predator while dismissing his victims as being part of some vast right wing conspiracy. Yes, Trump’s private conduct was much worse than that of HRC, but if decency and good behavior matters then we should have all been disgusted by HRC.

The whole “disqualified” line of attack annoyed me and pushed me more right. Someone who perjured himself, even if only about sex, should also have “disqualified” himself from the presidency, but as a teenager I was told that didn’t matter. I’m not saying you will agree with me or accept this, OP. I’m just answering your question.

Well said. I too separated personal flaws from policy after the Clinton era.

Anonymous wrote:I came of age at a time when I was told that perjury over a BJ was no big deal. That personal conduct could be separated from professional conduct in the role of the president.

Then you read about what Saint JFK was up to and other historical stars of the left and the right … and I guess I internalized those lessons that private conduct is separate from the presidency. I mean Hillary Clinton stayed married to at best a sexual abuser and at worst to someone that grabbing women by… and she did it for political expediency. HRC was out there defending a sexual predator while dismissing his victims as being part of some vast right wing conspiracy. Yes, Trump’s private conduct was much worse than that of HRC, but if decency and good behavior matters then we should have all been disgusted by HRC.

The whole “disqualified” line of attack annoyed me and pushed me more right. Someone who perjured himself, even if only about sex, should also have “disqualified” himself from the presidency, but as a teenager I was told that didn’t matter. I’m not saying you will agree with me or accept this, OP. I’m just answering your question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hilarious that, of all the things, you think this stupid tape is the most disqualifying. It's just two guys talking dirty and none of that really happened, except, maybe, going to the furniture with that woman which didn't really go anywhere. Why didn't he "grab the pussy" of that one? He is no more pussy grabber "a star women let do anything" than he is the most successful businessman and president with the biggest crowds.

Oh he has done more disqualifying things. We could go on all day. This was just the most repellent thing that came out during his campaign that was impossible to deny or spin. It should have been game over.

Going back before his campaign, The Central Park 5 should have been the end for him politically, professionally, and socially. He should have been shunned by society for the rest of his life because of that one. Yet it is hardly talked about.

The most repelling thing he has done on the campaign trail by far was when he mocked the physically handicapped reporter while in front of a camera and large group of people in 2015. Anyone who didn't have that "well, this guy obviously isn't presidential material" moment is a complete and utter idiot. If you're more offended by a sexually inappropriate comment that was intended to be part of private banter than someone mocking a handicapped person at a campaign rally, then you're part of the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hilarious that, of all the things, you think this stupid tape is the most disqualifying. It's just two guys talking dirty and none of that really happened, except, maybe, going to the furniture with that woman which didn't really go anywhere. Why didn't he "grab the pussy" of that one? He is no more pussy grabber "a star women let do anything" than he is the most successful businessman and president with the biggest crowds.

Oh he has done more disqualifying things. We could go on all day. This was just the most repellent thing that came out during his campaign that was impossible to deny or spin. It should have been game over.

Going back before his campaign, The Central Park 5 should have been the end for him politically, professionally, and socially. He should have been shunned by society for the rest of his life because of that one. Yet it is hardly talked about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because I and my friends have way more graphic discussions about what we’d do to guys we think are cute.

But he wasn’t fantasizing about what he wants to do. He said it is what he can do to any woman he sees, because he is famous.

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Not sure what I expected, but these responses are worse than I thought.

For those of you saying he doesn’t actually do it…of course he does. We knew at the time that there were SA allegations against him and that he cheated on his wives. We have seen the way he talks about and touches his own daughter.

Hopefully you aren’t the same people who were outraged at Biden say GD when reporters insulted him over his age.

Anonymous wrote:I am trying to keep this simple, so please stay on topic.

Going back to the Access Hollywood tapes. Why did you continue to support him after that? I think that was the moment that the rest of us were sure he was toast. But he wasn’t. In fact, I have never heard anyone say that was the turning point for them. I am simply asking why. Please no whataboutism.

As a refresher, the full conversation can be found
here…

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37595321

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hilarious that, of all the things, you think this stupid tape is the most disqualifying. It's just two guys talking dirty and none of that really happened, except, maybe, going to the furniture with that woman which didn't really go anywhere. Why didn't he "grab the pussy" of that one? He is no more pussy grabber "a star women let do anything" than he is the most successful businessman and president with the biggest crowds.

Oh he has done more disqualifying things. We could go on all day. This was just the most repellent thing that came out during his campaign that was impossible to deny or spin. It should have been game over.

Going back before his campaign, The Central Park 5 should have been the end for him politically, professionally, and socially. He should have been shunned by society for the rest of his life because of that one. Yet it is hardly talked about.