Anonymous wrote:Omg, imagine if you secretly recorded Americans in their cars while driving every day. You'd catch them in the act hurling grotesquely obscene language. I bet 95% of you have said racist stuff while road raging.

But are you really racists? Prob not. I care very little about locker room talk secretly recorded and attempted to be used as a gotcha. Pfff, you should hear the stuff that comes out of your kids' mouth in the football or lax locker rooms.

Uh…no. Good lord. Hurling racist slurs while driving (or at all!) is not something that most people do. And if you do this, then yes, you certainly are racist.

Normal people, even normal teenagers, also do not participate in locker room talk that involves bragging about sexual assault and sleeping with married women. My nephews were HS athletes. They never heard stuff like this in locker room or elsewhere and are pretty sure someone would have gotten their arse kicked if they had said these things.

So people who were disgusted by Clinton's behavior voted for Trump even though he is arguably even worse. Yeah, that makes sense.

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.

no, this was not "the most repellent thing". maybe if you stuck with what matters instead of getting outraged about every stupid thing he wouldn't be elected president twice.

He would because this election was bought.

Anonymous wrote:Because I doubt that he actually grabbed women by the p****. He's just a guy with an inflated ego, which we already knew about.

Ummm no he really is this disgusting and money always gets him out of trouble. If you grew up in NY you knew the entire Trump family were criminals with money....Daddy protected little Dumpy.

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.

+1
Plus the "drag a dollar thru the trailer park" and the destruction of evidence by HRC and her team leading up to the 2016 election drove the point home for me. My spouse was working in a SCIF at the time, and he would have been at best fired or, more likely prosecuted for doing what she did. And there are people out there who would let someone like DT grab them by the (blank) because they're out to secure the bag, he was not wrong. The subsequent years of legal contortions used to "get" Trump pushed me further right. It felt very "show me the man and I'll show you the crime." Leading up to 2024, I was tired of the culture of outrage, of women competing against biological men (I don't care if you say it was isolated incidents, that doesn't make it ok), rampant crime (thanks Soros), and the effects of 4 years of open borders. In 2016 I voted for Trump because he did not represent the establishment, in 2020 I voted for him because I suspected that Biden was hiding in the basement to cover up the fact that he was cognitively impaired. In 2024 I voted for him because the Biden administration has been an abysmal failure. Like the PP, I'm not looking to argue a point. I'm just answering the OP's question.

Anonymous wrote:

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

I was so annoyed that my Democratic party allowed Hillary Clinton to take another job based only on her husband’s peccadilloes, I voted for Trump. Then I voted for Biden.

I hope this is a sarcastic comment. So hard to tell these days!

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.

Op here, and I do agree. I didn’t use this because Maga felt they had room to spin this one. They argued that it was not in reference to that reporter. Of course, you and I know that it was. And we know that it was still incredibly repulsive even if it wasn’t. But this is maga we are talking about. Based on the replies to this thread, they would excuse it as, “Who among us hasn’t mocked the disabled? 🤷‍♀️” They think these things are normal human behaviors.

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.

😂😂😂 policy 🤣🤣🤣

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Pretty much any other republican would be more qualified to deliver the policies you want. This is what confuses me so much. He does not understand government at all. He has completely alienated half of the country and many of our allies (the list grows by the minute). Why not bring forward a republican who understands how this country operates and can work well with others? Why did it have to be Trump?

If someone like Mitt Romney was elected, that would just be so very…normal. I wouldn’t agree with most of his politics, but that’s just the way it is. We can wait out what we consider bad policy. We can’t wait out someone who is doing everything they can to burn this country to the ground and sow division at home and abroad.

So, if your answer is simply policy over character, please explain why you think Trump is more qualified than other republicans.

He won the party nomination. That's what makes him qualified. Any other dumb questions?

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.

Pretty much any other republican would be more qualified to deliver the policies you want. This is what confuses me so much. He does not understand government at all. He has completely alienated half of the country and many of our allies (the list grows by the minute). Why not bring forward a republican who understands how this country operates and can work well with others? Why did it have to be Trump?

If someone like Mitt Romney was elected, that would just be so very…normal. I wouldn’t agree with most of his politics, but that’s just the way it is. We can wait out what we consider bad policy. We can’t wait out someone who is doing everything they can to burn this country to the ground and sow division at home and abroad.

So, if your answer is simply policy over character, please explain why you think Trump is more qualified than other republicans.

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.

Trump isn't a 'sucessful' businessman considering he used his family money and still had to bail him out over and over. How many bankrupcies? Trump University etc?

Anonymous wrote:Trump cheated on all three of his wives, has been found liable for sexual assault, and has been convicted of 34 counts of fraud relating to his cover up of an affair with a porn star. Those are facts.

And bragged about walking in on teenage girls getting dressed even though he knew it made them uncomfortable.

And talked about his newborn daughter’s legs and breasts.

Trump cheated on all three of his wives, has been found liable for sexual assault, and has been convicted of 34 counts of fraud relating to his cover up of an affair with a porn star. Those are facts.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What policies? Because he doesn’t have those either. He doesn’t even understand how government works.

For what other roles in your life would you hire an immature malignant narcissist with a lifelong history of financial crimes? Because I can’t imagine hiring him even mow my lawn.

Yeah, this argument doesn’t carry water when HRC and Joe Biden are the opposing candidates.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sure, but there is a difference between consensual sex between adults and predatory pussy grabbers.

No. This is PP that came up as a teenager during the Clinton scandal. If you’re making an argument about morality than it is about right and wrong, not black, grey and white. This is exactly the thing that annoyed me to no end. To the extent that a vote for Trump so a middle finger to the establishment, this is exactly what I’m talking about.

When someone on the left does something, the argument becomes about black, grey and white (spectrum of conduct). But when it comes to a republican all of a sudden it is about right and wrong (binary).

If you're willing to go to extenuating circumstances when it comes to your side but not the other, then your whole argument comes across as hollow and convenient to your political goals. It is not convincing.