So, the latest allegations against Trump are pretty bad...

[evoeth]

Destroy the character of their opposition, at all costs.

Yes. Of course. How silly of us. It was Clinton that destroyed Trump's character!

\s

 

[essentialsaltes]

Tell that to Juanita Broderick.

Maybe somebody should have, since Broaddrick didn't even bring a civil case against Clinton.

 

[wing2000]

Tried to bring a link here,but it started another thread. I urge everyone to take the time to get to know Hillary.

We've had 25 years of Hillary exposure....the Trump expose is just getting started...

 

[chevyontheriver]

We've had 25 years of Hillary exposure....the Trump expose is just getting started...

Is anybody still going to vote for either of these two unacceptable candidates?

 

[Belk]

Is anybody still going to vote for either of these two unacceptable candidates?

Yes, millions of people.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Is anybody still going to vote for either of these two unacceptable candidates?

Yes, millions of people.

What ARE they thinking? Or maybe better - what ARE they smoking?

 

[Belk]

These 'allegations' are in a civil lawsuit, not a criminal complaint. In this heated election they are not to be believed. Imho. Why would anyone wait 22 years if this was true?

Exactly! I mean it is not as if people would call these allegations into question without reason? Certainly no young woman who brings allegations against a powerful man would ever have to fear being dismissed as a gold digger or an opportunist.

 

[Belk]

What ARE they thinking? Or maybe better - what ARE they smoking?

That our political system is such that there are only two viable candidates. People in this election more then ever before in history are voting against a candidate instead of for a candidate. Opposition is a powerful motivator.

 

[HannahT]

Exactly! I mean it is not as if people would call these allegations into question without reason? Certainly no young woman who brings allegations against a powerful man would ever have to fear being dismissed as a gold digger or an opportunist.

For myself? I wouldn't want to get into election, and place myself - and my family - on the front row of all the contempt and hate today. There are way too many nuts on both sides of this election, and you are just asking for trouble that would be beyond the pale at this point. This is no doubt a HIGH risk game. You really need to stop and think before stepping your toes into this.

No, I wouldn't want to go down in history books - and the media constantly tracking me down for the rest of days.

Something tells me that people talked these women into something, and they have no idea of the amount of backlash they will receive. Heck, look at Monica? It took close to 30 years, and she still doesn't have her life back yet! The only reason I mention her is because she was front and center right before the election garbage started. The others that accused Clinton for attacks? They aren't fairing to much better.

These women that are now accusing Trump? They will have the same fate I have no doubt. I hope they know they are in for a ride of the century. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Not a single person!

 

[AirPo]

These 'allegations' are in a civil lawsuit, not a criminal complaint. In this heated election they are not to be believed. Imho. Why would anyone wait 22 years if this was true?

If you are really interested in knowing, you'll need to be raped.

 

[Belk]

For myself? I wouldn't want to get into election, and place myself - and my family - on the front row of all the contempt and hate today. There are way too many nuts on both sides of this election, and you are just asking for trouble that would be beyond the pale at this point. This is no doubt a HIGH risk game. You really need to stop and think before stepping your toes into this.

No, I wouldn't want to go down in history books - and the media constantly tracking me down for the rest of days.

Something tells me that people talked these women into something, and they have no idea of the amount of backlash they will receive. Heck, look at Monica? It took close to 30 years, and she still doesn't have her life back yet! The only reason I mention her is because she was front and center right before the election garbage started. The others that accused Clinton for attacks? They aren't fairing to much better.

These women that are now accusing Trump? They will have the same fate I have no doubt. I hope they know they are in for a ride of the century. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Not a single person!

Yes. These women have decided to go public knowing they would be condemned, shamed, and likely face an increased risk of being attacked physically. I would not wish facing the choice to do this on anyone.

However if someone who had attacked me was running for the highest office in the land I like to think I would have the courage to make the same decision.

 

[HannahT]

Yes. These women have decided to go public knowing they would be condemned, shamed, and likely face an increased risk of being attacked physically. I would not wish facing the choice to do this on anyone.

However if someone who had attacked me was running for the highest office in the land I like to think I would have the courage to make the same decision.

Getting courage and support beforehand would be better. He was just a 'celebrity' then, and not running for office. People can be fickle when it comes to celebrities, and not so much the political figure. That's not to say they won't get hounded also, but it won't be this intense.

I just pray these women know what they are getting into. When you are vulnerable? You can talked into things that you had no idea what the end game intention was. Humans are evil that way. It is politics after all. Putting others under the bus for the win isn't all that uncommon no matter what side of the aisle they are on.

 

[Belk]

Getting courage and support beforehand would be better. He was just a 'celebrity' then, and not running for office. People can be fickle when it comes to celebrities, and not so much the political figure. That's not to say they won't get hounded also, but it won't be this intense.

I just pray these women know what they are getting into. When you are vulnerable? You can talked into things that you had no idea what the end game intention was. Humans are evil that way. It is politics after all. Putting others under the bus for the win isn't all that uncommon no matter what side of the aisle they are on.

Yes. Humans can be vicious creatures at the best of times. Hopefully this does not ruin their life. I know I would detest the spotlight this would shine on me.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

Hillary is not the point of the thread.

You can say that over and over again but it never matters. It never matters because the typical conservative response to anything confronting the behavior of Trump is to immediately deflect with attacks against Clinton and her husband.

 

[FenderTL5]

Yes. These women have decided to go public knowing they would be condemned, shamed, and likely face an increased risk of being attacked physically. I would not wish facing the choice to do this on anyone.

However if someone who had attacked me was running for the highest office in the land I like to think I would have the courage to make the same decision.

I would tend to agree.

Collectively, these accusers MAY stand a chance if there is evidence to support their claim(s).
However, individually I doubt any of them would be able to out-lawyer and out-last a billionaire who could tie up the court systems indefinitely.

 

[chevyontheriver]

That our political system is such that there are only two viable candidates. People in this election more then ever before in history are voting against a candidate instead of for a candidate. Opposition is a powerful motivator.

First, there is no constitutional requirement for two parties. It evolved. For a long time it worked. But for a long time at least one of those parties put forth a respectable candidate, even if the other guy won.

This year both big political parties flopped, picking awful candidates. You can argue about which is worse until the cows come home, but both are really really bad.

Voting AGAINST a candidate is sometimes a decent strategy. But this year it only guarantees that one awful candidate will win.

The appropriate action this year is to vote for neither of the two big party candidates. McMullen, or even Johnson, or the Green Party candidate, or the American Solidarity candidate would be better. Depending on your political philosophy, lots better. We should be looking to cast votes among those guys and leave the Trump/Hillary show with zero votes. I know. It's not gonna happen. Except I voted McMullen. So enjoy the show. And these allegations are just another part of the show. Pass the popcorn.

 

[Belk]

First, there is no constitutional requirement for two parties. It evolved. For a long time it worked. But for a long time at least one of those parties put forth a respectable candidate, even if the other guy won.

Yes. I know. That does not change the fact that Democrats and Republicans have amassed a lot of undue influence of over the electoral process.

This year both big political parties flopped, picking awful candidates. You can argue about which is worse until the cows come home, but both are really really bad.

Agreed.

Voting AGAINST a candidate is sometimes a decent strategy. But this year it only guarantees that one awful candidate will win.

Yes, but I think it is an important part of the election dynamics this year which I will get in to below.

The appropriate action this year is to vote for neither of the two big party candidates. McMullen, or even Johnson, or the Green Party candidate, or the American Solidarity candidate would be better. Depending on your political philosophy, lots better. We should be looking to cast votes among those guys and leave the Trump/Hillary show with zero votes. I know. It's not gonna happen. Except I voted McMullen. So enjoy the show. And these allegations are just another part of the show. Pass the popcorn.

I think the highlighted piece is a big part of the issue. I am guessing that a lot of people would be happy to vote for an outsider candidate if they thought it would make a difference. In my estimation the two things that are holding it back are a lack of momentum and the fact that since people are voting against a candidate. Because of that if they vote for third party they view that as throwing away their vote since they are worried that their disliked candidate will be elected.

 

[chevyontheriver]

In my estimation the two things that are holding it back are a lack of momentum and the fact that since people are voting against a candidate. Because of that if they vote for third party they view that as throwing away their vote since they are worried that their disliked candidate will be elected.

I guess I finally immunized myself to the attack that a vote for other than 'A' is a vote for 'B'. In reality only a vote for 'B' is a vote for 'B'. The responsibility for 'B' getting elected falls on those who actually voted for 'B'. I'm free to vote for someone rather than against someone else. If that someone else wins, and it looks like they will, I'm not sharing the blame.

The Republicans had a field of candidates ranging from great to good to fair to lousy. And they picked lousy despite my best efforts. Not my fault. I'm not throwing my vote away voting for one lousy candidate to stop another lousy candidate. (Had Bernie Sanders won the Democratic primaries, I might have been able to hold my nose and vote for him - I don't know - at least he was a decent socialist.)

This year in particular it seems that voting for either Hillary or The Donald is to throw away my vote. The only way I can not throw it away is to vote for someone else.

So that's what I did. McMullen got my vote in an absentee ballot. Michael Maturen was another possibility but McMullen actually has a microscopic possibility of winning if a whole string of things happen just right. First, he wins a state or two and gets at least a few electoral votes. This is likely now. One or two or three states he has a solid chance in. Second, neither big party candidate wins 270 electoral votes. But it's looking like Hillary will have more than 270. Oh well. Third, if the electoral college is actually deadlocked, the House of Representatives decides he is a more sane pick than Hillary or The Donald. Plausable. Not holding my breath on this but there is at least a path.

 

[rambot]

You would be wrong in your assumption. That aside, this is still a common tactic from the Clinton's. Destroy the character of their opposition, at all costs.

1|) That's a political strategy not limited to Clinton; not even close. Trump is attempting to do the same to Hillary and listening to the Trump apologists on this thread, that is pretty obvious.

Tell that to Juanita Broderick.
Oh, wait. It's okay for the Clintons to rape people and then threaten them, right?

It looks like someone did tell that to Juanita Broaddrick. In fact, it looks like many people tried to tell her "Hey! Bill Clinton raped you right? Yes, course he did he's a pervert. No, don't worry about whether it's true, he did and you know it".

Here is the affidavit she filed back in the day (look! A primary source that was sourced from the wiki article on Ms Broaddrick:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/affidavit122398.htm

Imagine that you have to go so far to explain the innocence of someone else before bill clinton haters (Back in the day) stepped off from their nonsense....

 

[Jack of Spades]

This year both big political parties flopped, picking awful candidates. You can argue about which is worse until the cows come home, but both are really really bad.

As an outsider, to me it seems largely like Hillary Clintons unpopularity is as much a product of decades of active rightist campaigning against her, as it is actually deserved. Yeah, she is not charismatic speaker and doesn't come off as particularly likable person, but it's not like she's something off the grid - evil either.

Trump on the other hand, has had only short time to build up his political infame and has already built one greater than that of Clintons, who's unpopularity has been in the making for 30 years.

We can only imagine how loved figure Trump would be, if he stayed in politics for 30 years. To dislike Trump, all I gotta do is to go through the youtube clips of him talking trash, but the case of why I should dislike HRC is far more unclear.