Again I draw your attention to your reading comprehension ... (and yes he has.WTF is "butt-hutt"?
A couple of things. I believe the term is butt hurt ...and the other is, I have never used that term. If I have please show me where. I've been insulted and personally attacked by the best and worst here for many years. It comes with the territory of holding the views I have. You get points without hurting your regards as a poster for attacking those on the right side of the aisle. Its a blood sport here. I have a thick skin.
I would argue the opposite on taking one's civic responsibilities seriously being a Trump supporter. I see it as my civic duty to stop the status quo any way I can. If it takes Trump to do it, so be it. You apparently see it as your civic duty to maintain the status quo anyway you can by electing Hillary Clinton.
Notice how Trump seems to scare everyone on both the right and left establishments ? That's good in my world. It shows me he has a plan that has them so scared they will join forces and do anything they can to stop him so they can remain in power. The only group of people supporting Trump are those who do not have a seat at the table.
What Bill did 20 and 30 years ago have little to do with the economy today, you're right. But I've had a problem with Bill from the beginning. So much so that I voted for Jerry Brown in the 1992 primary. So my problem with the Clinton's is nothing new. I've had enough of the Clinton's. With one, you get the other. They are inseparable in my world. That people think Trump should not serve because of his behaviour, well its a lot better than Bill's, which is the standard in place. Bill is still defended vigorously to the point that many wish they could vote for him, still. I've also had enough of the Bushes. 41 was actually good in my view, but 43 not. So I've got half of what I want so far.
Lastly, You and I would gather most Hillary supporters see Trump supporters as racist, xenophobic, bigoted misogynists. Oh, I forgot intellectually defective, deplorable and morally bankrupt. But do you know that I and most Trump supporters see Hillary supporters as simply in favor of open public corruption and willing to protect it at any cost so that y'all keep your place on the gravy train, aka status quo ...
I see Trump as the only one of the 17 running on his side willing and capable of taking on the corruption by not being bought and paid for by those who are corrupt, the establishment, by using his own money so he can tell them, STFU, you don't own me !!! Hillary on the other hand, is owned and operated by the establishment. The current wiki leaks confirms all of this including her views on open borders, Wall Street and her insistence of using executive orders to take away gun rights. Until now, these charges have been ridiculed as conspiracy theories by the usual suspects. Now they are proven.
So there ...
Thanks for the butt-hutt/hurt clarification. I'll take your word that you didn't call me that. Someone did. It's really pointless now. I apologize for getting into a flame war with you and accusing you of being a shill. You have valid points about Trump, Clinton and the election that deserve my serious consideration.
I'm also weary of the Clintons. I haven't seen Juanita Broaddrick's recent discussions of her claim that Bill raped her, but I've seen an older one and it put a chill in my spine. I tend to believe right off the bat women who claim rape , especially when they appear in emotional agony when talking about the incident as Juanita has. That video made me think, "Christ, was/is Bill a psychopath?" I'm also skeptical of their rapid accumulation of wealth since Bill left office: it looks like they cashed in many favors.
I understand your desire to change or stop the status quo. But kurtster, the status quo will remain in very good condition even if Trump wins or Clinton goes to jail in her first term. The federal government (hell, most governments) is a thriving exchange or marketplace trading in power, money, influence and alliances. Voting in a "maverick" is like jailing street-level drug dealers: there may temporary change, but the demand and supply of the product aren't affected in the long-run. If Trump wins, it will take him a long time to figure out how Washington works and that he will never have powers like a king. Without party support and some concessions to the status-quo on his part (i.e. playing ball), Washington will isolate Trump and work around him. That's what happened to Carter. Bernie Sanders and his talk of revolution would also have been gently bundled off to a quiet corner. If you keep talking about revolution and smashing the marketplace after you've been elected, you can't get anything done in the marketplace.
You have every right to demand change. I think that status quo can't continue: too many people are being left behind and without a political voice. A lot of people have made great money by turning the federal money spigot their way. This guy for instance has written some great (and dense) pieces on how trade lawyers have captured trade deals for themselves and allies, in turn hurting US manufacturing.
Average voters like you and me have to hammer at our Congressmen and Senators about what we want them to do. Bill and Hillary are like other top-level politicians: they triangulate and alter their positions to suit popular opinion and gain political support. Bill likely didn't want to welfare reform legislation that was as strict as the bill he signed into law but he had to accommodate Republicans on some issues like giving welfare money to states in block grants (which let states spend the money on non-welfare matters). He signed DOMA to avoid the humiliation of having the GOP override his veto and to get its support on other matters.
You point to Hillary's Wikileaked stuff and it's possible that she's misled the public (I haven't read much about the leaked stuff) but like many politicians she says nice vague things about immigration to one group
"My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere."
and different (but also vague things) to another. (Did she also ask for puppies and rainbows in that speech?)
HRC is not the devil. She is a clumsy and greedy politician. Clinton needs public scrutiny and pressure to be honest and open.She will shift her positions to reach a working compromise. Bernie forced her to do it on healthcare and college education. A healthy GOP will rein her in and pull her to the right.
Wrapping this up: I don't think Trump knows how to work with people in politics. Mitt Romney found out the hard way that being a successful CEO has little to do with being a successful governor but he got stuff done. OTOH Trump is accelerating the collapse of the GOP dramatically and is losing allies left and right. Trump wants to burn the house down...and then what?
No, not at all. It just gives the never Trump repubs another excuse to bail on him. They don't want to win anything and are willing to sacrifice the SCOTUS to screw the nation and keep their own little power niche.
FWIW, a woman sent that to me ...
A woman who doesn't understand all that "consent" nonsense.
Do you really think the reason women (and men) are outraged by Trump is because he used naughty words?
No, not at all. It just gives the never Trump repubs another excuse to bail on him. They don't want to win anything and are willing to sacrifice the SCOTUS to screw the nation and keep their own little power niche.
This is as intentionally obtuse as the "don't blame Hillary for Bill's behavior" meme.
Trump's behavior comes as no surprise to anyone. Is there a woman left who would trust Trump alone with her daughter? The people feigning outrage about this are the Republicans afraid to go down with his ship and suddenly awakening the last shreds of their of consciences. All the racism, the religious bigotry, the economic and civic illiteracy he has demonstrated was appalling of course, but not a deal breaker. Now that it's about white women they all clutch their pearls.
He's unloading all his bombs. To his detriment he's not articulate enough to play that hand effectively.
That's it. Does he have good ideas? He's too stumblebum to say them well. He came off as a bully (repeated interruptions are not Presidential) and unable to show the amount of nuance that the office requires. Sure he could throw a zinger. Is that what we need?
If we talk about Trump without talking about Hillary, we see someone who's not ready for the job in any way. He might have good intentions, but he's not Presidential. (Talking bad about Hillary is not a rejoinder to this observation)
None of this will make any difference. Voting for Trump isn't a logical thing, so logic and discussion is a useless tool. His followers are emphatic, driven, religious. He insulted minorities, handicapped, women. He's never held public office of any kind. His investments have frequently gone bankrupt. And yet, there he stands, supported by many working class people who think he gives a shit about them. The debate is just a chance to see him insult Hillary.
The moderators lack control of this. I think that there should be a timed microphone shut off where it's emotionless and neutral and consistent.
Yes it was a good one. I could go with the microphone timer.
But it was a real debate. Maybe the first real POTUS debate I've ever seen and I've seen em all since Kennedy / Nixon.
There was real direct back and forth at length with both of em saying what they really wanted to say. Never before has the choice or difference between two candidates been made so clear.
Mine too. Also, put shock collars on the candidates and give Sam the remote. Let him call bullshit. Let him say: ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION, MOTHERFUCKER!
The moderators lack control of this. I think that there should be a timed microphone shut off where it's emotionless and neutral and consistent.
He's unloading all his bombs. To his detriment he's not articulate enough to play that hand effectively. It's all about diversion. His exposure as a sleeze shouldn't be a surprise. It seemed pretty obvious all along. If the Republicans had enough fortitude they could have fielded just about anyone else and totally taken this thing.
*edit* I think by 'effectively' I mean in ways that doesn't alienate or strike a hollow tone. Oddly enough I'm not an expert on these things, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...
