Well, I am not a Donald Trump supporter, so you are trying to railing at the wrong person. Neither one of these two should be president and I don't believe either one of them will be.
You keep on stating that you aren't his supporter but it seems as if you you agree with almost all his rhetoric.
I have not commented on enough of Trump's rhetoric here on this forum for you to be able to credibly draw that conclusion. However, I do think the way that Trump has handled Hillary Clinton's playing of 'The woman's card' has been one of the most brilliant acts of political 'jujitsu' that I have ever seen. In fact, I challenge you to identify any other similar move by a presidential candidate to top it.
Just because someone disagrees with your assessment doesn't make it a "Democratic talking point," saying things like this paint you as a biased partisan rather than someone interested in debate and discussion. Really? The accusations of sexual misconduct against Bill Clinton are really about Hillary? You mean a female candidate for elected office makes comments that victims of rape should be believed? Say it ain't so. This coming from someone who probably actually believes that Obama "played the race card" and in doing so divided the nation more than the racists who actually did so. No, it isn't. It is a problem for her husband, good thing he won't be running for President again. And who, in every case, have had their day in court where their claims were found to be lacking in evidence necessary to find Clinton guilty. How is making suggestive comments to subordinates worse than actual rape? Link? You mean Hillary is actually using the political and rhetorical talents of her husband to try to get elected? That sneaky b!tch. Actually, Hillary hasn't done anything with regards to her husband's sexual escapades except forgive him, something a great many women have done when their spouses have committed infidelity. Bullsh!t. This isn't going to "go away" as long as there are people willing to attack her for her husband's misdeeds. The biased partisans (like you) will continue to crow about this, not realizing that the American people forgave Bill Clinton years ago, during the impeachment, because he was a good president, which isn't mutually exclusive with being prone to sexual misconduct (Kennedy, Johnson, etc.). LOL, keep telling yourself that while you're busy unskewing your polls to try and convince yourself that the GOP nominee has a chance.
This is a silly thread. Clinton can call Trump a sexist for many of his misogynistic remarks. If Trump doesn't agree he can disagree, but it's obvious to any half-brain wit the guy is a misogynist
Juanita Broddrick comments yesterday: It is certainly understandable that Juanita Broddrick would be appreciative of Donald Trump's willingness to take on these bullying thugs, Hillary and Bill Clinton, who have left a trail of sexually abused and harassed women in their wake, including Juanita herself. Who else has had the courage to take these people on other than Donald Trump? Of course she is backing Donald Trump. Regardless of whether Donald Trump becomes president or not - personally I do not believe he will win the Republican nomination - Trump is providing a valuable service to everyone on this, especially women survivors of sexual harassment and abuse by men and women in positions of power, such as Hillary and Bill Clinton.
Hillary is apparently in full retreat mode on this issue. The Donald has her right where he wants her. The rest of the Republican campaigns are assuredly watching this with rapt attention and with an exhilarating sense of fascination. Video at the link (MSNBC - Hardball with Chris Matthews) Hillary appears to be in a virtual submission hold here. If this is her response, how does she get out of this. And the barrage of Super Pac ads starts on this has apparently not even started yet.
You have a biased interpretation and you are trying to make it fit your FAUX frame of reference. The GOP is imploding and degrading the national narrative. Rasslin' that tar baby only gets you stuck. You look more 'Presidential" when you stay above the fray of the little people. The job is too important for petty name calling, it actually calls for respectful statesmanship and most voters know that. I don't think before the primary elections you even mention an opposition candidate specifically. You talk about your own policy plans first and general opposition party policy as it relates to that.
You mean like Hillary was doing when she was 'Playing the woman's card', going around calling Trump a sexist out on the campaign trail? LOL. Trump stopped that so fast, the proverbial tires didn't even have time to screech. And now she is all of the sudden holding herself 'above the fray'. Once again, you really cannot make this stuff up. Of course, nobody will believe this latest spin attempt by her and her cmoaign. Hillary Clinton just got her ass handed to her by Donald Trump, and everyone with a functioning brain who follows this stuff knows it.
Crack wise all you like. You and quite a few other people might well be in for a surprise. Let's keep in mind, she was the mortal lock presumptive winner of the Democratic nomination at this stage of the 2008 contest and she managed to fumble that away. It certainly would not be without precedent by her to see her blow it again.
You do know majority of liberal posters here would rather see Bernie over Hillary anyways. The most optimal Presidential race for a liberal would be Sanders vs Trump. General election debates require far more nuance in rhetoric mainly because there are going to be only two on the stage instead of the 10+ during the GOP primaries. Could you imagine how hilarious a Sanders vs Trump debate would be?
The contest you are much more likely to see is Sanders vs Cruz. I doubt very seriously if Ted Cruz is going to lose any sleep in the process of preparing to debate Bernie Sanders, or Hillary Clinton either for that matter.
"might be in for a surprise" , ha, that's a real commitment on your part. The vote will go like 54/46 for the Democratic candidate, it's just demographics.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73....it never goes away.</p>— Juanita Broaddrick (@atensnut) <a href="https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/684822324227379200">January 6, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
W has never filed for personal bankruptcy; but his incompetence bankrupted the co, the USA, that he had work for. past performance is a good indication of future performance. Trump had bankrupted several co who had hired him to run them. it is not out of the realm of possibility that he will bankrupt a co that is much bigger and more complicated that any co that he had work for
Holly Sheer rightfully makes the case that if Hillary wants to present herself as a champion of women's rights, then she needs to stop excusing sexual assault, even when it is committed by her husband.
I think this is an excellent point to bring up in the general election. The GOP should make this one of their main attack. When outsiders don't consent to consensual sexual behavior between two adults, it's sexual assault. The public would absolutely agree and vote in the GOP for this crap.
