[besson3c]

Could the general election come down to Trump's ability to persuade women to vote for him? Trump picks on lots of different people, but I would hope that any woman with a brain would have a hard time dealing with videos like this:

https://www.facebook.com/Gawker/vide...3938204302629/

[Cap'n Tightpants]

My mom can't stand Hillary and will vote for anyone, including Trump, to keep her out of office.

[besson3c]

Has she seen this video?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Has she seen this video?

Have you seen Hitlery ?

-t

[andi*pandi]

I would vote for many republicans rather than Trump. I would vote for hillary, i would vote for mickey mouse.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Has she seen this video?

Zero ****s given. Evangelicals will never vote for Hillary, even if it means electing Trump.

[The Final Dakar]

Can we get through the primaries before we start with this shit?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Have you seen Hitlery ?

-t

Sanders is clearly more liberal than Hillary, yet I've yet to see republicans frothing at the mouth with him like they have been with her. Why is that? I mean, I always thought they would completely lose their money over a democratic socialist being considered this seriously for the nomination. Where is all the red scare stuff like we saw during Obama's campaign?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sanders is clearly more liberal than Hillary, yet I've yet to see republicans frothing at the mouth with him like they have been with her. Why is that? I mean, I always thought they would completely lose their money over a democratic socialist being considered this seriously for the nomination. Where is all the red scare stuff like we saw during Obama's campaign?

Both Obama and Sanders are naive fools.

Hitlery is pure evil.

-t

[Cap'n Tightpants]

^^ What he said. To my recollection, Sanders has never been implicated in killing people or engaged in large scale coverups, also that terrible fake smile of hers sets people on edge (could just be the Botox, but I doubt it).

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Both Obama and Sanders are naive fools.

Hitlery is pure evil.

-t

But Trump is a teddy bear and Cruz is a fluffy bunny?

[subego]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Both Obama and Sanders are naive fools.

Can we once and for all dispel with this fiction Obama is a naive foo...





Sorry.

[subego]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sanders is clearly more liberal than Hillary, yet I've yet to see republicans frothing at the mouth with him like they have been with her. Why is that? I mean, I always thought they would completely lose their money over a democratic socialist being considered this seriously for the nomination. Where is all the red scare stuff like we saw during Obama's campaign?

At this stage of the game, it's far and away in the Republican's best interests for Bernie to succeed.

First and foremost, as long as he's in play, Hillary is getting attacked by Democrats. Apart from the damage this causes her, and the rancor it generates within the party, the effort she uses to defend herself against it is effort which would otherwise be used to attack Republicans.

Similarly, it forces her to burn money keeping her primary apparatus running.


I have no doubt the Republicans would love to go thermonuclear on socialism, but that gets them nowhere unless the socialist actually succeeds first. Until that happens, their best strategy is to offer him no impediments.

[Waragainstsleep]

JO on point as usual.

#makedonalddrumpfagain

[Chongo]

Is there still time to vote for Kodos?

[andi*pandi]

I don't know, bill n' opus make a valid ticket as well...

[turtle777]

I don't know why people are so negative about the options. It's pretty simple:

A) Hitlery - politics as usual.
Paid for by bankers and Wall Street, the political and financial elite will continue to do only what's good for them. The beating of Americans and foreign nations will continue until morale improves.

B) Trump - a Hail Mary. Anything can happen.

Me personally, I'll take uncertain change over the known evil of politics as usual.

-t

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I don't know why people are so negative about the options. It's pretty simple:

A) Hitlery - politics as usual.
Paid for by bankers and Wall Street, the political and financial elite will continue to do only what's good for them. The beating of Americans and foreign nations will continue until morale improves.

B) Trump - a Hail Mary. Anything can happen.

Me personally, I'll take uncertain change over the known evil of politics as usual.

-t

Vote for the candidate who will do the least damage. Who's sig has Vote Cthulu?

[subego]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I don't know, bill n' opus make a valid ticket as well...

As an aside, I think there's been a consistent inverse correlation between BB's skill as an artist and his skill as a writer.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I don't know why people are so negative about the options. It's pretty simple:

A) Hitlery - politics as usual.
Paid for by bankers and Wall Street, the political and financial elite will continue to do only what's good for them. The beating of Americans and foreign nations will continue until morale improves.

B) Trump - a Hail Mary. Anything can happen.

Me personally, I'll take uncertain change over the known evil of politics as usual.

-t

I might understand this "logic" if the risk was that Drumpf might just **** the economy, or make you an international laughing stock again, but much of what he says is way more Hitler-like than anything Hilary will do. I have my doubts that Drumpf means a single word he says, he might as well be standing at the podium repeating "9/11" as the answer to every question. But I can't help but think that useless is not the worst he could do.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I don't know why people are so negative about the options. It's pretty simple:

A) Hitlery - politics as usual.
Paid for by bankers and Wall Street, the political and financial elite will continue to do only what's good for them. The beating of Americans and foreign nations will continue until morale improves.

B) Trump - a Hail Mary. Anything can happen.

Me personally, I'll take uncertain change over the known evil of politics as usual.

-t

Let's unpack this post, shall we?

First, You choosing the republican nominee over the democratic one is not news. What would be news is there's a GOP nominee that you'd choose Hillary over.

Second, if there are no surprises on the first point, I could at least be impressed if you would choose Sanders the other 'anti-establishment' candidate over the likes of a Cruz or Rubio. I remain doubtful.

Third: You refer to Clinton as "Hitlery" which is just about destroys the irony scale when it's Trump who has spent the past six months campaigning on authoritarian policy and fascist leanings.

Fourth, and here's where we get to some real meat, your preference of 'anything can happen' over a known quantity exposes your position of (wait for the political dirty word) privilege. If you're a rich, white, or some combination of the above including male, it's not likely any of Trump's policies will impact you in a negative way. If you're muslim, black, hispanic, asian, female, poor, or a non-white immigrant, things aren't as rosy.

And finally, fifth, Trump is not anti-establishment. He is the establishment. On the tree diagram of The Establishment, the only position above "Federal politician" and "Lobbyist" is "Corporate Billionaire" (apologies to the illuminati). Seriously, how does that not completely undermine his position? Am I to believe that, blind trust or not, he would sign off on legislation that would undermine his business prospects or relations? Hell, no. If anything Trump is more beholden to corporate interest because he much more at stake than any other politician.

On top of that, for being 'anti-establishment' Trump is just as guilty of saying what people want to hear as any other politician, only, arguably, he's much more transparent in his pandering. I'm to believe that the guy who acts like a politician on steroids (but without any experience) is more likely than a Democrat to enact meaningful change?

Look, I get it, as far as corporate politicians go, Hillary is one of the worst Democrats you could get. Any self-aware Dem or lib knows that. However in a country where there's more than just that issue, this anti-government fervor reeks or throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't know what you think Trump will do, but if we're talking breaking up the banks, limiting lobbyists, working on campaign finance reform, or ending corporate welfare, I think he's only hinted towards one of these. Which means nothing since he's hinted at a lot of things.

[The Final Dakar]

Oh, and just for you besson, you premise is completely flawed:

White women still vote majority GOP.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Oh, and just for you besson, you premise is completely flawed:

White women still vote majority GOP.

What premise? I wasn't asking why women vote Republican, I was asking why any woman would vote for Trump specifically.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Why do supposedly strong feminists support Islamic extremists? I believe it has to do with forceful men awakening a biological need in them.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

Why do supposedly strong feminists support Islamic extremists? I believe it has to do with forceful men awakening a biological need in them.

WTF are you talking about Captain Loosepants? No feminists support Islamic extremists.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

WTF are you talking about Captain Loosepants? No feminists support Islamic extremists.

That's simply retarded, bessy:

Feminists Betray Islamic Women
Why Feminism is AWOL on Islam by Kay S. Hymowitz, City Journal Winter 2003
Why Do Non-Muslim Feminists Not Decry Violence Against Women in Muslim-Majority Countries? – Tablet Magazine
Few feminists dare criticise Islam. To see why, look at the ones who do | Coffee House
As Muslim women suffer, feminists avert their gaze
4 Ways Mainstream Feminism Fails Muslim Women — Everyday Feminism
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress...aryam-namazie/

There's so many articles, I could sit and post them all evening, but this one is the best: https://bitchmedia.org/post/islam-an...re-not-at-odds "Because Islam doesn't actually mistreat women!"

They're right, I guess, wearing a ****ing beekeeping suit in the middle of the damned desert is "merciful", or so says Muhammad (a plague upon his miserable ass), and you know, females only walk 7 paces behind men for their own safety. Hell, what chick really needs a clitoris anyway? Might as well just cut it right off.

[besson3c]

Fine, no Western feminists do.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

It's shamefully common with Western Feminists, and it answers part of Trump's allure as well. Evolution has taught women to support boisterous and threatening men, it's a survival instinct that's millions of years old.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Fine.

Translation: f$&@, I have just been schooled by Shaddim.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Translation: f$&@, I have just been schooled by Shaddim.

-t

This thread is about American voters voting for Trump, I don't think it's a massive assumption to assume that he was referring to Americans.

What is it about you that craves constant conflict?

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Translation: f$&@, I have just been schooled by Shaddim.

-t

I've had to school a lot of people around here recently. In this instance, evolution doesn't lie. There's a reason why nice guys are ignored by women.

[andi*pandi]

You say you're a feminist, but then post things like that. Are we really all still neanderthols? I think my husband's a nice guy. I know lots of nice guys who are husbands.

[subego]

I'd thought the fact we are far more Neanderthal than we desire to be was indisputable.

[Waragainstsleep]

CTP has already stated on multiple topics that he has no faith whatsoever in humanity's ability to overcome our baser instincts. Collectively in particular.

[Hawkeye_a]

I'm curious, did women/feminists support Bill Clinton?

[BadKosh]

Funny that the feminists support Obama And Hillary, BOTH of which pay men more than women, all while lying about it like the hypocrites they are.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

I'm curious, did women/feminists support Bill Clinton?

As opposed to Bob Dole?

[besson3c]

Feminists are about equality. Human beings are (generally) against being cheated on. Clinton's infidelity has little to do with feminism specifically.

[andi*pandi]

Well, feminism does preclude a certain amount of respect for women. A candidate who can't respect his own wife/girlfriend/family/staff doesn't have much credibility in regards to other women's rights, unless his other non-personal policies amass so much good will to tip the scales.

Full disclosure, yes, I voted for Bill. It was the economy stupid.

[Hawkeye_a]

Rhetorical questions:

1: So when the candidate is from the left side of politics it's ok to disrespect women(or rather it will be overlooked), but when he's from the right, its not?
2. So if the candidate is rich and from the left(Clintons) it's not an issue, but when he's from the right(Trump) it's not?
3. So when a candidate panders the electorate with class-warfare-type-rhetoric, it's alright if he's from the left, but needs to be accused of 'populism' if he is from the right and advocating tax breaks for lower income brackets?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Well, feminism does preclude a certain amount of respect for women. A candidate who can't respect his own wife/girlfriend/family/staff doesn't have much credibility in regards to other women's rights, unless his other non-personal policies amass so much good will to tip the scales.

Full disclosure, yes, I voted for Bill. It was the economy stupid.

No disagreement, I'm just saying basic human morals tells us to not cheat, so this should be seen as a black mark on his record to everybody, not just feminists.

Unfortunately, there are very few politicians lacking any black marks. In some cases it is a matter of being shady, in others it is just basic human failure. I guess it's a matter of opinion where you lump Clinton, but I would say that it is unreasonable to expect our politicians to never fail us as human beings.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I would say that it is unreasonable to expect our politicians to never fail us as human beings.

It isn't about the politician, or the 'black mark'.

It's about the hypocrisy in the inconsistent way one applies specific values to candidates from different sides of the political isle.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

You say you're a feminist

Only in the basic 1st Wave sense (and many of the 2nd wave ideas), the 3rd wave is just nuts.

Are we really all still neanderthols? I think my husband's a nice guy. I know lots of nice guys who are husbands.

We're animals, we still have those instincts. Hypergamy is still a "thing". Men primarily wanting women who are younger, with wider hips and bigger boobs, is too (for the function of easier breeding and child-rearing). The social "sciences" have attempted to lie to everyone for the last 50 years, telling us that gender and sexuality are simply social constructs. They aren't. So while we can override basic human evolution, those are traits that aided our survival for millions of years, they aren't going to be washed away by bitter sociology majors with gender envy. They shouldn't be, unless we want the human race to collapse.

Japan is the canary in the coal mine. The blurring of gender lines there has led to a real crisis: Japan’s population time bomb worsens as ‘herbivore’ men not interested in sex extends to married males They've even started giving classes on how to be men, inlcuding how to show dominance and be assertive. It's projected that Europe and the USA are only a generation behind them.

Sad Stat In Japan: Quarter Of Its Men Still Virgins — And There Are Classes To Help Them Lose ‘It’
Japan's 40-Year-Old Virgins: Middle-Aged Men Attend Classes To Learn About Sex : News : Headlines & Global News

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

It isn't about the politician, or the 'black mark'.

It's about the hypocrisy in the inconsistent way one applies specific values to candidates from different sides of the political isle.

People are inconsistent, but I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that Trump has the most vile black marks of any candidate as far as his pretty regular objectification of women for many, many years. Just look at the video in the original post. I think you'd be hard pressed to find another politician with this sort of body of work.

That being said, that doesn't mean that even a single case of inequality by anybody else should be dismissed passively.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Feminists are about equality.

It was, but isn't anymore. Now it's about engineering society via intersectionality.

[andi*pandi]

Any other Republican who bragged about sleeping with married women would be given the bum's rush by the Church crowd in a New York minute.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Any other Republican who bragged about sleeping with married women would be given the bum's rush by the Church crowd in a New York minute.

Twitter is alight with it, but he doesn't care. That's a large part of it, Trump simply doesn't give a shit what anyone else says or does, not one bit. Frankly, there is something admirable about it, not caring about popular opinion and going your own way. God knows if you ever apologize or capitulate to certain people (SJWs and the like) it only makes matters worse, it's like blood in the water. At some point that tactic will eventually betray him, though.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Any other Republican who bragged about sleeping with married women would be given the bum's rush by the Church crowd in a New York minute.

That's part of the inconsistency (but then again, Church goes tend to preach forgiveness as well i suppose). Personally, i'm not sure if the Church going Republicans had too big an issue regarding the infidelity aspect of it, but rather using and tarnishing the office of the president in such a way.

What I cant seem to understand is why what Clinton did(proven act) as president got forgiven so quickly by his supporters/feminists, and yet they're trying to crucify Trump under the banner of "feminism".

[Cap'n Tightpants]

I don't understand how they can still praise Bill while women are still claiming he raped them, didn't Hillary herself say we should believe all women who claim they've been raped? Shouldn't that apply to them too? Personally I don't think they give a damn what he's done, just as long as he's still useful to them.

[BadKosh]

More proof liberals are not connected to actual reality, but see the world through that self centered, selfish liberal filter. They see a narrative, not actual events.