Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max™]

It was more than 1 person, there were instances from 2010 as I recall, but another thing struck me just now.

What the hell kinda loser brags about being so rich THEY have to go beyond just hitting on chicks into "ok we need to start discussing sexual assault charges" territory?

Turn it around: I walk in a room and they just grab me with their pussy. They don't even wait to start kissing me. They can't wait to have a grope of the ole' 'Trump Tower'.

Still crass 'guy talk', but amazingly less sleazy, yeesh.

Trump was young and stupid, he was just 60 years old at the time.

Ah to be young and sixteeny, and also a robotgila monster.


Either way, I'm expecting the debate to be hai-lahr-ee-oose.

[smjjames]

The thing is that this isn't just about this one time he talked like that, he talks like that about women just about all the time, if less vulgarly.

There is the Howard Stern stuff, but given that he's a shock jock, I'd take those comments with a grain of sand in that situation, but the tape does put the Howard Stern stuff in a different contextual light.

[smirk]

Turn it around: I walk in a room and they just grab me with their pussy.

Not what you're talking about, but:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

https://twitter.com/duarteamanda/status/784576474561048577/photo/1

I want this as a poster.

[Frumple]

My position is that this type of conversation is relatively inconsequential compared to actual policies which Trump has proposed, and business practices he has enacted. The one person Trump claims to have groped is insignificant next to the millions who are facing deportation or being denied refuge that they desperately need, and the thousands who have been swindled out of their savings or provided services without compensation.

See, though, it's not inconsequential, at all. It may be relatively less consequential, but a person's character and specifically how they treat certain demographics of the population (in this case, roughly half of the bloody thing) is very, very relevant when you're talking consideration for a position that has significant influence on how said demographic is treated. The people trump groped may be insignificant, but the behavior that's displayed by him doing so isn't.

To take it somewhat towards the extremis, me going out and torturing and mutilating a kitten, even if it's just one kitten, is not something that people are going to look at without a great deal of askance. Particularly if it's when I'm well past middle aged, and frankly even if I'm just saying I'd do it. I may not have left a bleeding trail of millions of crippled kittens behind me but that doesn't mean it's not obvious there's almost certainly something seriously wrong with me -- and you damn sure wouldn't want to put me in charge of any pounds, vets, or anything to do with animals in general.

You can question all sorts of things related to most sorts of policy. You can't really question little Furry McNubless worming its way across the floor. And in this case, we got trump lusting after dismembered kitten limbs. Metaphorically. _Hopefully.

[misko27]

Trump was young and stupid, he was just 60 years old at the time.

I mean yeah obviously. He's just doing what young, virile 60 year old males do all the time right? And besides this was before he met Jesus;  if you are going to judge him, judge him for some RECENT indiscretion like asking everyone to look at Alicia Machado's sex tape at 3:20 AM (which doesn't actually exist).

And this from the party calling Porn a "national health crisis".

[RedKing]

But Frumple, it's perfectly normal for virile males to want to mutilate kittens!

[birdy51]

Eh, we're dancing along the forum guidelines and I have little desire to continue pondering the morality of Trump's love life.

Bottom line, anything two individuals choose to do together is largely their own business. But there has to be some kind of a mutual agreement there.

I do not believe that Trump is the kind to abide by mutual agreements in romantic relationships. Thereby, I consider his actions to be amoral. It's as simple as that.

[Frumple]

Man, all I know is that if the worse thing being promised turns out to be animal cruelty I'm going to just lock the door and not go outside until election day. There's a point where it's time to just go, "To hell with this, I quit."

[Starver]

3:20 AM (which doesn't actually exist).

Yes it does. Albeit that it always belongs to the previous day, despite being 'apparently' connected through the imaginary hours of 8am through to 10am, which definitely do not exist, save as hallucinations for those that dreamt that they stayed up aaallllll night, instead of only half of it.

[RedKing]

Maybe he shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die.

[Loud Whispers]

Maybe he shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die.

It's enough to make you hang your head and cry

[smirk]

It doesn't help that he was talking about women in general, and not just specific demographics. His base is the single biggest market for pedestals to put women on, so this was a pretty damn big straw to try and pile on the back of that already overloaded camel.

More cynically, it's been increasingly clear even to the Republican party since at least the first presidential debate that Trump has precisely zero chance of winning the race, and if that's not gonna happen then why would they ever hang around the toxic landfill fire that is Don's campaign? This latest scandal is the perfect opportunity to jump ship and try to make themselves look better in the process.

[Folly]

More cynically, it's been increasingly clear even to the Republican party since at least the first presidential debate that Trump has precisely zero chance of winning the race, and if that's not gonna happen then why would they ever hang around the toxic landfill fire that is Don's campaign?

Honor? After all, they made him swear he would support whoever won the nomination; it would be pretty hypocritical of them to not support him after he won.

[Frumple]

... we're talking an american political party, here, and more than that the GOP. Somehow I doubt either of those are much of a concern :V

[Sergarr]

More cynically, it's been increasingly clear even to the Republican party since at least the first presidential debate that Trump has precisely zero chance of winning the race, and if that's not gonna happen then why would they ever hang around the toxic landfill fire that is Don's campaign?

Honor? After all, they made him swear he would support whoever won the nomination; it would be pretty hypocritical of them to not support him after he won.

Modern GOP has zero honor. Absolutely zero. No party that manipulates voting results via "gerrymandering", promotes laws which are clearly intended to reduce voting influence of minority groups, endorses people that promote grand conspiracy theories like "birtherism", engages in hyperpartisan anti-American bullshit that was "Nobama" strategy, and holding the world's economy hostage just to push their own agenda, can claim to be honorable.