Print

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

[Loud Whispers]

welp, time to go to sleep
I hope I'll wake up to the glorious news of Trump getting trumped!

I concur, it is very nighttime

Goodnight Americans

In this specific scenario, it means recognizing that Trump's statements are not the desires of some freakish sociopath who is thinking things no normal person would think. His ability to control his impulses, or at least avoid talking about them, might be somewhat below the standards our society imposes, but otherwise his sexuality is essentially normal. And returning to my original point, this means that his recent audio clip is of relatively little consequence when compared to the other things he has said and done. And in particular, it is of little relevance to his capacity to serve as president.

Oh ok I get that, so not cast judgement on him based off of his sexuality, but judge him based off his actions and lack of restraint in regards to his sexuality
I get that
Also lack of sexual restraint is very relevant to people in authority, particularly when it comes to things like abuse of authority, blackmail by others and the poor judgement it could show in a candidate

[Powder Miner]

I mean, I'M not out to molest relative strangers, myself. When I do end up actually engaging in a sexual relationship, I would prefer it to be a trusting thing with someone I'm close to

[MetalSlimeHunt]

There are still a lot of Americans who basically give Bill carte blanch because they perceived the impeachment as a paper-thin partisan attempt to disbar a sitting President by playing on prudes and telling everybody he got sex from an intern. I doubt anybody in that camp is going to be persuaded by Trump's allegations.

[Max™]

So guys and gals, tell me: are you guys worried that Trump's arguments about Bill Clinton will have any strength? I know the conventional wisdom is going dirty with Bill is a bad idea, but is there any way he wins points or damages Clinton by doing this? I hope Clinton has a very, very solid idea of how to respond, because he's clearly telegraphed his strategy ahead of time.

My woman is a goddamn saint, I believe her when she says she would be mad but wouldn't attack some chick I'd been shtupping on the side who knew about us, so I rephrased it to get away from her saintliness.

"[RANDOM CELEBRITY] is on live tv, and out of nowhere is told that the chick who just walked on stage next to her has been banging her husband, so [RANDOM CELEBRITY] punches her in the nose, do you blame [RANDOM CELEBRITY]?"
'Oh, well no.'

[mainiac]

It's called foreplay,

I am pretty darn sure that nobody would have objected if Trump had come out in favor of foreplay...

Why are you not doing this professionally?  You have talent.

[smjjames]

18 min to go.....

Also, apparently Trump did some sort of surprise panel with the Bill Clinton accusers. and all indications are that sparks are gonna fly in this.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Nate Argon posted an analysis which pretty convincingly shows that second debates don't have strong effects on the polling. And I believe that analysis, because Nate Cesium's methodology is not of this world.

But yet.


2016.

[Max™]

18 min to go.....

Also, apparently Trump did some sort of surprise panel with the Bill Clinton accusers. and all indications are that sparks are gonna fly in this.

You so late.

It's called foreplay,

I am pretty darn sure that nobody would have objected if Trump had come out in favor of foreplay...

Not as long as he buys me a drink first and cuddles afterwards.

[Max™]

I just want to see Hillary ask whether Trump would rather have her husband up on the stage rather than her to debate his scandals against.

...and now I'm sad this will probably not happen.

y u do dis 2 me fren

[smirk]

So guys and gals, tell me: are you guys worried that Trump's arguments about Bill Clinton will have any strength? I know the conventional wisdom is going dirty with Bill is a bad idea, but is there any way he wins points or damages Clinton by doing this? I hope Clinton has a very, very solid idea of how to respond, because he's clearly telegraphed his strategy ahead of time.

I'unno misk. Depends on how he goes about it. I guess theoretically he might be able to manage... something. I'm not sure what, but *shrugs*

I wouldn't give good odds on it turning out well, though. Clinton's been dealing with that line of attack for well over a decade, and from operators both less and significantly more smooth than trump seems capable of. Would imagine him trying would be like a squirrel trying to hump an active wood mulcher.

Will say I'm wondering if security is going to be nearby, though. Could see trump snapping at some point during this.

What Frumple said. Clinton has had almost 2 decades of experience with these attacks and she's an experienced politician; Trump has had 48 hours and has never had to deal with this type of thing before at all. He's gotta be out on the ragged edge by now. I give him a very small but non-zero chance of actually physically attacking Hillary at some point tonight.

[smjjames]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/second-presidential-debate-election-2016/?#livepress-update-13257618 Lol 538 (in a good way).....

I just want to see Hillary ask whether Trump would rather have her husband up on the stage rather than her to debate his scandals against.

Heh, yeah, because the republicans somehow think that Bills scandals have everything to do with her.

[birdy51]

I am not nearly drunk enough for this.

Which is why the drinking is starting early. Save me from the election Troegenator!

Remember, if you die of alcohol poisoning, Trump gets the last laugh.

He may get the last laugh, but I won't remember it. Because I'll be drunk and dead. Dying doesn't improve memory, science told us that.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

If there is a fistfight note that you are required to try and drink yourself to death.

An exemption in this case has been granted for maniac, as all of his hopes and dreams rely upon living to election day after such an event.

[smjjames]

So guys and gals, tell me: are you guys worried that Trump's arguments about Bill Clinton will have any strength? I know the conventional wisdom is going dirty with Bill is a bad idea, but is there any way he wins points or damages Clinton by doing this? I hope Clinton has a very, very solid idea of how to respond, because he's clearly telegraphed his strategy ahead of time.

I'unno misk. Depends on how he goes about it. I guess theoretically he might be able to manage... something. I'm not sure what, but *shrugs*

I wouldn't give good odds on it turning out well, though. Clinton's been dealing with that line of attack for well over a decade, and from operators both less and significantly more smooth than trump seems capable of. Would imagine him trying would be like a squirrel trying to hump an active wood mulcher.

Will say I'm wondering if security is going to be nearby, though. Could see trump snapping at some point during this.

What Frumple said. Clinton has had almost 2 decades of experience with these attacks and she's an experienced politician; Trump has had 48 hours and has never had to deal with this type of thing before at all. He's gotta be out on the ragged edge by now. I give him a very small but non-zero chance of actually physically attacking Hillary at some point tonight.

He might try to physically intimidate, and I keep imagining him constantly circling around Clinton.

Too bad we didn't have a town hall style debate during the primaries on the republican side once things got down to two or three candidates. Would have been interesting to see his behavior.

If there is a fistfight note that you are required to try and drink yourself to death.

An exemption in this case has been granted for maniac, as all of his hopes and dreams rely upon living to election day after such an event.

I doubt things will come to blows, but I can see him going all ALPHA MALE POSTURE, GO!.

[Rolan7]

What I mean though is, what better way to get voters who at ambivalent at best about a female presidency on board than parading around an orange, bloated, shrieking misogynist who makes you feel ashamed to be share his gender?

Wait. I am confused. You are presenting it as an option. Do you imply that there was a slightest possibility that American socialists would not:
1) Eventually drag out a would-be "First Woman President".
2) Paint the opponent of (1) as "an orange, bloated, shrieking misogynist", even if he was literally a green fish.
3) Do so after they themselves both have painted themselves in various unnatural shades of red and shrieked down Sarah Palin (then pretended she did never exist).
?
 

In case someone has pointed it out yet (I'm catching up with the thread), it's not like Palin was even the first vice presidential candidate.  The Democrats, I mean the red-painted socialists, did that with Geraldine Ferraro:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw4-1E4ooX0