What's new
By:

Can the Trumpster fire come back from this?

dalamon said:
It's not his worst but it's the one that has alienated his base the most up until this point.

Ripping on immigrants or blacks or Muslims doesn't alienate as much as treating beautiful little white women like commodities
Click to expand...


I knew there was a racist shot to be taken at a bunch of people. I knew 2016 society wouldn't let me down.
 
JJAS said:
This just shows how uneven everyone's metrics were and maybe still are. With Romney it was the dreaded "47% gaff." What will historians call "Trump's" latest gaff. It probably wouldn't be able to be printed in most junior high history books. If this indeed is the nail in the coffin, it's insane that it took this long, and once again, I don't think it's his worst statement.
Click to expand...

It's either gonna be the grab-em-by-the-***** or moved-on-her-like-a-bitch gaffe. I love this. We finally don't have to worry one bit that this dangerous nitwit will get to make decisions regarding the USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BYE
ONE LOVE said:
We dunno if he did or didn't though.. I mean when you're hanging out with a group of guys, you talk ****, whether it's true or not.



I mean we've all done it.
Click to expand...

Not sure if serious. But supposing you are, then I reply...

Uh, no. I've never talked about molesting women, regardless of whether or not I was hanging out with a group of guys.
 
Gameface said:
You would vote for Bill Clinton?
Click to expand...

I wasn't a big fan of Clinton while he was in office, but in hindsight... not so bad. A walk in the park compared to his successors.

If he were running as a third option, I'd seriously consider him.

He's a bit of a dog, but comparing him to Trump is apples and watermelons (I know you weren't the one who made that comparison, [MENTION=26]Gameface[/MENTION]).

Trump is bad, very bad, at being a respectable human being. While being a raging sexist and racist isn't a crime (yet) it's not what makes a good leader for such a diverse country. Trump is divisive, and we need unity more than anything else. A leader that nobody trusts is useless as a leader.

For the record, Hillary is also impossible to trust.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Bronco70 said:
I wasn't a big fan of Clinton while he was in office, but in hindsight... not so bad. A walk in the park compared to his successors.

If he were running as a third option, I'd seriously consider him.

He's a bit of a dog, but comparing him to Trump is apples and watermelons (I know you weren't the one who made that comparison, [MENTION=26]Gameface[/MENTION]).

Trump is bad, very bad, at being a respectable human being. While being a raging sexist and racist isn't a crime (yet) it's not what makes a good leader for such a diverse country. Trump is divisive, and we need unity more than anything else. A leader that nobody trusts is useless as a leader.

For the record, Hillary is also impossible to trust.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

I pretty strongly maintain that anybody who seriously looks into the Clinton Presidency (especially using the clarity of hindsight) will mostly likely conclude that it was a bloody disaster.

It's a sign of our political corruption (societally speaking) that we sharply contrast Reagan and Clinton. They are two peas in a pod right there.
 
colton said:
No he didn't. He said he apologized "if you were offended" which is completely different than apologizing for one's actions.
Click to expand...

No, he made the apology even more effective by targeting it to those who were offended by his words and actions, thereby establishing a more efficient apology. Why spread out an apology over people who were not offended? Those people don't need an apology. Clearly.
 
LazyD said:
No, he made the apology even more effective by targeting it to those who were offended by his words and actions, thereby establishing a more efficient apology. Why spread out an apology over people who were not offended? Those people don't need an apology. Clearly.
Click to expand...

No, it shifts blame to people for taking offense and suggests that only certain people would be offended while others would find remarks about sexual assault from a presidential candidate perfectly acceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top