• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

These Trump women (1 Viewer)

Removable Mind said:
Ocean, why do you want to exclude half of everybody in the public limelight who find themselves a member of the Kingdom of Washington and who really and truly believe that they are entitled to decide on who they owe their allegiance? And also why deny that both conservative and liberal/progressive wealthy donate according to their needs, not by party line or political philosophy?

Sorry, I don't buy that.

I opine that citizens who believe that our elected officials' and governments' gross misconducts and abilities to legislate themselves out of having to be accountable and be able to exploit the citizens, whom they are to serve is based primarily on party alliance andor political philosophy (aka "partisanship")...then nothing will ever change.

There's an old saying you might have heard: "If the right one don't get ya then the left one will."

MSM is selling a product made up of several elements. Truthful elements, lie elements, fact elements or fiction elements. People are buying product and what element of that product they value will vary. In 30 days from now there will be a different truth, lie, fact, or fiction being sold. And those who buy the product will decide on which element they want to purchase.
Click to expand...

I don't believe my words attempted to exclude anyone. At least that was not my intent.

My previous post simply identified, in my opinion, the strategy and the methodology.

People certainly can contribute and believe anything they wish. Donors are on both sides.

However, let's not ignore the facts. The Hillary Machine is a multi-billion dollar enterprise, aligned with ideologies that see much at stake.

It is also aligned with the messaging machine that will decide what products are available. That is different from a grocery shelf full of options.
 
TheGoverness said:
Doesn't matter.

If you have definitive evidence that they are lying then that's fine. But if you don't, it'd be best for you to take a neutral position when it comes to these allegations like I am.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter? Srsly?
 
countryboy said:
It doesn't matter? Srsly?
Click to expand...

Yes seriously.

I don't care about people's speculation that these women are lying, especially one from an extremely biased party.

What I am concerned with is proof. If you can present some definitive proof that these women are lying about being sexual assaulted by Donald Trump, then I will be happy to call them liars. Until then, I will stand by my decision to remain neutral towards these allegations.
 
ocean515 said:
I don't believe my words attempted to exclude anyone. At least that was not my intent.

My previous post simply identified, in my opinion, the strategy and the methodology.

People certainly can contribute and believe anything they wish. Donors are on both sides.

However, let's not ignore the facts. The Hillary Machine is a multi-billion dollar enterprise, aligned with ideologies that see much at stake.

It is also aligned with the messaging machine that will decide what products are available. That is different from a grocery shelf full of options.
Click to expand...

But Hillary is cut from the same mould that so many political figures are in both parties - and with both political philosophies (conservative and liberal...and all those in between or outside of those circles). She's a part of a machine that so many are, in both parties. She uses a lot of the same strategies and methodologies that people in both parties use. Most of whom subscribe to the two most noted political philosophies. The citizens are simply a means to an end. Neither party sees us in any other light. We see and hear them in a manner that they choose us to see and hear them. We hopefully respond to them in a manner that they want or prefer.

Even the media companies are owned by large non-journalistic companies who have the ability to use their ownership to persuade the public or to control information in specific ways via the media outlets that they own. Media companies produce revenues of over 1/3 of a trillion dollars annually. And they have the power of the press in their hands, the same power that the Framers wanted protected in the First Amendment. The same power that the Framers believed would help our nation maintain a stable republic form of government. But even they had enough insight to warn us that their Constitutional plan wasn't perfect and about how special interests could usurp that power and use it in inappropriate ways.

I think our problems go way beyond all of the Hillarys and Trumps in our nation.
 
grip said:
I'm more a fan of Bernie Sanders but I'll vote for Hillary the devil I know over a kook like Trump. He might be a genius but he has no emotional control.
Click to expand...

Wait, didn't you just say you're a conservative? And yet you're a "fan" of Bernie Sanders? Riiight. : rolleyes:
 
TheGoverness said:
I honestly have no problem flipping a giant middle finger to the establishment.

But is Trump the best person to rally behind to do that? Hell no.
Click to expand...

Hmm... i think he's still ahead of Ché Guevara though.

Cue the hipsters with ironic Trump t-shirts.
 
I agree with the bold part of your post :

VanceMack said:
I believe we should believe them. Believing them does not mean we agree with them that Donald Trump attacked them. It merely means we are willing to take their allegations seriously and investigate them. And Im really grateful to see so many leftists eager to believe victims. that represents a 180degree turn on their past history of believing the victims of sexual assaults perpetrated by leftist politicians. And since we have this new found agreement that women should be believed then we also must examine exactly how others have responded to those victims of sexual assault...especially those people that are running for president.
Click to expand...
 
TheGoverness said:
Yes seriously.

I don't care about people's speculation that these women are lying, especially one from an extremely biased party.

What I am concerned with is proof. If you can present some definitive proof that these women are lying about being sexual assaulted by Donald Trump, then I will be happy to call them liars. Until then, I will stand by my decision to remain neutral towards these allegations.
Click to expand...

So you're basically taking the position of, "so, when did you stop beating your wife"? Ooooo-kay. I'm surprised at you, you are usually more objective than this. :shrug:
 
countryboy said:
So you're basically taking the position of, "so, when did you stop beating your wife"? Ooooo-kay. I'm surprised at you, you are usually more objective than this. :shrug:
Click to expand...

What? That's not even close to being an apt comparison.

I am choosing to remain neutral until definitive proof has been presented. I'm not accepting these allegations as gospel, nor am I saying that they are untrue. I am not taking sides here.

I am only asking for evidence. If you do have definitive proof that these women are lying about these allegations of sexual misconduct, then please, present it to me.
 
Last edited:
countryboy said:
So you're basically taking the position of, "so, when did you stop beating your wife"? Ooooo-kay. I'm surprised at you, you are usually more objective than this. :shrug:
Click to expand...

No, actually, you are the one trying to force an undemonstrated premise.

She is challenging you for evidence.
 
TheGoverness said:
What? That's not even close to being an apt comparison.

I am choosing to remain neutral until definitive proof has been presented. I'm not accepting these allegations as gospel, nor am I saying that they are untrue. I am not taking sides here.

I am only asking for evidence. If you do have definitive proof that these women are lying about these allegations of sexual misconduct, then please, present it to me.
Click to expand...

You don't sound very objective since you are asking for evidence that they are lying. How about evidence that they are telling the truth?

At the very least, it is highly suspect. Why have these women remained silent for so long?
 
countryboy said:
You don't sound very objective since you are asking for evidence that they are lying. How about evidence that they are telling the truth?
Click to expand...

I am asking you for evidence that they are lying, since that is what you (and other Trump supporters) believe. I have no way of knowing if these women are telling the truth, either. If someone can provide me with definitive proof that these women are in fact telling the truth or that they are lying about these allegations of sexual misconduct, then I will be happy to change my neutral stance.

So far, no one has presented any evidence to sway me either way, so I'm remaining neutral for the time being.

At the very least, it is highly suspect. Why have these women remained silent for so long?
Click to expand...

Like I said before, I do not care for speculation. I am only concerned about definitive proof.
 
volsrock said:
All come out at once at the same time month before election


Only some with a mental disease would believe this
Click to expand...

It's called political strategy. Ciinton apparently saved her best material for the most opportune moment in the race. Only a moron wouldn't use such damning evidence against ones opponent.

The stories may be delivered strategically but they're not false.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Ahem, I am still coping with your defining me as a 'conservative' as even here, in liberal Canada I am considered left of center. In fact I have kind of thrown a monkey wrench into the election cycle by demanding a provincial dental plan LOL!

What we DO share is a contempt for so-called "unprincipled" or in my case outright dishonesty. The Harper Tories would have made a deal with Satan to stay in office...in fact I think they did. They were mean not just lean, and hurt a lot of people to reach arbitrary policy targets. They also intrude into Canadians lives, and while we have a reputation for being "nice" our national sport is a the only professional sport that allows bare knuckled fighting....and we do not like to be told how to live our lives.

Integral to their loss and being relegated to the political junk heap, was how they went nuts over Syrian refugees. FFS Canada has always had its doors open to the dislocated. We are taught beginning in grade one about the "Underground Railway" which for many of us DEFINES what it is to be Canadian. We are nothing if we are not safe harbor for the displaced, endangered and in harm's way.

They also hurt a lot of people with ten years of belt tightening. At one point they illegally "clawed back" $166 a month from my pension. I thought it was a "one of" case, mistakes happen. Uh, uh, 6,000 seniors were hit.

Few Americans know this, but we have had a cancer growing in our land since the 1960's. It is called "residential schools" where thousands upon thousands of native children were taken from their families and homes and sent to live in prison-like circumstances having their culture beaten out of them. There are thousands of cases of sexual abuse, and thousands of broken natives who became alcoholics and drug addicts, thousands of suicides and broken families as a result of what was done to them. [I know one man who ran away from his "school" 17 times and was beaten each time.] It has been the crazy old aunt, or the elephant in the room, so hidden and so secret even I as a journalist had no idea of the breadth of the problem nor the severity of the treatment. It has been the 'conservative' way to keep it quiet, say nothing and pay out $ where you have to.

That won't wash anymore. Trudeau made a point of making his cabinet one half women, what he hasn't made a big deal of is he has six or seven natives also in cabinet, and they are ripping the lid off, exposing the wounds, so we can begin healing.

In a closing note, I don't trust any of them, especially your side of the 49th. I don't see much difference between the parties, frankly, in platform or integrity, but like you would err on the side of a "liberal" government so would I in the belief whatever they do won't be deliberately harmful, however the solution of "Obamacare" and how that rolled out will last a long time in this reporter's memory.

What counts now is how the Republicans back away from Trump. If they follow their house leader and abandon Trump for congressional 'block seats' they will inevitably end up exactly where they started - the guys who won't let anyone do anything. If they want to remain a viable alternative they are going to have to lose a lot of what has been their core, that is of course if there is anything left after Donald is done throwing his historical tantrum.
Click to expand...
Oops!

Sorry about that.

Somehow I got the impression you were a very moderate conservative, and I chalked-up your support for single-payer healthcare to your being Canadian.

I might have inferred incorrectly from your dislike of Obama. ;)
 
D_NATURED said:
It's called political strategy. Ciinton apparently saved her best material for the most opportune moment in the race. Only a moron wouldn't use such damning evidence against ones opponent.

The stories may be delivered strategically but they're not false.
Click to expand...

That's what people said about Reid's statement in 2012...except he later admitted his strategically delivered statements WERE false. "It worked, didn't it?"
 
Removable Mind said:
But Hillary is cut from the same mould that so many political figures are in both parties - and with both political philosophies (conservative and liberal...and all those in between or outside of those circles). She's a part of a machine that so many are, in both parties. She uses a lot of the same strategies and methodologies that people in both parties use. Most of whom subscribe to the two most noted political philosophies. The citizens are simply a means to an end. Neither party sees us in any other light. We see and hear them in a manner that they choose us to see and hear them. We hopefully respond to them in a manner that they want or prefer.

Even the media companies are owned by large non-journalistic companies who have the ability to use their ownership to persuade the public or to control information in specific ways via the media outlets that they own. Media companies produce revenues of over 1/3 of a trillion dollars annually. And they have the power of the press in their hands, the same power that the Framers wanted protected in the First Amendment. The same power that the Framers believed would help our nation maintain a stable republic form of government. But even they had enough insight to warn us that their Constitutional plan wasn't perfect and about how special interests could usurp that power and use it in inappropriate ways.

I think our problems go way beyond all of the Hillarys and Trumps in our nation.
Click to expand...

I agree our problems go way beyond both candidates. I believe those problems are aligned with Hillary Clinton and the massive global effort behind her candidacy. She is merely the tool it is using to continue expanding the problem further.
 
ocean515 said:
I agree our problems go way beyond both candidates. I believe those problems are aligned with Hillary Clinton and the massive global effort behind her candidacy. She is merely the tool it is using to continue expanding the problem further.
Click to expand...

You can't have it both ways. If you agree that our problems go way beyond Clinton and Trump, then why did you take it back with the following, "I believe..." comment?

What can I say other than, "As you wish, Ocean."??? But I still think you're being myopic regarding our political systems as a whole. What person who reaches the highest offices in the land isn't a tool? And for that matter, I would go as far to say that even State Legislator seat holders are also tools used as a means to an end. This is the grand problem here. Our political system is driven by tool makers, not "we the people".

And anyone who implies that it is a "partisan problem", is lost to two hundred and forty years of political propaganda and doesn't do anything but negate the essences of what the overall problem is. The money behind both parties are so enmeshed - so legislatively protected, and lord knows how much foreign donors are able to hide behind United Citizens. We just keep watching the bouncing ball and not the one who threw it.
 
Removable Mind said:
You can't have it both ways. If you agree that our problems go way beyond Clinton and Trump, then why did you take it back with the following, "I believe..." comment?

What can I say other than, "As you wish, Ocean."??? But I still think you're being myopic regarding our political systems as a whole. What person who reaches the highest offices in the land isn't a tool? And for that matter, I would go as far to say that even State Legislator seat holders are also tools used as a means to an end. This is the grand problem here. Our political system is driven by tool makers, not "we the people".

And anyone who implies that it is a "partisan problem", is lost to two hundred and forty years of political propaganda and doesn't do anything but negate the essences of what the overall problem is. The money behind both parties are so enmeshed - so legislatively protected, and lord knows how much foreign donors are able to hide behind United Citizens. We just keep watching the bouncing ball and not the one who threw it.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to keep a focus on the present.

I agree the Establishment Elite running both parties are part of the problem. What has been their reaction to Trump? The voters put Trump at the head of the ticket, not the Republican Establishment Elite. They have been trying to anything the can to stop him, but the voters would not hear it.

On Hillary's side, the effort behind her has never been more evident, and obvious.
 
ocean515 said:
I'm trying to keep a focus on the present.

I agree the Establishment Elite running both parties are part of the problem. What has been their reaction to Trump? The voters put Trump at the head of the ticket, not the Republican Establishment Elite. They have been trying to anything the can to stop him, but the voters would not hear it.

On Hillary's side, the effort behind her has never been more evident, and obvious.
Click to expand...

In other words, you believe that the "Angry Voters Movement" is using Trump to invoke the type of action we find stated in the famous passage from the DOI?:

"~~governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall become destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Click to expand...

Who ACTUALLY wins if Hillary becomes president? Who ACTUALLY wins if Trump become president?

Do you believe that if Trump takes office that all of the "angry voter" electorate who are responsible for him being seated in the White House are truly the winners? That they represent what will be positive change in our political system? Our government will somehow be recreated to be congruent to the ideals of the Framers? That the elitists/corporatist will lose their influence on elected officials? That special interests will become something future generations will only know existed by reading about them in history books?

Do you believe that if the conservatives maintain control in both chambers of Congress that Hillary will be able to give America away to foreign interest? Or that if both Chambers become liberal majorities that we can kiss American ideals goodbye and fall into grips of global leadership and be dissolved as a sovereign nation?
 
Removable Mind said:
In other words, you believe that the "Angry Voters Movement" is using Trump to invoke the type of action we find stated in the famous passage from the DOI?:



Who ACTUALLY wins if Hillary becomes president? Who ACTUALLY wins if Trump become president?

Do you believe that if Trump takes office that all of the "angry voter" electorate who are responsible for him being seated in the White House are truly the winners? That they represent what will be positive change in our political system? Our government will somehow be recreated to be congruent to the ideals of the Framers? That the elitists/corporatist will lose their influence on elected officials? That special interests will become something future generations will only know existed by reading about them in history books?

Do you believe that if the conservatives maintain control in both chambers of Congress that Hillary will be able to give America away to foreign interest? Or that if both Chambers become liberal majorities that we can kiss American ideals goodbye and fall into grips of global leadership and be dissolved as a sovereign nation?
Click to expand...

I certainly can't predict the future and what Trump will do. I do feel comfortable in my belief the voters behind Trump most certainly reflect the passage you posted from the DOI.

All things must start somewhere. Short of cataclysmic revolution, voters can only regain a voice in the small steps the framers provided. A Trump win, perhaps only in symbolism, reflects one of those small steps.

As I stated before, a Hillary win absolutely assures continued movement away from the foundational principles the framers established. I do believe if the White House and both chambers become liberal majorities, the United States will move further into the grips of globalist powers and sovereignty will be increasingly difficult to define.
 
ocean515 said:
I certainly can't predict the future and what Trump will do. I do feel comfortable in my belief the voters behind Trump most certainly reflect the passage you posted from the DOI.

All things must start somewhere. Short of cataclysmic revolution, voters can only regain a voice in the small steps the framers provided. A Trump win, perhaps only in symbolism, reflects one of those small steps.

As I stated before, a Hillary win absolutely assures continued movement away from the foundational principles the framers established. I do believe if the White House and both chambers become liberal majorities, the United States will move further into the grips of globalist powers and sovereignty will be increasingly difficult to define.
Click to expand...

Throughout our nation's history, conservatives in our government haven't done any better than liberals at maintaining founding principles. They're all too busy being self-absorbed and serving the highest donator...which hasn't been the electorate.

And our nation is so indoctrinated with the "concepts of conservatism and liberalism" that they'll leave claw marks departing from them at any time in the near future. In my opinion, Trump will be merely be a failed experiment if he takes office. Yes, we need a champion to carry out that passage from the DOI and really in a significant way, but I don't see Trump being even a small step in that direction.

And as far as Hillary is concerned, I dread the thought of her being president....dread it to the very core of my being.
 
Removable Mind said:
Throughout our nation's history, conservatives in our government haven't done any better than liberals at maintaining founding principles. They're all too busy being self-absorbed and serving the highest donator...which hasn't been the electorate.

And our nation is so indoctrinated with the "concepts of conservatism and liberalism" that they'll leave claw marks departing from them at any time in the near future. In my opinion, Trump will be merely be a failed experiment if he takes office. Yes, we need a champion to carry out that passage from the DOI and really in a significant way, but I don't see Trump being even a small step in that direction.

And as far as Hillary is concerned, I dread the thought of her being president....dread it to the very core of my being.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I have written elsewhere that I support a "redo" of the Republican Party. I have no clue what conservatism means anymore. Perhaps I never knew.

The Republican party has taken on issues and platforms it has no business being involved with. Religion and abortion are individual beliefs that should remain in that context. There is a reason separation was in the founding documents.

As I wrote, Trump may not be the vehicle himself, but his election would be symbolic of voters doing what is available to them to take back the country from the Elites they allowed in the Hen House.

I share your dread regarding Hillary. Not just for the corrupt person she is, but for her successful placement by the powers who are using her.
 
ocean515 said:
For what it's worth, I have written elsewhere that I support a "redo" of the Republican Party. I have no clue what conservatism means anymore. Perhaps I never knew.

The Republican party has taken on issues and platforms it has no business being involved with. Religion and abortion are individual beliefs that should remain in that context. There is a reason separation was in the founding documents.

As I wrote, Trump may not be the vehicle himself, but his election would be symbolic of voters doing what is available to them to take back the country from the Elites they allowed in the Hen House.

I share your dread regarding Hillary. Not just for the corrupt person she is, but for her successful placement by the powers who are using her.
Click to expand...

See there, we do have a few things that we don't disagree on. ;)
 
_Sal said:
so you think you can just walk up to a woman, grab her crotch and if she doesn't knee you that's consent?

what is consent if you don't ask

and you had best be careful here because Trump thinks consent means she didn't file a lawsuit...so tell me....is that consent?
Click to expand...
Listen Sal, hate to break it to you, but you females are a very fickle lot indeed. Being a nice guy for the majority of my life, I have seen certain guys that get to do JUST THAT sort of thing. Women often say they want things one way, but it apparently is not so often the truth. Instance the 'Bad Boy' syndrome. Sorry, but the bad boys do get away with a lot, its allowed, its condoned, its often desired. An identified 'nice guy' tries the same thing--- slap. I taught high school, I saw over and over and over the guys that ended up with the top girls, the way they treated girls in general... and who the other girls were then jealous of.

Do not know how many girls in my younger days that I have been attracted to, respected and always treated properly. Don't know how many had bad boy boyfriends that cheated on them, disrespected them, etc... and I was there, you know the 'nice guy' to give her, them, a shoulder to cry upon, to listen, to commiserate... wanna guess how many of those I eventually ended up dating or even going out with as a possibility? Wanna know, after all that, what the percentages were that went back to the guy that screwed them over, or wanted to go back?

Sorry, but its true, certain people can act in certain ways and its not considered by many women that they are doing it to as offensive. Often not only allowed, but some girls seem absolutely exhilarated by such conduct.

Not all women certainly. And I am still a fairly nice guy, but I understood the need to change my ways to fit the reality, not the perception. You girls, over the years, have trained me in what that reality over perception is.

You can deny it. Go ahead, doesn't change things.

But now up on the soapbox, much of what Trump said was bravado, and many men, talking to other men, have that, when talking, in spades. Different from action, the actual. Ask Bill about actual, ask Hill about defending and protecting what we know is an actual predator, a sexual harasser and sexual abuser/molestor and probably a rapist. Ask her about her underlying love for women when she was looking to destroy the ones that could become some sort of threat to Bill...and thus to her.

There is a vast difference between the two, the three.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom