American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

[Talksteer]

AreOut said:

Countdown said:

Brilliant logic. Almost Trump-esque... first make a statement which is completely false and then suggest actresses are de-facto wes....

rofl, fking for money is called prostitution whatever fancy name you invent for it

So if a full length dramatic film included a sex scene where the two actors engaged in actual sex that would make them prostitutes?

What about if two actors kissed presumably that would make them professional kissers, what about if they drove some cars around a race track, that would presumably make them professional racing drivers.

Both people in a porn film are being paid, only one person in a prostitution situation is being paid. There is a big difference in the dynamic and no assumption should be made about the practitioner of either being prepared to do the other.

[230TE]

Talksteer said:

How about this from Vox; how a Clinton White House would actual operate and the gap between Hilary in office (popular) and running for office (unpopular):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hIFDaGs8l8

Based on the above I think there is a very good chance she'd actually be a very successful US President as one of the principle features of the US president is that in terms of power they are relatively limited. Her previous suggests that she'd be good a finding acceptable compromises, Trump on the other hand claims to be able to do a whole bunch of stuff that is very much not within the scope of the US president's powers or would require them to be used in a very dangerous manner.

Imagine President Trump as opposed to candidate Trump not accepting the result of election or creating special prosecutors to jail his opponents.

Edited by Talksteer on Sunday 23 October 18:26

Thanks for that. It started badly. A couple of minutes in I was getting flashbacks to all the excuses the Labour spin doctors made for Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband ("he may seem a bit weird in public but he's really nice when you get to know him"), and a couple of minutes after that I started wondering whether vox.com was a Clinton campaign website. Then it got more interesting, and I think reinforced my own perception of Clinton's big weakness - the lack of vision or imagination for the future of the United States.

I well understand that the President's power is limited, and quite right too. But it's very much a leadership role in terms of setting the direction of travel for the country. A good President will have some kind of vision, and I'm not getting that from anything I've seen of HRC. Trump is as mad as a box of badgers, but you have to admit that "Make America Great Again" sounds like a plan, even if it turns out not to be.

That Unrep chap seems a bit strange - appears to think Hillary has the right to unconditional love from everyone, and that anyone who suggests she is less than perfect must be a Trump supporter. I do wonder whether he's slightly less confident about Hillary's chances than he claims to be - there seems to be a bit of insecurity there. Or maybe he's just trolling.

[AreOut]

Talksteer said:

So if a full length dramatic film included a sex scene where the two actors engaged in actual sex that would make them prostitutes?

What about if two actors kissed presumably that would make them professional kissers, what about if they drove some cars around a race track, that would presumably make them professional racing drivers.

Both people in a porn film are being paid, only one person in a prostitution situation is being paid. There is a big difference in the dynamic and no assumption should be made about the practitioner of either being prepared to do the other.

but those are not "full length dramatic films", those are films that include only sex scenes, and sometimes male "actors" are working for free because that's how they are underpaid compared to women, most famous male pornstars earn less than many totally anonymous females

don't get me wrong I don't have anything against prostitution/porn but let's not pretend those are romantic dramas

[unrepentant]

Talksteer said:

AreOut said:

Countdown said:

Brilliant logic. Almost Trump-esque... first make a statement which is completely false and then suggest actresses are de-facto wes....

rofl, fking for money is called prostitution whatever fancy name you invent for it

So if a full length dramatic film included a sex scene where the two actors engaged in actual sex that would make them prostitutes?

What about if two actors kissed presumably that would make them professional kissers, what about if they drove some cars around a race track, that would presumably make them professional racing drivers.

Both people in a porn film are being paid, only one person in a prostitution situation is being paid. There is a big difference in the dynamic and no assumption should be made about the practitioner of either being prepared to do the other.

I think you're wasting your breath trying to have an intelligent discussion with that poster.

The fact that Spunkers assumed that an adult film actress would sleep with him for money is indicative of his basic misogyny. I saw the woman being interviewed yesterday and I believe that she would be a credible witness. Trump blusters and threatens to sue in the hope that other women will be fearful of coming forward. I believe that this will all end up in court as I suspect that Gloria Allred is preparing a large civil suit against Trump that will be just another nail in his personal coffin over the next couple of years.

In other news the latest ABC poll came out today and has Trump trailing by 12 points at 50-38. Anything below 40 truly is meltdown for the GOP. If this poll is accurate, and the numbers have been trending this way, the house is in danger. 40% is the absolute floor for a republican, the nominee starts at 45%. Given that the vast majority of republican voters in this election who are still doing so are voting red despite Trump in order to save the SCOTUS, these numbers are shocking.

[smn159]

rovermorris999 said:

It seems Hillary isn't much liked even by those who intend to vote for her so how's this for a scenario.....

It's polling day and the opinion polls have Hillary with a commanding lead, it looks a done deal. Lots of those who were going to reluctantly vote for Hillary think 'she's won, I don't like her so I won't bother voting; it's safe, Trump won't get in'.
Trump voters on the other hand are much more fired up and committed plus there is a lot of 'shy' Trump support which does turn out.
Cue dropping jaws on the news programmes as the results come in, much like after the Brexit vote. Hello President Trump.

Could this happen?

Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

Trump is telling everyone that the election is rigged, plus Hillary has a big lead in the polls. This is likely to depress turn out in general and Republican turn out in particular (why bother if it's 'rigged' anyway?)

" there is a lot of 'shy' Trump support " - any evidence for this? Doesn't seem likely to me that there are loads of 'shy' US Trump supporters. I can't remember meeting any Americans at all that I would consider shy!

[FourWheelDrift]

smn159 said:

" there is a lot of 'shy' Drumpf support " - any evidence for this? Doesn't seem likely to me that there are loads of 'shy' US Drumpf supporters. I can't remember meeting any Americans at all that I would consider shy!

Certainly not shy from what I can see here - https://i.imgur.com/aCOcBD9.gifv

[rovermorris999]

smn159 said:

Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

Trump is telling everyone that the election is rigged, plus Hillary has a big lead in the polls. This is likely to depress turn out in general and Republican turn out in particular (why bother if it's 'rigged' anyway?)

" there is a lot of 'shy' Trump support " - any evidence for this? Doesn't seem likely to me that there are loads of 'shy' US Trump supporters. I can't remember meeting any Americans at all that I would consider shy!

Not wishful thinking on my part and the 'shy' Trump support was merely an hypothesis, a scenario as I said.

[dudleybloke]

"Make America Grate Again"

[anonymous-user]

Anyone seen these SNL debates with Alec Baldwin as DT, rofl

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ta1UxnmeP8

[AreOut]

did he force her to accept?! Since when is offering someone(especially a pornstar) money for sex considered an assault? As for her allegations that she went to his room with her friends because she didn't feel safe alone and that she felt unpleasant because he started kissing them that's ridiculous again.

[230TE]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Slightly OT but I just looked at that HuffPost story and it has this at the bottom:

"Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S."

That doesn't seem to be related to the actual story being reported. Is this kind of thing normal for US news sources? It's a bit unsubtle.

[GCH]

230TE said:

Slightly OT but I just looked at that HuffPost story and it has this at the bottom:

"Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S."

That doesn't seem to be related to the actual story being reported. Is this kind of thing normal for US news sources? It's a bit unsubtle.

No. Just Ariana Huffington firmly nailing her colours to the mast. It appears at the bottom of any article mentioning the d!ckhead

[Vaud]

AreOut said:

did he force her to accept?! Since when is offering someone(especially a pornstar) money for sex considered an assault?

Do you think an adult industry actress is the same as a prostitute?

[rscott]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

AreOut appears to think that because she's an adult movie star, she's simply a piece of meat which anyone can do what they like to as long as they hand over the money afterward.

[unrepentant]

Vaud said:

AreOut said:

did he force her to accept?! Since when is offering someone(especially a pornstar) money for sex considered an assault?

Do you think an adult industry actress is the same as a prostitute?

He's already said he does but then he is a total cretin.

[Vaud]

rscott said:

AreOut appears to think that because she's an adult movie star, she's simply a piece of meat which anyone can do what they like to as long as they hand over the money afterward.

Quite.

[230TE]

GCH said:

No. Just Ariana Huffington firmly nailing her colours to the mast. It appears at the bottom of any article mentioning the d!ckhead

Thanks for explaining. Fair enough if it was still her train set, but it isn't any more, so I'm a bit surprised the AOL corporate lawyers have let it through. Presumably AOL aren't bothered though. Or their CEO hates Trump.

[iphonedyou]

The Hypno-Toad said:

It will be far, far worse if Clintbot wins especially if its with a very slender majority.

The Trumps appealing to the worst kind of good ole boy and conspiracy nut job and they will be very pissed off if he doesn't win and the "whole Washington elite and media conspiracy" were responsible in their eyes. And remember a lot of these people have guns...

This election is now depressing me quite profoundly. If The Trump loses by a small margin, he will tie the US up in endless lawsuits and attempts to impeach Clintbot. His lifes work will become to ruin her and he'll spend as much of his fortune as it takes or until he gets imprisoned himself for fraud/sexual assault/rabbit worrying.
We need Clintbot to win with a massive majority so that any attempt by The Trump and his "They took our jjjooobbbss," mates can't even get started. But that doesn't look much like happening and so I see an extremely worrying few months and possibly years ahead of us. Plus the actual idea of Clintbot having a majority bigger enough to do what she wants is pretty damn scary as well. The only thing you can say is that neither of them will stand any chance of getting a second term as the American public surely won't make this mistake again.

A turd. Or a douche. How in the name of all that is holy as it come to this?

Could you please fix your autocorrect or proof your posts? Takes the edge off your post when you keep misspelling her name!

[GCH]

230TE said:

GCH said:

No. Just Ariana Huffington firmly nailing her colours to the mast. It appears at the bottom of any article mentioning the d!ckhead

Thanks for explaining. Fair enough if it was still her train set, but it isn't any more, so I'm a bit surprised the AOL corporate lawyers have let it through. Presumably AOL aren't bothered though. Or their CEO hates Trump.

She is still editor-in-chief and her surname on the masthead and URL. Would imagine when AOL bought it there were certain terms regarding editorial freedom retained..

[limpsfield]

rscott said:

AreOut appears to think that because she's an adult movie star, she's simply a piece of meat which anyone can do what they like to as long as they hand over the money afterward.

I seem to remember the poster being particularly active on the missing Malaysian plane thread suggesting a bunch of crazy theories so I am not too surprised.