Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Congrats on the new home first time buyer!
And look at it this way...if Trump starts WWIII, think of the money you'll save on mortgage payments!
US Politics VI
- Thread starter DaveC
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Congrats on the new home first time buyer!
And look at it this way...if Trump starts WWIII, think of the money you'll save on mortgage payments!
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I don't judge her for being a porn star, don't see the relevance at all of mentioning that as far as her motives.
Honestly I judge her for having sex with Trump. Even though it was once. Not really of course, we all make mistakes. But I do seriously think she lowered her standards with that one. I think many women have had transactional relationships with him, including possibly his wives. Not discounting that there was possibly/probably love involved in the beginning. But I bet you have to make plenty of deals and sell off parts of yourself to stay with him.
Honestly I judge her for having sex with Trump. Even though it was once. Not really of course, we all make mistakes. But I do seriously think she lowered her standards with that one. I think many women have had transactional relationships with him, including possibly his wives. Not discounting that there was possibly/probably love involved in the beginning. But I bet you have to make plenty of deals and sell off parts of yourself to stay with him.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
YES. Stomach churning stuff, right there.
I too don't give a crap about Trump's affairs or consensual encounters with prostitutes. But since he has been accused of being a sexual predator, I do wonder what would happen if people pressed further on that issue. Again, I sadly don't think women talking about that would sway Trump supporters any, but I would be curious to see how that would play out if his accusers officially tried to press legal charges or something.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
well if a lie about it can get him impeached like Clinton, that would be cool!
can anyone explain why Stormy Daniels is being treated like a hero, whereas Monica Lewinsky was vilified? all this hurts my brain
can anyone explain why Stormy Daniels is being treated like a hero, whereas Monica Lewinsky was vilified? all this hurts my brain
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
I usually don't agree with what you write in terms of politics, but I appreciate your posts. I think most people here would describe themselves as center left, and it's nice to have another perspective, and as far as I know you're always civil.
I’ll second this.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
That's a valid question, mama cass. I honestly don't know, other than it's likely party loyalty/hatred playing out. If you hate Trump, of course you're going to support Stormy, if you like him, you're going to think she's lying. Same thing applies to everything with Clinton and Monica.
And I think some of it is the fact that the world was a different place in the '90s than it is now, and attitudes on these situations will continue to evolve and change with time. Not that that excuses or justifies the attacks and insults made towards Monica, of course, just that that sadly likely explains some of the difference in reactions as well. I think Monica would have an easier time getting sympathy and support today, though, thankfully.
I never care about a politician's affairs, regardless of their party. That's for them, the person they cheated with, and their families to sort out, it has no impact on my life one way or another (though I obviously think a president should spend more time focusing on handling serious matters than trying to hook up with people). The only time it ever bugs me is if said politician is having affairs while also going around harping on about how we need to "protect the sanctity of marriage" by not letting gay people get married and other bullshit of that sort. But it's not the affair itself that's the problem there, it's, obviously, the hypocrisy.
And I think some of it is the fact that the world was a different place in the '90s than it is now, and attitudes on these situations will continue to evolve and change with time. Not that that excuses or justifies the attacks and insults made towards Monica, of course, just that that sadly likely explains some of the difference in reactions as well. I think Monica would have an easier time getting sympathy and support today, though, thankfully.
I never care about a politician's affairs, regardless of their party. That's for them, the person they cheated with, and their families to sort out, it has no impact on my life one way or another (though I obviously think a president should spend more time focusing on handling serious matters than trying to hook up with people). The only time it ever bugs me is if said politician is having affairs while also going around harping on about how we need to "protect the sanctity of marriage" by not letting gay people get married and other bullshit of that sort. But it's not the affair itself that's the problem there, it's, obviously, the hypocrisy.
Last edited:
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
I think you know the answer to that. It's all about politics, not principle. Evangelicals are taking a lot of heat for overlooking Trump's personal failings because they support his political agenda...but feminists (and Democrats in general) made pretty much the same bargain with Bill Clinton. And as long as HRC had political prospects, and Bill was useful, people were willing to overlook Clinton's sleaziness (he was a featured speaker at every Democratic convention since he left office)....including accusations of sexual harassment and rape.
Trump's supporters are essentially making the same deal. The only thing I'll say about the evangelicals is this...if you know Trump is really a sleaze and opportunist and is pretty much faking his kinship with you in order to exploit you and get your support, and you're still cynically supporting him because he advances your issues...I can sort of understand that. After Trump is gone, as with President Clinton, it's going to be the bills he signs into law and the judges he picks that remain. Who cares what Clinton did in his personal life....we have RBG and Stephen Breyer, two people who always going to preserve a woman's right to choose, on the Supreme Court. That's politics. That's thinking strategically.
But if you're an evangelical who really believes what he's selling you about himself, you need to take a look in the mirror.
Last edited:
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Sad but true. It's tribalism, pure and simple.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
yeah i guess it is political tribalism, ugh it's all so hypocritical...
There's a few things wrong here though...
From the affair stand point, I don't give a crap. The continued support from the "moral" majority just shows their hypocrisy, but supporting this man to begin with was as hypocritical as it gets for anyone who claims to hold the moral high ground.
You're against gay marriage because it would ruin the sanctity of marriage, but you voted for a serial adulterer who's been married multiple times? Yea, you can fuck off (not you moonlit, the people who that describes)
That aside... I personally don't give a turkey about Trump or Stormy schtooping each other, much like I didn't care about whatever Bill and Monica did. Where the problem starts is when there are potentially illegal activities done to hide the affair.
Bill Clinton lied under oath. That's why he was impeached. I'm generally not a Bill Clinton fan, and I think he gets a little more credit and not enough blame for some of the things that went wrong in the 2000s. The housing crisis? Yea... Bush gets the blame, but Bill set that bubble in motion; and almost nobody mentions that when discussing it.
But back to the matter at hand... the lewd details of the Lewinsky affair became the headlines, but he actually did commit a crime. One can debate how serious we should have taken it, but he did lie under oath. (This is apparently now less of an issue for our current Republican leadership. I'm sure that's merely coincidental).
With Trump and Daniels, once you stop being distracted by the bells and sparkly lights, the questions that remain are a) were campaign funds used to pay her off, and b) was she physically threatened.
What those two boneheads did consensually does not concern me, nor should it anyone else who's able to see through the bullshit.
iron yuppie
ONE love, blood, life
Maybe not on topic, but the housing bubble predates Clinton significantly. The rampant deregulation and new investment packages introduced in the 80s are the source. If you want to blame someone in the Clinton years, it's Alan Greenspan.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
woah woah woah - first of all, let's please not make what bill clinton did and this stormy daniels thing out to be the same thing. they are definitely not. the lying is one thing but bill clinton used the power of his office to sleep with an employee. that is predatory and it's exactly what harvey weinstein's life right now is (rightfully IMO) in ruins for doing. trump sleeping with stormy daniels may have been a tawdry and gross affair but by all accounts it was not predatory, exploitative, or forced in any way, and moreover trump certainly hasn't lied under oath to deny it.
none of this is even considering any of the unproven allegations throughout clinton's career of more shenanigans like this.
donald trump is certainly a sexual predator in other cases as he has admitted himself, but let's please not make the mistake of equating the clinton-lewinsky affair with the trump-daniels story.
yea no kidding, that was by far the most disturbing part of the interview to me and it was just glossed over. thinking about his daughter as he's about to hook up with a woman? that's really gross even in the best case, most well-intentioned scenario but it always makes me wonder what's buried in his and ivanka's past when i hear about something like this (since he's obviously been sexually attracted to her at least since she was a young teenager - blech i feel like i need a shower after typing that
), or what she thinks when she reads something like that. ugh.
Last edited:
I was going to say it’s interesting that many people who insist that Trump’s moral choices don’t matter then make sure they label her as a porn star as that’s somehow a relevant fact. Who cares what she does for work?
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Oh give me a break.
"Porn star" is mentioned in every single article about this mess. When the story first "broke" here, the comments mentioned she's a porn star. If she were an accountant, no one would be mentioning that every time her name was brought up. The story is "Donald Trump slept with a porn star just after his wife gave birth." The media loves this story because it's salacious, and her being a port star is part of that.
So spare me. It's a big part of why so many people are so obsessed with this story. As for her credibility, I already said I believed her. Look for offense elsewhere.
"Porn star" is mentioned in every single article about this mess. When the story first "broke" here, the comments mentioned she's a porn star. If she were an accountant, no one would be mentioning that every time her name was brought up. The story is "Donald Trump slept with a porn star just after his wife gave birth." The media loves this story because it's salacious, and her being a port star is part of that.
So spare me. It's a big part of why so many people are so obsessed with this story. As for her credibility, I already said I believed her. Look for offense elsewhere.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Oh, you're right about the prominent differences between Clinton and Trump, especially in relation to the issues involved. I also agree with Headache about the real concerns worth focusing on in relation to the whole Trump-Stormy business, and the reasons Clinton got in trouble.
For my part, though, I was mainly trying to explain and theorize about the difference in the public's reactions to Stormy and Monica themselves, and why some people were/are more willing to believe one woman, but not the other. I do agree that that's a question and discussion the public needs to have more of as well (and has been trying to have, thanks to the whole MeToo movement and all).
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Once again, I agree with this. There was indeed power and work dynamic in play with Clinton that wasn't there with Trump (and promising to get Daniels on The Apprentice is not quite the same). There's also the fact that Clinton's machine, while he was in office, attempted to destroy Lewinsky and her reputation. And the fact that Trump's behavior was not while he was President of the United States, and didn't occur in the Oval Office. Even if Clinton never lied about the affair, what he did was still probably worse than what Trump did. So I get your point.
Clinton's lying under oath and subsequent impeachment due in part to lying about the affair, is a separate matter from his conduct with Lewinsky...the lying came later, and it's a trap Trump could still fall into. But that remains to be seen.
That said, there are some other obvious parallels, but in terms of the egregiousness of the offenses, Clinton's behaviour was probably, in this instance, worse than what Trump did.
Last edited:
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
i am guessing the "moral police" can't shame or destroy Daniels, she's a porn star and proud of it, so there's nowhere for a moral shaming to go, whereas Lewinsky was young, naive and vulnerable so they could have an absolute field day with her
guess it's all about how much control a woman has - Daniels is in control, Lewinsky was not, one was not a victim, the other was, so an easy target (thinking out loud)
guess it's all about how much control a woman has - Daniels is in control, Lewinsky was not, one was not a victim, the other was, so an easy target (thinking out loud)
Last edited:
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Ssssh. We're not supposed to mention her profession. That fact that she's a porn star isn't a relevant fact.
Seriously though, I agree with you.
Last edited:
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Maybe you could try to stop making snide comments like this, that are simply based on who is posting what. If you think I don't realize that, I do.
I don't think it's relevant that she's a porn star, in the context of what I posted. That's simply my opinion that has zero to do with you Nick. Believe it or not.
He is always snide and super outraged when anybody calls him out.
Even though he was the one who said:
But yeah, he's only using the descriptor because that's what the media has been doing. It's obviously super relevant here.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
totally, i didn't want that post to come across as accusatory or anything, i just don't want us to fall into the very easy trap of either downplaying what clinton did, or exaggerating what trump (probably) did, which is happening all over the internet right now.
if this story came out even a year ago i probably myself would have been downplaying clinton's affair because until recently i had always sort of considered it a story of "married man cheats with co-worker and lies about it" and never really reflected on the massive power gap in those kinds of situations, and how it's so insanely hard for anyone in the position lewinsky was in to say no without taking enormous risks of all sorts. listening to many of the stories of #metoo has been pretty eye-opening though.
Wide Awake n AZ
The Fly
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2017
- Messages
- 296
John Edwards was indicted for the same thing...eventually, he was found not guilty of one count and a mistrial for lack of jury consensus was declared by the judge on 5 counts.
And he was WAY away from election day. There is a significant difference between what he did, and having campaign funds (if so) used to cover up a major issue that could affect the election in the days before the general election for President of the United States.
No...this doesn't compare to Clinton. But only because Mueller isn't a frickin' half-cocked cowboy looking to depose Trump to get him to perjure himself on a question that had nothing to do with the reason the special counsel was appointed. But there is a clear difference...Trump did not lie under oath.
But if he used campaign money to keep a personal secret from revelation in the days before the nation decided on its President, with full knowledge that personal character is an impacting factor?
It's 10X worse, from the point of campaign finance law, than what Edwards did. It is not 10X worse than what Edwards did...he was a scumbag of the highest order, and a fake one at that, while Trump wears his scumbaggery proudly. But from the general spirit of campaign finance laws and elections, Trumps would be pretty awful.
And he was WAY away from election day. There is a significant difference between what he did, and having campaign funds (if so) used to cover up a major issue that could affect the election in the days before the general election for President of the United States.
No...this doesn't compare to Clinton. But only because Mueller isn't a frickin' half-cocked cowboy looking to depose Trump to get him to perjure himself on a question that had nothing to do with the reason the special counsel was appointed. But there is a clear difference...Trump did not lie under oath.
But if he used campaign money to keep a personal secret from revelation in the days before the nation decided on its President, with full knowledge that personal character is an impacting factor?
It's 10X worse, from the point of campaign finance law, than what Edwards did. It is not 10X worse than what Edwards did...he was a scumbag of the highest order, and a fake one at that, while Trump wears his scumbaggery proudly. But from the general spirit of campaign finance laws and elections, Trumps would be pretty awful.
I, uh, wouldn't necessarily be so confident in that one
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I think Trump should take Howard Stern's advice and get out of DC.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Just saw the commercial-Comey's doing an interview with George Stephanopoulos Sunday night April 15th. Nothing's off limits. He has that book coming out.
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
The idea of an FBI director doing a "tell all" is almost a contradiction in terms. And shame on ABC if they're suggesting in the promo that "nothing is off limits." There's loads he's legally proscribed from discussing. I suppose by "nothing is off limits", they mean George can ask, but James won't necessarily answer (and they probably won't air those questions).
What a showboat this guy is, starting with going on TV and injecting himself into the 2016 election, an action that arguably helped put us where we are today.
What a showboat this guy is, starting with going on TV and injecting himself into the 2016 election, an action that arguably helped put us where we are today.
Last edited:
Wide Awake n AZ
The Fly
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2017
- Messages
- 296
I feel like his questions will pertain to actual political crimes. Even Stormy Daniels relates to campaign finance.
Wide Awake n AZ
The Fly
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2017
- Messages
- 296
Comey should be a Trumpian Icon...they are just too stupid or deluded to realize Comey handed them their hero in the White House.
- Status
Similar threads
