Trump's Lies

More of Trump's lies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSE-XoVKaXg

Trump was caught on tape talking about groping (sexually assaulting) women after marrying Melania. Even Geraldo Rivera on Fox News was disgusted. An event he was supposed to be at in Wisconsin tomorrow has been cancelled. Unwanted touching of people's genitals and kissing them without permission are crimes. This makes perjury look like nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html

 

A couple of members here said that Trump shouldn't apologize for what he said about the Central Park Five because he was just going by the information available at the time. Well, despite DNA evidence proving otherwise, Trump still thinks they're guilty.

Donald Trump Says Central Park Five Are Guilty, Despite DNA Evidence - NBC News

 

And in the meantime, the left has no problem whatsoever with Hillary laughing about getting a brutal rapist set free, and viciously smearing the women who were victims of her husband's sexual assaults. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

And, once again, Hillary Rodham Clinton committed PERJURY. She lied to Congress while under oath, and that as a "high crime" (felony) disqualifies her from holding the office of POTUS, for which "high crimes and misdemeanors" are impeachable offenses.

If you keep ignoring those pesky facts, do you really think that I'll stop pointing them out?

 

I don't think that most people are going to vote for either Hillary or Trump based on their personalities. Both candidates come across to me as dislikeable, as people that I wouldn't want to have a beer with.

For many of us this election is all about issues and underlying political philosophies. That's what I'm going to be voting for. That's why Donald Trump is attractive to so many people.

Trump thinks that foreigners who want to enter the United States must obey US immigration laws and that there must be penalties for failing to do so. He doesn't believe that the law should be optional for certain ethnic groups, even if they tend to bloc-vote. He's an unrepentant nationalist who proposes to be President of the United States, not president of the world, the United Nations, the IMF or the G-12. He favors policies that are in the interest of the American middle class, not the rich elites in the NYC-Washington DC axis and in Silicon Valley who often seem to loathe and distrust the rest of America and its traditions. He opposes the deindustrialization of the United States. (We won WWII because we out-manufactured our opponents and flooded the world with ships, tanks and planes. What's going to happen if we get in a war with China and they manufacture everything?)

But at the same time, he isn't a doctrinaire "religious-right" Republican. He isn't going to try to outlaw abortion, forbid the teaching of evolution or turn America into some weird image of a shariah state. (I viscerally dislike the religious right.)

One of the more interesting aspects of contemporary politics around the world is how it is shifting away from the increasingly meaningless 19th century "left-right" dichotomy (kept alive by the Cold War, I guess), towards a division between the people and the elites that presume to be their rulers. It's happening all over the world and is visible in the Brexit vote in the UK, in the rise of countless populist parties in Europe, and in the Trump phenomenon here in the United States.

It's ironic that the political left has always insisted that it is the representative of "the people". But objectively, if you look at left voting blocs not only in the US but in Europe too, the left is almost always composed of elites. The journalistic elites, the media elites, the government elites, the academic and intellectual elites, all of the people who tell you what to do and what to think, tilt much farther left than the average person in a middle-tier job in a less stylish city.

What is interesting is that the increasingly endangered middle classes are achieving what the old left would have called "class consciousness". They are rising up and expressing their alienation from the direction they are being led and from all of the new-orthodoxies being forced down their throats. It isn't just Trump voters in the United States, we see the same thing in Poland, Hungary, France and the Netherlands too. It's a grand political reorientation that is probably going to define politics for the next generation.

In the face of that, Trump's or Hillary's personal foibles kind of recede into insignificance in my opinion.

 

Why don't you start your own thread about Hillary instead of throwing a Trump thread off-topic? This forum has some of the worst moderators. Just because you keep trying to deflect from the topic at hand does not mean I will stop pointing out Trump's negatives. You consistently refuse to acknowledge anything Trump has done wrong.

Trump's casino was fined $650,000 for hiding black employees to appease a racist mobster.

Trump's Casino Was Fined $650,000 for Catering to a Racist Mobster*

The American left is also composed of the majority of minorities (this includes black people, Latinos, and Asians), women, and other historically-marginalized groups (LGBT). For decades, college-educated people in the U.S. have mostly voted for Republican presidents.

 

I actually think just the opposite. Even "smart" people tend to focus on only a few issues and have neither the time nor inclination to look into, yet alone understand all of the policy issues that come up throughout the election cycle. It is much easier to latch on to loose political party associations, few soundbites, personality assumptions, or hair styles which are things that I think will influence the vast majority of voters.

 

What happened during the Bill Clinton scandal was that Hillary's popularity went up. It's just my guess as a social scientist, but her popularity probably went up because women could relate to the situation. Even though it is not something I would do, women often attack the mistresses. It's irrational to lay all the blame on the mistresses, but it happens. Women mostly see her as a victim of her husband's actions.

 

When I see something that needs a dose of truth and reality, I jump in.

Actually, we have really good moderators. You have no idea of the amount of SPAM and other nonsense that we catch, delete, and ban the posters before it's ever seen here. When we moderate, we moderate very fairly; never once have I ever deleted or altered a post here because I didn't agree with it. However, when I'm a participant, I'm a participant. The 2 roles (moderator and participant) are mutually exclusive, and have very little to do (if anything) with each other.

Continue to point them out, who's stopping you, or even suggesting you stop? However, as I said, when I see something I believe needs a shot of truth or reality, I'm throwing my 2 cents in. As a participant.

The only perfect person I know of was born 2016 years ago, and was not named Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. The big difference is the enormity of the mistakes, and how they impact not only our justice system, but the citizens in general.

Hillary Clinton committed multiple counts of perjury, and got away with it.

Civil fine vs. Felony.....surely from your Criminal Justice studies, you know that's like comparing a head cold to cancer, right?

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.

 

Isn't presenting accusations against Candidate A (he lies!) that are at least equally applicable to Candidate B (she lies!), as if the accusations constitute good reasons for voting for Candidate B and not voting for A, an inherently weak argument?

 

I'm arguing that the Trump phenomenon in the United States is part of a larger populist surge visible in many countries around the world. In other words, it isn't a referendum about Trump's or Hillary's personalities or hair styles. It's about much bigger issues than that. Issues that the media seem strangely unwilling to even mention.

It's about nationalism vs globalism. It's about the people of Hungary, Poland, France, Britain, the Netherlands and the United States desiring to preserve and protect their own histories and national distinctiveness, in the face of those who want to homogenize away all national peculiarities into one single 'European' or 'World' identity. That's why immigration is such a big issue everywhere and why the elites' open borders idea has become so controversial on the street.

It's about nationalism vs globalism. It's about the people of all of these countries perceiving their nations's industries as their nation's industries, in the face of those who believe it makes no difference (except to their company's bottom line) where the factories are and what country the company's employees live in. It's about people who (with good reason) perceive industrial strength as a good indicator of national strength and why they oppose the continual deindustrialization of the Western world.

And ultimately all around the Western world, it's about the broad middle classes who perceive themselves as the heart and soul of their countries displaying new 'class-consciousness' and realizing that the elites that rule them and tell them what to believe, don't have their interests at heart at all and too often despise them. It's the realization that the elites up above, along with the elites' poor welfare-state clients down below, are doing their best to squeeze the middle class out of existence.

I think that these tendencies are exceedingly important. They are going to redefine politics here and in Europe for the next generation. (No more stereotypical 'left' and 'right'.) That's why I think that trying to reduce the upcoming US election to personalities is just stupid.

What it does explain is why Trump's poll numbers hold up no matter how high his opponents can push his personal negatives. It explains why, as Hillary plaintively bleated, "Why aren't I 50 points ahead??" It isn't about who is a bigger liar or who says something rude. The election is about issues, it's about the future direction not only of our own country, but of Western civilization as a whole. It needs to be seen in context.

 

Oh, I agree with you and these things are central focuses of what the election means to me. Having been in some of these countries and others where nationalism is rising in the past year and seen first-hand how populations are expressing their outrage and desires for changes to existing policies, I completely understand the context.

However, when I talk to most people about the election or read most popular media and related information, this type of information is usually either glossed over, if not omitted entirely. Maybe a lot of people pick up on the stuff we're talking about here on a subconscious level or in a manner that isn't as clearly defined, but asking most people to articulate their voting preferences is an exercise in better reciting points made in US Weekly or on "The View"...not the most geopoltiically charged media outlets in my opinion!

 

I’m half Hungarian and I’m deeply worried about what’s happening in Hungary today. It's populist nationalism without memory.

In the late 9th century, the Hungarians were living a nomadic life somewhere the Don and the Dnepr. The country known today as Hungary didn’t exist and was inhabited by Slavs and Avars. The Hungarians came into conflict with a Turkic people called Pechenegs, who drove the Hungarians into the Pannonian Basin. Being nomadic, and quite keen on raiding neighbouring countries and territories, it took several decades before the Hungarians settled down, and a few decades more before St Stephen the Great became the first Christian ruler of the country, in 1000 or 1001, not without considerable resistance from pagan chiefs. In the 12th century, there were still Hungarian splinter groups between the Don and the Dnepr: pagan, pillaging nomads.

The Hungarians took Hungary by force, an event referred to in Hungarian as ’A honfoglalás’. It took them about 100 years to give up their nomadic lifestyle and many of them didn’t accept Christianity willingly.

 

The sad part of this whole thing is that people have to argue about who is a bigger liar when they're both lying dirtbags. One is no better than the other, and neither are good choices to be President. Either of them will be a complete disaster.

The kicker is that it doesn't matter. Things will continue as they have regardless of which figurehead puppet gets to sit in the Oval office musical chair.

 

Saying that the sky appears to be blue is a dose of truth and reality, but it's still irrelevant to the topic at hand. When moderators violate TOS and throw threads off topic, it is not good moderation, in my opinion.

In my criminal justice studies, I've learned the difference between accusations, charges, and convictions. I also learned that laws don't always line up with morals. Having a certain amount of drugs in your possession can lead to a felony, but my opinion is that discrimination is worse even though it only leads to civil penalties.

I've reported Trump's lies and Clinton's lies; the Clinton lies thread just got no attention. Instead of telling this to me, you should be saying it to Bruce; but, your political bias will not allow you to be objective. I made a thread about Trump, and Bruce has tried to counter everything by bringing up Clinton's lies. It's called deflection.

 

Not all of them accused him of sexual assault. However, family members often do have a tendency to believe that their loved ones are innocent. So, the question is: Did Hillary Clinton see them as sexual assault victims, people making up stories for money, or mistresses?

 

I agree that Fidesz and Orban Viktor definitely fit the mold of nationalism fueled by populism, but I think that the ongoing refugee situation really has much of Europe, especially those in "gateway" areas like Hungary on edge. Although the Hungarian people may not be as old as some would believe, the cultural identity is far more entrenched than in younger, less homogeneous places like the U.S. As such, I can somewhat understand the sentiment.

That being said, 57 percent of the country refusing to vote in the referendum last week sent a pretty telling message that not everyone in the country is on board with Orban's wishes.

 

That was not in response to you. Look at the post, and you'll see that I quoted Heirophant.

The obvious reason why Clinton is not 50 points ahead is because she also has high negatives. African Americans have been here just as long as European Americans. Europeans have more recent, large waves of immigration than Africans (who mostly came here involuntarily). Believe it or not, there are also Latinos and Asians who have been here for generations. With all of this said, most minority Americans do not subscribe to this extreme nationalism, which is the precursor to fascism, and do not see a place for themselves in the far right wing ideologies that have racist undertones.

I'm not saying this is true of all Trump supporters, but I overheard a conversation between Trump supporters. One guy was talking about how Clinton is going to let the country get browner and how Trump will protect white people. What I gathered from this is that this man's vision of the U.S. does not include people of color even though we have been here for centuries. Native Americans have been here even longer.