Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters...

[shaggy1]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

I'm not sure of whom you are asking this question, shaggy. Please elucidate. I don't see who in the really immediate past said it was OK for Trump to be politically incorrect, but then I often miss things.

Deb

Rhetorical question.

 

[kenny]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

Trump voters CHEER when their candidate is PIC.
Clinton voters CRINGE when their candidate is PIC.

 

[AGBF]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

I'm not sure of whom you are asking this question, shaggy. Please elucidate. I don't see who in the really immediate past said it was OK for Trump to be politically incorrect, but then I often miss things.

Deb

Rhetorical question.

I got that. What I meant was, why were you asking that rhetorical question now. Who did you think said that it was OK for Trump to be politically incorrect? I didn't hear anybody say that!

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37330420

Clinton has apologized.
Good on her ... especially for apologizing so quickly.

... but that saying comes to mind, "You can't unring a bell."

I had to go back and read the "apology" and it is not really an apology at all.

It reminded me of a long time ago. I remember when I was a young 20 something and my mom and I had an argument. My dad told me to apologize. He clarified it with "and not a Clinton apology, it must be sincere." The "I'm sorry, but..." doesn't cut it and I have remembered that when I am sorry, I must be truly sorry or it means nothing.

 

[Tekate]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37330420

Clinton has apologized.
Good on her ... especially for apologizing so quickly.

... but that saying comes to mind, "You can't unring a bell."

I had to go back and read the "apology" and it is not really an apology at all.

It reminded me of a long time ago. I remember when I was a young 20 something and my mom and I had an argument. My dad told me to apologize. He clarified it with "and not a Clinton apology, it must be sincere." The "I'm sorry, but..." doesn't cut it and I have remembered that when I am sorry, I must be truly sorry or it means nothing.

Whoa, your dad must have been a real hater of Bill Clinton.. sheesh... My mother used say "Oh, they are John Bircher's" and then spit! Irish mom... I thought John Bircher's (whatever they were) were the scum of the earth.. lol.. and she also said: "Katherine, don't give a half assed apology either" in her brogue...

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

I can almost hear her brogue now T. My dad is colorful that is for sure. Not really a hater but a strong dislike for sure.

 

[AnnaH]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

Trump voters CHEER when their candidate is PIC.
Clinton voters CRINGE when their candidate is PIC.

Not true, Kenny. The Hillary crowd cheered her inappropriate and false comment.

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

Trump voters CHEER when their candidate is PIC.
Clinton voters CRINGE when their candidate is PIC.

Not true, Kenny. The Hillary crowd cheered her inappropriate and false comment.

Yes they did.

 

[TooPatient]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Believe it or not, I was focusing on what Trump said when I read about and saw parts of news shows. I didn't see that Secretary Clinton had said this until you started this thread, redwood. I think what she said was disgusting. No one has the right to tell someone else how to vote in the United States. Disparaging others for their choices is even worse.

Deb/AGBF

This is one thing that we definitely agree on, Deb. I am still astonished when someone tells me I have to vote, or worse yet, tells me who I have to vote for, when I say that I'm not voting in this election How one chooses to vote (or not vote) is their own, personal choice.

Agree with you both.

We are all free to vote or not vote as we see fit. Period.

 

[ksinger]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Believe it or not, I was focusing on what Trump said when I read about and saw parts of news shows. I didn't see that Secretary Clinton had said this until you started this thread, redwood. I think what she said was disgusting. No one has the right to tell someone else how to vote in the United States. Disparaging others for their choices is even worse.

Deb/AGBF

Really Deb?? Looks like somebody hasn't read my tag line in a while.

First, please show me where Clinton TOLD someone who to vote for in that mess of what she said, because I could not find it. But even if she did, yes, we - all of us - do have the right to tell someone how to vote. Fer cryin' out loud that's all candidates do - tell you (with more or less reasons) "You need to/should vote for ME!" or "You need to/should get out and vote (for me)!"

I have the right to tell you what I think you should do and (if I'm feeling particularly honest) why I think you're an idiot for not doing it, all day long. What I don't have is the right to do so without consequence (unless I'm Trump of course, who murdered any vestige of political civility with great abandon this election), or the power to compel you to act, or to listen. And if you do happen to hear, you have the right to tell whoever is telling you what you should do, to bugger off in return. It's that free speech thing everyone loves. Until they don't.

What you and many others here are speaking of in terms of "rights", is simply pissing and moaning about what those being told, think they shouldn't have to hear, and THAT is a different critter. Every time I read someone on here all twisted up that someone had the nerve to tell them they should do this or that because, I get a vision of a sullen young teenager saying, "You're not the boss of ME!!!" Yeesh.

Everyone is all up in arms about dishonesty in politics, yet when candidates and voters are actually honest - honesty being the best policy all the time, right? - it's not quite as refreshing as everyone thinks it is when they aren't actually being subjected to it, is it?

 

[telephone89]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

I'm confused. If Trump had've said it, you'd be cheering him on. But because she said it? How horrible! It's not like she's wrong LOL.

Also, I'm not sure how this is pandering to the LGBTQ community. TBH, if there's one thing I like about Trump, it's that he is pretty open minded towards this community. If you'll recall, he was one of the most outspoken people for people using the restroom of their choice. That might be his only redeeming quality! I'm sure his supporters stuck their fingers in their ears and LALALALA'd until that blew over though, because I do suspect a lot of them are homo/trans/etc phobic.

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

I'm confused. If Trump had've said it, you'd be cheering him on. But because she said it? How horrible! It's not like she's wrong LOL.

Uh no I would not. I don't cheer him on and neither did anyone in this thread.

 

[AnnaH]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Both candidates have said things they should not have said. Trump makes more ridiculous statements than Clinton, in part, because he's had much more to say publically and off the cuff.
Seems important to point out that many of the terrible Trump statements were unscripted, while this Clinton "deplorables" statement was planned and scripted, as are most statements Clinton makes.
I suspect that Clinton said what she really thinks, just as a few here have approved of what she said. Not cool.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Both candidates have said things they should not have said. Trump makes more ridiculous statements than Clinton, in part, because he's had much more to say publically and off the cuff.
Seems important to point out that many of the terrible Trump statements were unscripted, while this Clinton "deplorables" statement was planned and scripted, as are most statements Clinton makes.
I suspect that Clinton said what she really thinks, just as a few here have approved of what she said. Not cool.

Okay so I am trying to follow this logic. Because Trump can't stick to a script to save his life it's okay that he makes, as you admit, MORE nasty comments than Clinton. But because Clinton's comment MAY (and you have no proof) been scripted, her ONE comment is worse than his MANY unscripted comments.

I call BS and clearly need better boots.

 

[AnnaH]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Both candidates have said things they should not have said. Trump makes more ridiculous statements than Clinton, in part, because he's had much more to say publically and off the cuff.
Seems important to point out that many of the terrible Trump statements were unscripted, while this Clinton "deplorables" statement was planned and scripted, as are most statements Clinton makes.
I suspect that Clinton said what she really thinks, just as a few here have approved of what she said. Not cool.

Okay so I am trying to follow this logic. Because Trump can't stick to a script to save his life it's okay that he makes, as you admit, MORE nasty comments than Clinton. But because Clinton's comment MAY (and you have no proof) been scripted, her ONE comment is worse than his MANY unscripted comments.

I call BS and clearly need better boots.

I give neither a pass. Dislike both candidates, with reason, just as I've stated many times.
I often need rubber boots when I read your posts, G.

 

[momhappy]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

I'm confused. If Trump had've said it, you'd be cheering him on. But because she said it? How horrible! It's not like she's wrong LOL.

Uh no I would not. I don't cheer him on and neither did anyone in this thread.

I wouldn't have cheered him on either. In fact, often times when I hear him speak, I cringe.
Hillary's rant confirmed my belief that she is no better than Trump

 

[Tekate]

Re: Re:Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voter

No one should tell you who to vote for or to vote if you feel you are exercising your right to free speech.

What if I vote for Trump?

Do you still feel the same way?

I don't care whom you vote for.. what if I vote for Trump? who knows.. no one should tell another whom to vote for, we have to make our own decisions.

 

[Tekate]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Both candidates have said things they should not have said. Trump makes more ridiculous statements than Clinton, in part, because he's had much more to say publically and off the cuff.
Seems important to point out that many of the terrible Trump statements were unscripted, while this Clinton "deplorables" statement was planned and scripted, as are most statements Clinton makes.
I suspect that Clinton said what she really thinks, just as a few here have approved of what she said. Not cool.

I'm cool and I'm fine with what she said. I'm not as fine with Trump being Putin's bestie. Are you saying that Trump says dumbass things off the top of his head? and Clinton scripts hers? So, I"m gonna take the scripter if trump can just off the top of his head, this means he might start a war off the top of his head.. or because somebody flipped him the bird...

 

[AnnaH]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

Both candidates have said things they should not have said. Trump makes more ridiculous statements than Clinton, in part, because he's had much more to say publically and off the cuff.
Seems important to point out that many of the terrible Trump statements were unscripted, while this Clinton "deplorables" statement was planned and scripted, as are most statements Clinton makes.
I suspect that Clinton said what she really thinks, just as a few here have approved of what she said. Not cool.

I'm cool and I'm fine with what she said. I'm not as fine with Trump being Putin's bestie. Are you saying that Trump says dumbass things off the top of his head? and Clinton scripts hers? So, I"m gonna take the scripter if trump can just off the top of his head, this means he might start a war off the top of his head.. or because somebody flipped him the bird...

Again, I have serious problems with both candidates, but if you are worried about Trump's trigger finger rather than his middle finger, Clinton is more of a hawk than Trump.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Re: Re:Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voter

No one should tell you who to vote for or to vote if you feel you are exercising your right to free speech.

What if I vote for Trump?

Do you still feel the same way?

I don't care whom you vote for.. what if I vote for Trump? who knows.. no one should tell another whom to vote for, we have to make our own decisions.

Nahhhh....I have a better chance of hitting the lottery!..

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..



This took mere hours to happen.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/12/clintons-deplorables-gaffe-touches-off-merch-meme-frenzy.html

 

[the_mother_thing]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

And a new ad out of Camp Trump:

https://youtu.be/gj7CLJbyjrk

He spoke today, hammering her on the comments she made, and NOT commenting on her health issues. Smart moves on his part ... sticking to the issues & her character. Effective imo.

 

[PierreBear]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

Trump voters CHEER when their candidate is PIC.
Clinton voters CRINGE when their candidate is PIC.

Why is this the case? Is it because of Trumps' personality or type of voters he follows? Is it because Clinton is a woman and we don't associate with a female? Would like to understand this psychology a bit better!

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

So it's ok for Trump to be politically incorrect?

Trump voters CHEER when their candidate is PIC.
Clinton voters CRINGE when their candidate is PIC.

Why is this the case? Is it because of Trumps' personality or type of voters he follows? Is it because Clinton is a woman and we don't associate with a female? Would like to understand this psychology a bit better!

If you listen to the video the Clinton attendees did cheer at her remarks so kenny is incorrect. Maybe some of her supporters here did not like what she said, but some did.

 

[BeekeeperBetty]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

It was pretty obvious that Sec Clinton was talking specifically about the voters who are white supremacists antisemitic and so on. And as if to prove her point, Donald Trump Jr put this on twitter:
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-adviser-son-post-image-trump-s-deplorables-featuring-white-n646431

This article is linked to in the above article about what the symbol Pepe the Frog means.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/26/how-pepe-the-frog-became-a-nazi-trump-supporter-and-alt-right-symbol.html

A white nationalist who was interviewed in the Daily Beast article states:
"In a sense, we’ve managed to push white nationalism into a very mainstream position,” he said. “Trump’s online support has been crucial to his success, I believe, and the fact is that his biggest and most devoted online supporters are white nationalists. Now, we’ve pushed the Overton window. People have adopted our rhetoric, sometimes without even realizing it. We’re setting up for a massive cultural shift."

This is the image:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BKMtdN5Bam5/

The guy on the far right in the picture works for Breitbart News, of which the former CEO is now head of Trump's campaign. He is considered the leader of the alt-right, and recently earned a lifetime ban on Twitter for sending multitudes of racist and misogynistic tweets to a female who was in the new Ghostbusters reboot.

So, are these people not deplorable? And it is odd to me how little press this stuff gets. It's like we are all suffering from Trump fatigue and now every horrible thing he says or does the public doesn't react to at all, but Hillary Clinton coughs and the world goes crazy.

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

The MSM to her rescue.

 

[BeekeeperBetty]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

I'm not sure what that means? The media is all over her illness right now, and barely reporting on the white nationalist stuff. Can you imagine the brouhaha if Romney had any of this stuff associated with his campaign? It would make that 47% comment look like nothing. Heck, he was eviscerated for putting his family dog on top of the car on a family trip. Trump's sons regularly hunt lions and giraffes in Africa, and not a peep.

 

[redwood66]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

There has been plenty of coverage on Trump and the alt right, David Duke, et al. I have even seen online outrage about his son legally hunting in Africa. The NBC article you linked is deflecting from her disgusting comments thereby rescuing her.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

The Dems. are getting nervous b/c this race is too close for comfort.

 

[NonieMarie]

Re: Attacking the other candidate is ok but not the voters..

BeekeeperBetty,
Thanks for all the links. I do not understand how the media and Trump's rational supporters don't see or choose to overlook what's happening. Clinton was not on a "rant". That word can be applied to Trump from the start of his campaign. He has made it acceptable to be "deplorable". I have family members, in laws, that are voting for Trump. I have no problem calling them "deplorable". When my grandsons come back from their summers in MS, They repeat what they have heard. At least they are smart enough to know, what they heard, is not true but they ask about it. I walk a fine line making sure that I don't lash out at their MS family and just have a calm discussion of why they are wrong. The kicker is that my grandsons are 1/4 black. My daughter is biracial. While she was still married to my son in law, they were visiting and she called me very upset. Her brother in law, with the backing of her in laws, said some horrendous things about people of color. The worst was that the only thing a woman of color was good for was being "blanked in the blank". I know that is crude but it is what it is. The great majority of southern white Trump voters feel the same as them. They want the stupid wall (Mexico will never pay and it is too expensive to build), all Muslims are their enemy, 11 plus million people need to be deported (maybe they'll study how the Germans rounded up and removed the Jews) and want to go back to a time in the 50's (white rule), you know what they are......deplorable.
Like I said before, if you don't believe those things than you are not who she was talking about.
To get off subject a bit.
Trump has lied more times, maybe 5-10 times more than Clinton. That's not me saying it, it's the fact checkers. You can't just say they both lie. Trump's lies have been repeated so often that his supporters think they are true.
He has not made a donation to HIS charity since 2008. The few times he has followed through with a charitable donation it has come from other people's donations and he takes credit.
Since securing the Rep nomination, he has repeatedly used his venues, including office space, and transportation, at inflated prices, reimbursed by the RNC.
He has made part of his campaign people involved in the alt-right and white nationalism movement. Some of his "Christian" advisors have publicly said that the LBGT community is Satan's work and were happy about the shooting in Orlando. Yes, happy!
One of the worst things he has done is split this country apart and he does not care. He said things to appeal to "the deplorables", he made it ok to publicly voice their unamerican views, yes unamerican. It is all "the chase" the next deal, as he said in interviews through the years. If he were to become President and finds he can not govern our country like one of his businesses, with total control, he will lose interest and leave it to Pence. He does not seem to grasp, as some of his supporters don't grasp, we are a country with 3 branches of government. There are checks and balances. I think the republicans, like Paul Ryan, just want to protect the lower half of the ticket. They think that if he was to get in office they will put a muzzle on him. If they do that he will probably resign. What fun would it be to be the President and not have any power?