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

[arkieb1]

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

Trump thrives on saying controversial polarising things to the media, as we have seen before you could argue he is one of the few politicians in history that is allowed to be a politically incorrect circus, to lie all he wants and not be held accountable for those lies and many of his loyal supporters mostly like these things about him.

The double standard is Hillary said what everyone was thinking or if she dare calls it like it is, then she is called out on it....

 

[Dancing Fire]

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

Nonie... does that mean you are not voting for Trump?...

 

[NonieMarie]

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.

Why has the coverage of Trump's connections with the alt-right, white nationalism, the backing of David Duke, KKK and white supremacist groups, anti LBGT groups, anti Muslim groups and the mass deportation of 11 million illegals not affected his polls? Most of his followers have no problem with Trump's connections with the named organizations or their views This week he made numerous speeches about making the US a nation under ONE God!!!!! What the he## is that supposed to mean? He said that while he was pandering to the right wing conservative Christians. Does he not understand the separation of church and state? Most of his followers don't. These used to be fringe groups but because of Trump they have entered the main stream of our society.
I'm calling out ALL Trump supporters, not half, if you back him you're tainted with the stain of his deplorable views, advisors and the organizations that are trying to take over this country.

When you put Clinton up against Trump as far as lies and trustworthiness, Trump loses hands down. Trump has been a liar and self promoter all of his life. He lies about his business, his wealth, his charitable donations. He has no respect for most women or most people in general. He doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. His fawning over Putin shows how stupid he is. He keeps repeating because Putin said he was brilliant (he did not, the translation was bright as in colorful candidate) he'll say nice things about him. To say that Putin is a stronger leader than Obama is outrageous. It easy to be a "strong leader" if you have no laws that protect free speech. In Russia, hundreds of journalists and critics have been jailed or murdered. Is that the kind of strong leader Trump supporters want?

What do you have against Clinton?
For 30 years, long before she held public office, this label of being untrustworthy has followed her. It started during her husband's 2nd campaign for governor of AR. He was running against a former governor, a segregationist that labeled her that because she had a job and accused her of being a bad mother.
Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, the private server and Benghazi. There have been dozens and dozens of investigations, many headed by republicans with the sole purpose of taking her down. Nothing met the criteria for charges of anything. Let it go! This was at the cost of 10's of millions, if not more, of taxpayer dollars. A republican even came out and said that the purpose of the last investigation was to tarnish her in this election. He was chastised by other republicans because he told the truth.

Just as Trump was given a positive start to this campaign because of his self promotion, name recognition and TV show, Clinton started with all the negative spin and lies that have plagued her for 30 years.

 

[NonieMarie]

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

Nonie... does that mean you are not voting for Trump?...

No patriotic American would.....

 

[Dancing Fire]

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

Nonie... does that mean you are not voting for Trump?...

No patriotic American would.....

Make America Great Again is not patriotic?...

 

[AGBF]

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?

ksinger-

I remember Lynn Redgrave was interviewed once when she was quite a young woman, in her 20's. I believe the topic may have been men or what kind of man she would marry, but I might be mistaken; it was many years ago. Someone called her on it shortly thereafter and she rather cheerfully said, "I talk rubbish". That stuck with me because she was so totally honest. (And British.)

I find myself in the same position about telling people how to vote now.

When I wrote that no one should tell others how to vote I thought I meant that. I was feeling that it was wrong of Hillary Clinton to have said what she did about Trump's supporters and, without really thinking anything through, just extrapolated that if it was wrong for Hillary it would be wrong for right wing people, too.

But of course you are right. I am an ACLU backer. I believe in freedom of speech. So if I believe that people have the right to spout Nazi propaganda, how could I not believe that someone has the right to tell someone else how to vote?

Deb

 

[sstephensid]

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

Nonie... does that mean you are not voting for Trump?...

No patriotic American would.....

Make America Great Again is not patriotic?...

How is that patriotic? Make America great AGAIN= America is not great now, but was sometime in the past.

Do you think America is weak, insignificant (antonyms of great- since apparently we are NOT great)? If so, hard to consider you patriotic.

 

[Dancing Fire]

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

Do you think America is weak, insignificant (antonyms of great- since apparently we are NOT great)? If so, hard to consider you patriotic.

You tell me...
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-to-embarrass-potus-in-front-of-the-world.225382/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-to-embarrass-potus-in-front-of-the-world.225382/[/URL]

 

[AGBF]

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.

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

OK, ksinger, while I am disagreeing with myself, let me also quote my favorite columnist, Charles M Blow whom redwood likes so much. He agrees with everyone here that it was stupid of Secretary Clinton to say what she did, because she is a politician. But then he goes on to say, "Luckily, I’m not a politician". And then he goes on to make a point and he uses statistics with which to do it. He writes:

"Donald Trump is a deplorable candidate — to put it charitably — and anyone who helps him advance his racial, religious and ethnic bigotry is part of that bigotry. Period. Anyone who elevates a sexist is part of that sexism. The same goes for xenophobia. You can’t conveniently separate yourself from the detestable part of him because you sense in him the promise of cultural or economic advantage. That hair cannot be split.

Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.

It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable.

And there is some evidence that Trump’s supporters don’t simply have a passive, tacit acceptance of an undesirable platform, but instead have an active set of beliefs that support what is deplorable in Trump.

In state after state that Trump won during the primaries, he won a majority or near majority of voters who supported a temporary ban on Muslims entering this country and who supported deporting immigrants who are in this country illegally.

In June a Reuters/Ipsos poll found: “Nearly half of Trump’s supporters described African-Americans as more ‘violent’ than whites. The same proportion described African-Americans as more ‘criminal’ than whites, while 40 percent described them as more ‘lazy’ than whites.”

A Pew poll released in February found that 65 percent of Republicans believe the next president should “speak bluntly even if critical of Islam as a whole” when talking about Islamic extremists.

Another Reuters/Ipsos online poll in July found that 58 percent of Trump supporters have a “somewhat unfavorable” view of Islam and 78 percent believe Islam was more likely to encourage acts of terrorism.

A February Public Policy Polling survey found “Trump’s support in South Carolina is built on a base of voters among whom religious and racial intolerance pervades.” What the poll found about those South Carolina supporters’ beliefs was truly shocking:

• Eighty percent of likely Trump primary voters supported Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims.

• Sixty-two percent supported creating a national database of Muslims and 40 percent supported shutting down mosques in the United States.

• Thirty-eight percent wished the South had won the Civil War.

• Thirty-three percent thought the practice of Islam should be illegal in this country.

• Thirty-two percent supported the policy of Japanese internment during World War II.

• Thirty-one percent would support a ban on homosexuals entering the country.

On Saturday, Clinton issued a statement pointing out that “I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong.” Place the percentage where you will — or don’t — but the fact is indisputable.

I understand that people recoil at the notion that they are part of a pejorative basket. I understand the reflexive resistance to having your negative beliefs disrobed and your sense of self dressed down.

I understand your outrage, but I’m unmoved by it. If the basket fits …"

 

[NonieMarie]

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

I just watched Charles Blow on CNN and always like hearing what he has to say. He called out the former Lt Governor of NY when she tried to negatively spin and add untruths about what Clinton said. He gave the poll info and I have to say I wasn't shocked. Just think back to those Trump rallies. The real kicker is that well over 30% wish the south had won the Civil War. What are they thinking? What kind of world would we be living in if that happened?

 

[the_mother_thing]

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

Can someone please just let me know when Hillary returns all of that deplorable money she accepted from Trump over the years when he wasn't her opponent? Thanks!

 

[BeekeeperBetty]

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.

Not at all. Trump's path to victory through the electoral college is very grim. He has almost no chance of winning. It does make me sad that his percentages are so high, given his racist and hateful rhetoric. I am not sure if they are just Republicans voting along party lines, or if that many Americans are really that hateful. Hoping for the former.

I have nothing against Republicans, not at all. My husband used to identify as Republican, but like Martin O'Malley, he says the party left him. On a side note, I learned recently that Mr O'Malley is, um, in quite excellent physical shape. How did I not know this before? Anyway, I do believe that we need a 2 party system, and I understand why they believe as they do, even though I disagree. But I am stunned that as all this white power junk is being brought in to the mainstream that the GOP is just shrugging their shoulders and changing the subject to Benghazi or emails. Hillary's issues pale in comparison to what Trump has been saying and who he has been courting.

Unfortunately, I have some relatives who are of that stripe, and this is how they communicate their abhorrent views. It's all symbols, winks, nudges. Then they throw a few small racist tropes in there to see if anyone is receptive. If they get shot down they feign ignorance. What? I didn't know those numbers meant that. But, that's just a star, I didn't know it was antisemitic. I just got this picture from my buddy, I didn't know it was wrong. They know. And Trump and his family know, too. And so does the GOP.

 

[redwood66]

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

Here is a video of numbers for both Clinton and Trump supporters and their racial attitudes. Clinton's numbers are lower but certainly not zero like everyone would like to believe. Sure would like to see Clinton supporter numbers in Blow's list.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/most-important-number-of-the-day-50-763288131618

 

[E B]

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

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.

I completely agree. She's the adult in this election, and so when she "misspeaks," she's piled on for it because the standard are MUCH higher for her. Unfortunately. Trump has so saturated the news (and our minds) with hot garbage, we hardly react anymore. What's left to shock us? He already literally said he could shoot someone and it wouldn't affect his numbers. He's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is, but he's smart enough to know that. Once he started complimenting Putin, Putin's approval rating among Trump supporters SOARED compared to his numbers pre-election. VLADIMIR PUTIN. It's utter insanity. But, hey, as long as our team wins, right?

By the way, Trump's turning the revealing of his health records into reality TV-quality stuff. Dr. Oz will see them first and "reveal them" to Trump, live on TV.

This is real life.

 

[BeekeeperBetty]

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

In case anyone doesn't know about Dr Oz, I'll just leave this here:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dr-oz-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-day/

If he's not careful, he will be disciplined by his state board of medicine like Dr Bob Sears was recently.

 

[E B]

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

In case anyone doesn't know about Dr Oz, I'll just leave this here:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/dr-oz-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-day/

If he's not careful, he will be disciplined by his state board of medicine like Dr Bob Sears was recently.

But of course. A TV doctor for a reality spectacle. C'mon.

FWIW, going back to Hillary's original comment, I facepalmed when I heard her say it. Now, It wasn't what she said, but how she quantified it. I do think it is an incredibly important conversation to have, because Trump's campaign seems to have emboldened racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and downright violent behavior from people who SHOULD be shamed for it, and we as a country need to not only discuss it, but shine as bright a light as we can on it.

I agree that when it comes down to it, such a fuss is being made over it because it hit a nerve with the majority-- people who aren't used to being insulted. We can overlook anything said to Mexican "rapists," African Americans having nothing to lose because you have no jobs or money or power, Middle Eastern refugees we just can't trust because of your "scary" religion (and scary religion's bad apples), homosexuals whose proclivities go against the Bible, etc., etc. (I say this all with tongue firmly planted in cheek). Insult the Real Americans? Hoo boy.

 

[sstephensid]

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

Nonie... does that mean you are not voting for Trump?...

No patriotic American would.....

Make America Great Again is not patriotic?...

How is that patriotic? Make America great AGAIN= America is not great now, but was sometime in the past.

Do you think America is weak, insignificant (antonyms of great- since apparently we are NOT great)? If so, hard to consider you patriotic.

That move was petty. Strong leaders do not make petty, childish moves. I think whoever in China made that decision is weak.

So, are you admitting you are unpatriotic?

 

[NonieMarie]

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

Here is a video of numbers for both Clinton and Trump supporters and their racial attitudes. Clinton's numbers are lower but certainly not zero like everyone would like to believe. Sure would like to see Clinton supporter numbers in Blow's list.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/most-important-number-of-the-day-50-763288131618

This shows how prevalent racism still is in our country, it makes me sad. The major issue is, Trump has brought it into the mainstream. He has made it ok to publicly voice these archaic views. Yes, in this country there is free speech unlike Putin's Russia. He has actively courted voters with racist, homophobic, and xenophobic views. That is a big difference between the 2 candidates. Trump has fanned the flames of of those deplorable views and Clinton has said those views do not belong in our melting pot of a country.

Charles Blow said it best....

"Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.
It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable."

 

[AnnaH]

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

Here is a video of numbers for both Clinton and Trump supporters and their racial attitudes. Clinton's numbers are lower but certainly not zero like everyone would like to believe. Sure would like to see Clinton supporter numbers in Blow's list.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/most-important-number-of-the-day-50-763288131618

Of course, racial prejudice can be found anywhere, even among Dems. Thankfully, there is significant improvement with each generation. That's not to say that change comes quickly enough.
I wonder if those questions in the poll reveal a prejudice based on economic status as much as skin color.

 

[Dancing Fire]

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

So, are you admitting you are unpatriotic?

I have an American flag in front of my house... We were a strong country till Obama came along, and now we are the laughingstock of the world among world leaders. They treat our Prez. and our country with no respect.

 

[redwood66]

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

Charles Blow said it best....

"Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.
It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable."

Watching interviews between Blow and anyone with a different opinion is much like watching a rabid dog. He is so disrespectful. If he is anyone's ideal liberal voice then no-thank you to liberal views IMO. I don't like extreme right or left voices that are disrespectful.

 

[NonieMarie]

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

Charles Blow said it best....

"Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.
It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable."

Watching interviews between Blow and anyone with a different opinion is much like watching a rabid dog. He is so disrespectful. If he is anyone's ideal liberal voice then no-thank you to liberal views IMO. I don't like extreme right or left voices that are disrespectful.

You have got to be kidding. Calling him a "rabid dog" is offensive. Have you seen the Trump surrogates and the lies they tell over and over. They talk over people all the time. But I guess because you believe what they are saying, you give them a pass. Charles Blow lets a person speak and only gets upset when one of Trump's people starts talking over him. He's always saying, "I let you speak, now it's my turn".
I'm sorry Redwood, it appears that your mind and politics were made up from the time you were young enough to listen to your father's views. At some point you need to open your mind and look at the truth.

 

[redwood66]

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

Charles Blow said it best....

"Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.
It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable."

Watching interviews between Blow and anyone with a different opinion is much like watching a rabid dog. He is so disrespectful. If he is anyone's ideal liberal voice then no-thank you to liberal views IMO. I don't like extreme right or left voices that are disrespectful.

You have got to be kidding. Calling him a "rabid dog" is offensive. Have you seen the Trump surrogates and the lies they tell over and over. They talk over people all the time. But I guess because you believe what they are saying, you give them a pass. Charles Blow lets a person speak and only gets upset when one of Trump's people starts talking over him. He's always saying, "I let you speak, now it's my turn".
I'm sorry Redwood, it appears that your mind and politics were made up from the time you were young enough to listen to your father's views. At some point you need to open your mind and look at the truth.

Don't be sorry. I'm not.

And I said I don't like disrespect on both sides. Read what I wrote.

ETA - we all listen to our father's views. Why is that bad? Because you think my father has bad ones? Kinda rude don't you think just because I have a different view than you?

 

[arkieb1]

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

Will any of your vote for Even McMulling, the new contender?

 

[redwood66]

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

No because my vote will not matter in my state. Don't know enough about him at this point and it seems to be so far out of the realm of possibility for him to win enough states.

 

[AnnaH]

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

Evan McMullin is really young, only 40. I would consider him if he had a chance, but, of course, he doesn't. I wonder if he's even going to make all the ballots.

 

[NonieMarie]

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

Charles Blow said it best....

"Furthermore, one doesn’t have to actively hate to contribute to a culture that allows hate to flourish.
It doesn’t matter how lovely your family, how honorable your work or service, how devout your faith — if you place ideological adherence or economic self interest above the moral imperative to condemn and denounce a demagogue, then you are deplorable."

Watching interviews between Blow and anyone with a different opinion is much like watching a rabid dog. He is so disrespectful. If he is anyone's ideal liberal voice then no-thank you to liberal views IMO. I don't like extreme right or left voices that are disrespectful.

You have got to be kidding. Calling him a "rabid dog" is offensive. Have you seen the Trump surrogates and the lies they tell over and over. They talk over people all the time. But I guess because you believe what they are saying, you give them a pass. Charles Blow lets a person speak and only gets upset when one of Trump's people starts talking over him. He's always saying, "I let you speak, now it's my turn".
I'm sorry Redwood, it appears that your mind and politics were made up from the time you were young enough to listen to your father's views. At some point you need to open your mind and look at the truth.

Don't be sorry. I'm not.

And I said I don't like disrespect on both sides. Read what I wrote.

ETA - we all listen to our father's views. Why is that bad? Because you think my father has bad ones? Kinda rude don't you think just because I have a different view than you?

Based on the story of your father saying not a "Clinton lie", I'd say he formed your opinion about Hillary Clinton. I'll exercise my free speech rights and say....If you are basing your opinions in 2016 on the views of a person born over 60 years ago, I don't know when he came of age and am only throwing my age out there, then yes, he has bad ones. My parents were born in the 30's. When I was in 3rd grade, my mother was in an awful accident and spent 3 weeks in hospital. When she came home, she wanted to invite her favorite nurse and her husband to dinner. They were Black and my father said, "what will the neighbors think". It wasn't that he did not want them to come he was just afraid of the talk in our small town. I find it very cowardly and wish he had invited them to dinner. I did not hear that story until 1982 when I was pregnant with my biracial daughter. In our home there was never any mention of race or any derogatory remarks about anyone different than us. I went to an integrated high school and had friends of all colors, creeds and nationalities. All 4 of my siblings and I grew up with an open mind and were able to form our own opinions.
My father was a democrat and my mother a republican, they always canceled out each others vote.
When we were young adults, my mother became "born again", the friction in our family was sometimes unbearable. Everyone else was going to hell, Catholics, how we were raised, Jews, Baptists, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhist on down the list. She brought my gay brother to a Dr, just once, to try to get him therapy. She still thinks my brother and her other 4 children are going to hell but she doesn't say anything. His partner of 20 years is welcome in her home.
If we were young and this transformation of my mother happened then, like many children that are raised with her beliefs, our minds would have been molded. Once you become an adult, it is your job to look around and question what you have been taught.
Not speaking to anyone here but if people are brought up in a racist environment, the bigotry needs to stop with them.

 

[the_mother_thing]

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

I just want to point out that just because someone else has a different opinion or viewpoint than you, doesn't make you right and them wrong, or vice versa. That is all.

 

[redwood66]

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

JCJ some of the people here are always right. Even when they aren't. Extremely rude too. Who cares? Not me. I am fine in my skin and don't need to tell other people how to live or that only I know "the truth"

 

[shaggy1]

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

Not speaking to anyone here but if people are brought up in a racist environment, the bigotry needs to stop with them.

You're talking to me.

My parents were born in 1929 (not that that's any excuse) and are horrible racists. I think there has been exactly ONE black person in their home EVER (a kid who delivered something). As a child I didn't know that anyone thought differently than they did.

As a teenager I dated some screaming liberals and I thank them from the bottom of my heart for opening my eyes. I started speaking out when my parents voiced hate and we're basically estranged now.

I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU and I defend Trump's right to say racist xenophobic crap, but I will also speak out against it.