Vae on 11/10/2016 at 04:54
That was clever and sweet...I like the writer.
It's always good to have some humor during the political season, so that we don't tarnish relationships.
demagogue on 11/10/2016 at 05:08
So the threads on the second debate are dominated by traumatized women--the gaslit pussy-grabbed constituency--forming support groups and solidarity to deal with Trump's shit without literally breaking down into uncontrollable shaking and crying. It has to be some kind of record. What a charmer. Millions of women break into sobbing and physical sickness and pain when he speaks. Now there's a leader that inspires something.
I also get the impression the reason Trump squints so much is because his entire world is lit by gaslighting. I can't even think of anyone outside a movie that is so consistently textbook pattern for it. The first thing out of his mouth is "I didn't say that" so reflexively I have to think it's dyed into him and he's apparently never seen the movie or knows it's a thing.
Medlar on 11/10/2016 at 08:28
I found both debates a sad spectacle, political debates should be inspiring not toe curling embarrassing, what is this long drawn out, bad tempered, sexual referrals and childish haranguing demonstrating to American youngsters? What ever it is, politics it ain't.
Say what you will about the Obama years but at least the man is an eloquent speaker with an admirable command of language and debating skills. That cannot be said of the current candidates.
demagogue on 11/10/2016 at 12:01
I should have been fair in my last post. Plenty of friends in my feed are also disgusted by the tone of Hillary's voice to such an the extent they can't bear to even watch or listen to her without extreme discomfort either. I wouldn't say it's equivalent to reliving the trauma of sexual assault and emotional manipulation by gaslighting sociopathic men, but probably fair to say they think Hillary screeches like a bitch harpy, am I right? With that smug smile they want to just slap off of her with a baseball bat.
I just felt it was important to be fair & balanced in acknowledging both sides can't stand the tone of voice of the other side's candidate, lest someone might get the impression I was being biased.
heywood on 11/10/2016 at 12:57
Dude, you're biased. And so what, why shouldn't people be biased when talking about Presidential candidates?
Also, where are you finding all these traumatized women forming support groups to prevent uncontrollable shaking and crying when Trump speaks? Exaggerate much?
demagogue on 11/10/2016 at 15:05
Of course I'm biased, that was the whole point. Two big groups in my feed are both admitting they can't bear to listen to the other side, and I'm copying their reasons pretty much verbatim. One is a mirror of an abusive bf/husband they all know, the other is a harpy screeching bitch. They're not even in the same galaxy of moral equivalence. That disparity struck me & I was pissed.
As for "those women", they were overrunning the FB comments on the videos of the debate making the rounds. One had like, I don't know, in the 100s of comments. They were all sobbing and shaking, yes. Or at least they said they were. That's why it struck me as much as it did. It was like the consensus position, once one admitted it they came out of the woodwork. The moderate ones only felt physically ill and just holding it together. If you think I'm exaggerating, I invite you on to those threads and tell those women to get over themselves, and see how that goes over.
Edit. Point of logic, obviously it's not all women that go ape shit, and a few threads don't say anything empirically about any trends. The polls have Trump at more than a 10 point gap for women voters, which probably translates from mild to serious disgust for Trump in the 60% range, but most not getting emotion involved. Within that group is a small but livid contingent including some number of the ~30% of women in the US which stats report have suffered some form of domestic abuse by their partner, which in the US would amount to >40 million women. Among that group--even a small % is a lot of people--is probably the core group that's not taking the latest news about Trump well, and read it into the debates. Anyway that's the story that kept coming up in the threads. They couldn't separate the transparent gaslighting techniques he used in the debate from that used by an abusive partner or from the latest news. That thread was of course only anecdotal and not data to say anything, but the numbers of people making the same point made an impression. In contrast, the "can't watch harpy bitch" comments were rampant among friends and threads alike, so I take it much more widespread.
Tony_Tarantula on 11/10/2016 at 15:19
Quote Posted by SD
Tony has been watching too much Trump, he thinks if you say these things they're automatically true, and facts and evidence are for namby pamby liberals.
However, bearing in mind the Brexit thing and the fact that the pound in my pocket has depreciated faster than an Xbox One, maybe I ought to be supporting a Trump presidency. It's costing way too much to import collectibles from the US these days, and I really could benefit from you guys destroying your economy all over again like you did in 2008 when I could get 2 dollars to the pound rather than a buck 20.
Guess again.
Also learn how to read. Trump isn't saying this (though it would be advantageous to, fear is a powerful persuasive tool) and even if he did I don't recommend taking anything he says at face value. It's actually coming from EU press sources (mostly German language) that tend to be a little bit more honest in their reporting about what the US is doing in Syria.
Regarding the EU pound depreciation that is a terrible thing for the US again. The biggest problem facing the US right now is that EU instability and the EU's out of control hunt for cash is driving currency into the United States.....capital flows are why the US stock market is at historical price/earnings ratios and the market stays high in spite of declining earnings. Most analysts on Wall Street are missing this because they're only trained to look at the market through a "fishbowl" mentality that assumes a closed investment market. Combine a growing dollar strength with an imminent pension crisis (social security becomes a net negative cash flow in 2017 according to the government's own forecasts) and the US is looking at a financial catastrophe.
Quote:
So the threads on the second debate are dominated by traumatized women--the gaslit pussy-grabbed constituency--forming support groups and solidarity to deal with Trump's shit without literally breaking down into uncontrollable shaking and crying. It has to be some kind of record. What a charmer. Millions of women break into sobbing and physical sickness and pain when he speaks. Now there's a leader that inspires something.
And it's amazing how one-sided the reaction is. You can not logically condemn either Trump's comments, or Clinton's abuse of rape victims, without also condemning your own candidate. Yet people always somehow think that whatever their candidate did is "not relevant" while it makes the other candidate a monster.
Quote:
Anyway, the trumpton issue, I can deffo see why it's not a nice choice to make, but it does seem a fairly easy one. What are tumptytumpts policies on Russia then?
Actually him and Putin would probably get on just fine thinking about it...
Remind me. How did you feel about Dick Cheney, Halliburton, and Iraq?
Because that's exactly what Hillary's policy is except this time they're starting World War 3 and not a 3rd world civil war.
Tony_Tarantula on 11/10/2016 at 15:35
Also about how it's "crazy talk" that Hillary would start World War 3.
THE DAMN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ARE SAYING THIS.
I have to make two posts to embed videos but here goes.
I wasn't able to find the isolated clip from recently, but here is Hillary last year advocating a no-fly zone.
[video=youtube;eaj7H_o11tw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaj7H_o11tw[/video]
Tony_Tarantula on 11/10/2016 at 15:37
Now here is how the military leaderhip described the results of this policy when asked.
[video=youtube;fmE9Jj-rEVs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmE9Jj-rEVs[/video]
This Sunday, AFTER the discussion that I posted occurred, Hillary re-iterated her support for a no fly zone. If we assume that she is competent at foreign policy (as her supporters in this thread have been vivaciously saying she is), then that means she is fully aware of this assessment and intends for that to be the outcome.
