Chewkw, you don't get it do you. Doesn't matter what you or I think.
The way he talks and specifically what he said in this instance, is unacceptable to many Americans. Enough so that many will not vote for him because of it.
Do you need any more help?
+1
Considering a lot of them are very very religously conservative and prude. I can't imagine many Southern Staters - with their almost English levels of politeness being very happy about him.
Graham The FBI investigating Clinton is quite different than a Trump President scouring all Government archives including deleted email servers. IMO it would be a total sh.t show
Don't think you meant to direct that at me jamba, but to be honest I can't see how Trump, president or not, would have any more luck than the FBI. If the email servers have been deleted in accordance with gov guidelines then not even the NSA will be recovering them.
Tom_W1987 - Member
A lot of my friends are womanzing scumbags, one once took an amazing stripper home without ever paying her anything, but they'd never say something like that....
In other part of the world the action of your friend is totally unacceptable.
However, in terms of speaking dirty (not assault btw) there are worst ...
MSP - Member
Is that how you talk about women?
Amongst some blokes that's how they communicate with each others when they talk about women. That is why I asked the question whether that was the first time s/he heard blokes talks.
We don't do such thing.Do you like to tell all your mates how you sexually assault women?
fourbanger - Member
The way he talks and specifically what he said in this instance, is unacceptable to many Americans. Enough so that many will not vote for him because of it.Do you need any more help?
Yes, it is unacceptable if he speaks publicly about his fantasies whatever that is but that is a private conversation between two blokes.
If you cannot distinguish between private and public conversation I cannot help you.
In other part of the world the action of your friend is totally unacceptable.However, in terms of speaking dirty (not assault btw) there are worst ...
I know Chewkw - usually I'm pretty tolerant of your posts but Trump isn't defendable on this point.
Tom_W1987 - Member
I know Chewkw - usually I'm pretty tolerant of your posts but Trump isn't defendable on this point.
It is not acceptable if you are well known but you need to realise that was a private conversation between two blokes.
The question is why is that conversation "accidentally" recorded?
Do you record private conversation only to release them to the public?
Where are the privacy of thoughts, speech and expression?
If you think you can find "sainthood" in politicians then think again because most are rotten to the core.
If you think you can find "sainthood" in politicians then think again because most are rotten to the core.
Are byou now saying that Trump is a vile piece of work or is this a bizarre attempt at defending him?
When Trump made these comments, he was AT WORK! Making a documentary, talking to a work colleague, in front of other colleagues, one of whom recorded it. That kind of talk in the workplace is Gross misconduct and an immediate dismissal.
Neither. To me most politicians are not saints.captainsasquatch - Member
Are byou now saying that Trump is a vile piece of work or is this a bizarre attempt at defending him?
Why didn't they object to his comments at that time? Shouldn't they just tell him off for his comments? He can say whatever he wants at work and it is up to their own internal company policy to deal with him.dantsw13 - Member
When Trump made these comments, he was AT WORK! Making a documentary, talking to a work colleague, in front of other colleagues, one of whom recorded it.
Not if two blokes are having a private conversation softly without wanting others to hear them. But if you stick your nose/ear and listen (tape) their conversation then essentially you are invading individual privacy is it not? Would you like someone to tape your conversation or object to hearing your private conversation at work?That kind of talk in the workplace is Gross misconduct and an immediate dismissal.
Yes, it is unacceptable if he speaks publicly about his fantasies whatever that is but that is a private conversation between two blokes.
He is on record [b]publicly[/b] suggesting, in an interview, that he'd like to have sex with his own daughter.
He is also on record admitting to walking through the models dressing rooms at his beauty pageants so he can see them naked, which the models have publicly complained about.
In the "pussy grabbing" story, he knew he was being filmed. He knew he was miked up.
Is this really a man you could entrust with state secrets and the nuclear trigger??
If you cannot distinguish between private and public conversation I cannot help you.
If you cannot distinguish between me and the American public I cannot help you.
The fact that it was a remark that may have been made in private is not important. Its in the public now and you can bet there is more where that came from.
Considering a lot of them are very very religously conservative and prude. I can't imagine many Southern Staters - with their almost English levels of politeness being very happy about him.
That's an interesting one. I'm not sure that small 'c' conservative and even evangelical Christianity and some quite extreme political positions are mutually exclusive. I think many will be prepared to overlook Trump's 'frailties'* because they loathe Democrat politics even more.
One of my relatives (a Brit and a member of an evangelical church), used to live in Trump Towers in NY and remains a firm supporter of Trump. Because Hillary is so much worse, apparently.
*not the term I'd use.
Hilary is Pro Choice, hence the Devil Incarnate to most of Bible Belt.
State secrets are something he will be very good at keeping. As for nuclear trigger - yes. Because the force within (opposition parties etc in Merica) will counter his eagerness. He will not be in complete control and like I said previously they will watch him like hawk. Every tiny movement he makes will be scrutinised if he becomes the Presidents, much more than Hillary Clinton. Hillary can get away with "murder" with a smile.GrahamS - Member
Is this really a man you could entrust with state secrets and the nuclear trigger??
I bet he did that deliberately to wind up the media and to gain attention albeit very rude.In the "pussy grabbing" story, he knew he was being filmed. He knew he was miked up.
Yes, it's public now for political convenient otherwise it's just another piece of no news.fourbanger - Member
The fact that it was a remark that may have been made in private is not important. Its in the public now and you can bet there is more where that came from.
as this guy says on [url= https://twitter.com/robfee/status/784823574406303744 ]Twitter[/url]
[i]"How are so many people JUST NOW offended by Trump? It's like getting to the 7th Harry Potter book & realizing Voldemort might be a bad guy.[/i]"
Anyway for what it's worth my little story is that I'm a regular kinda guy. Take my daily constitutional right after breakfast and that's it, nothing else is required until shortly after tomorrow's brekkie.
I was lucky enough to go to New York a couple of years ago and we went to one of those typical diners where you get a frankly ridiculous pastrami on rye that looked summit like this
[img] 
[/img]
It came with a big bowl of pickles too.
I demolished it all and we left but shortly after my stomach started flip-flopping. I hunted around for the nearest bogs which happened to be in the Trump Tower and the world literally fell out of my bottom. It was a nasty business.
Ever since then my wife and kids refer to the time I took 'a dump in the Trump'.
Now that Trump has shown his true colours I'm quite proud of that.
^^^ we got a yank in the ranks, omg ^^^
So a few questions:
1. The best of the two choices is Trump?
2. No lame duck situation because there's no strong contender for the next election?
3. There is no other choice.
[quote=captainsasquatch ]How many Trumpette voter will live to regret their decision?
I'm hoping none of them.
Is this really a man you could entrust with state secrets
You mean as opposed to the woman who has categorically demonstrated that you can't trust her with state secrets?
[quote=ninfan ]like it or not, the message Trump is sending to people about jobs and future is a lot more positive than what they see in front of themselves with Clinton - those leaked private speeches about free trade etc. that Hilary was making to bankers haven't really hit home in the aftermath of 'p***ygate, but are likely to over the next week.
Too many were expecting Trump to crash and burn in last nights debate, and he came out swinging
Positive? You must have a totally different meaning to positive than everybody else - pretty much all he is doing is attacking Clinton, virtually nothing of any substance whether positive or negative. At the best it's wishful thinking.
I think most people were expecting Trump to come out swinging, it's just that he managed to control himself well enough (and Clinton didn't attack him that hard or provoke him sufficiently) that he didn't quite manage to kill off his campaign. You can take that as a win if you like.
[quote=ninfan ]Frank Luntz is [s]massively respected in US polling[/s] a Republican who's worked on previous campaigns and currently working for Fox and says it was game changer:
I reckon if Luntz didn't call it for Trump then that might actually be sufficient for him to throw in the towel.
Could you just clarify for us ninfan, do you actually support Trump, or just hate Clinton?
a Republican who's worked on previous campaigns and currently working for Fox and says it was game changer:
I suggest that you didn't watch the video in which he discussed it, or those of the focus group snakes when Trump challenged Clinton over her emails.
(edit, worth pointing out that Luntz focus group clearly called the first debate for Clinton)
I suggest that you didn't watch the video in which he discussed it, or those of the focus group snakes when Trump challenged Clinton over her emails.
I watched the debate and saw some of the opinion charts as he was speaking, yes he got a bonus for the emails.
The rest was a play to his supporters, he failed to answer a single question asked to him until the end. It looked like he was shoehorning his campaign into the question that seemed most appropriate - like a game of cards against humanity.
The summary from Liegh Sales over here in Oz (a very experienced political journalist) was as I posted after if you supported Clinton you would say she won, same if you supported Trump he ticked the boxes for his base. Neither won over the others supporters and the undecided probably didn't care. Clinton delivered policy at least.
In the end she called it a Clinton win as Trump was the guy who needed a massive boost and failed to get one. He's probably off life support so to speak after that one but must know that he is behind in a lot of the places that matter for the election.
Oh dear does seem as though he has publicly shit the bed, it was only a matter of time though wasn't it 😆
Graham, yes sorry it was gonefishing who posted just before you. My point was that Trumpmwill scour Govt servers for messages from Clinton, she can delete from her end but not the Govt end. Lawyers / FBI can't search govt folders - lawyers call that a "fishing trip" but a Trump Presidency could.
I saw BBC summary of the debate and it looked pretty even to me, I could see how a Trump spin doctor would say he was calm. I thought his responce on tax issue was pretty simple, he used the same allowances others use like the big donors to the Clinton campaign and that if Clinton thought the allowances where wrong she could have campaigned to change them. She doesn't as her donors benefit.
Rumours of a $5m fee being asked for the release of a tape with Trump using the N word.
Incredible really, this is the most successful and powerful country in the world.
We go on.
(edit, worth pointing out that Luntz focus group clearly called the first debate for Clinton)
Didn't spot that one, the only person who thought Donald got the first one was him.
this differs from Clintons strategy, how, exactly?pretty much all he is doing is attacking Clinton
Tbh I've watched both debates and I think, strategically, trump comes out on top. They've heehaw to do with any substance and clinton seems perfectly willing to cat fight the process out, which only benefits trump imo.
You can argue over the little substance all ye like and try and base them on that but you're be deluding yourselves. These debates are all about playing to the lowest common denominator. Personally I struggle to pick out a winner there, as Clinton isn't shy with the personal attacks either. The debates are essentially just 3 hours of continual and overt digs at each other.
In that context trump is winning hands down with the draw more or less imo, as it levels the playing field down to a popularity contest and the jibes. In that sense trump is the stronger "character".
A grim grim place for politics. And we "Brits" shouldn't laugh too heard.
Politics has found its level amoung the world of shit reality TV bitch fights. Substance and content means nothing.
It is not acceptable if you are well known but you need to realise that was a private conversation between two blokes.
The question is why is that conversation "accidentally" recorded?Do you record private conversation only to release them to the public?
Where are the privacy of thoughts, speech and expression?
He was filming, he was wearing a microphone, the mike was live, Trump was too full of himself to remember the mike was live and recording, his attitude most likely, 'what the ****, those bits will just be edited out'.
When will you realise, Chewkw, that in situations like that, there is no such thing as a private conversation, when it's in public.
You want a private conversation, you go somewhere private, and YOU SWITCH THE SODDING MIKE OFF!
A bit like "our" No boom or burst ex-PM Brown isn't it.CountZero - Member
You want a private conversation, you go somewhere private, and YOU SWITCH THE SODDING MIKE OFF!
At the moment it is like making a mountain out of a molehill with all his movements and comments sized by those desperados down to minute details.
this differs from Clintons strategy, how, exactly?
If you listened last night at least she got some actual policy in.
You can argue over the little substance all ye like and try and base them on that but you're be deluding yourselves. These debates are all about playing to the lowest common denominator. Personally I struggle to pick out a winner there, as Clinton isn't shy with the personal attacks either. The debates are essentially just 3 hours of continual and overt digs at each other.
In the debate as a vacuum you could maybe come to that conclusion, the video of where he claims to have never said things coupled with video of him saying exactly that is case in point. His pathetic faux apology to the family of the serviceman he spent 3-4 days trying to beat down was cringeworthy and reeked of someone saying whatever he could to be elected. His constant interruptions and the worst of all his inability to look anything other than bored or confused when he wasn't talking himself was enough to drop him points.
In a regular year this could have been about policy which would have been a good thing for the voters, but instead he has driven a kicking fighting gutter level campaign based on the no matter what I've done somebody did worse premise (which could well be made up) Sunday night was just a call to his supporters to reassure them he was the Real Donald etc.
on taxes...
COOPER: You have not answered, though, a simple question. Did you use that $916 million loss to avoid paying personal federal income taxes for years?TRUMP: Of course I do. Of course I do. … I absolutely used it. And so did Warren Buffett and so did George Soros and so did many of the other people that Hillary is getting money from.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/10/13228628/warren-buffett-donald-trump-taxes
[img] 
[/img]
Careful who you use to back up your case
It gets better. Buffett reports that he took only $3.5 million in charitable deductions — even though he donated more than $2.8 billion. This is a not-so-subtle dig at Trump’s “charitable” efforts, which amount to self-serving work by his foundation and not a whole lot else. Buffett, by contrast, has pledged most of his estate to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and most of the remainder to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation (named after his late wife), which is one of the biggest backers of family planning and reproductive health and rights causes in the United States.As a final knife-twist, Buffett notes that he is currently being audited — but releasing information from his return anyway, since that is totally allowed, despite Trump's protests to the contrary.
At the moment it is like making a mountain out of a molehill with all his movements and comments sized by those desperados down to minute details.
Pffffffff.
Mountains out of molehills? Minute details? [u]He was bragging about his (actual) repeated sexual assault of women[/u] FFS. The fact that ANYONE is still defending him, or dismissing this as "bantz" is nauseating.
The Donald is trying desperately to deflect attention - but I feel like there is a pre-planned schedule of scandals about him that are going to arrive day-by-day between now and the election, leaving his campaign without time to mount a meaningful response.
here's hoping
Could you just clarify for us ninfan, do you actually support Trump, or just hate Clinton?
Or just troll.
he just tolls or more accurately is a devils advocate with a RW leaning
Ah, you see, anyone who disagrees with the leftie convention is a [i]Troll,[/i] now?
or perhaps more accurately either a Troll, racist or stupid.
Scott Adams (Dilbert creator) nails it again::
[i]Trump is trying to make America a bit more like Switzerland. Clinton is trying to make America less like Switzerland. Spend a day in Switzerland and tell me who has the better plan[/i]
Of course not but trolling is hardly the best defence to an accusation of trollinganyone who disagrees with the leftie convention is a Troll, now?
Trump is trying to make America a bit more like Switzerland.
Eh?
[i]*Googles Switzerland*[/i]
Hmmm...
Well I'm not seeing any Swiss policies promoting torture, war crimes, or sexual assaults on women.
And the Swiss have Universal Health Care and abortions are available as part of that. So no parity with Trump there.
I guess they are well known as a tax haven though, so maybe it's that?
Buffet is being very very economical with the truth. He runs his entire investment business through his Insurance Company. These are fantastic vehicles for legally avoiding and deferring taxes. I know as I've studied them
carefully and spent 2 years trying to raise the money to set one up. Some of the industry's biggest hedge fund names have set them up, Soros, Einhorn, Cohen, Moore
Buffett is famously "frugal" so easily gets by on $11m a year whilst legally sheltering the rest of his huge annual profit/income in Berkshire Hathaway
Ah, you see, anyone who disagrees with the leftie convention is a Troll, now?
or perhaps more accurately either a Troll, racist or stupid.
There's playing devil's advocate, there's simple trolling and there's blind stupidity.
This isn't disagreeing with leftie convention, this is suppporting Trump. Something a fair few right wing Americans seem to be having problems with at the moment.
Scott Adams (Dilbert creator) nails it again::Trump is trying to make America a bit more like Switzerland. Clinton is trying to make America less like Switzerland. Spend a day in Switzerland and tell me who has the better plan
Scott Adams fails to nail the starting point of this comparison. One could equally exchange Switzerland for Syria and have the same, effective soundbite.
Iknow as I've studied them
With your record of falsehoods hardly a ringing endorsement.
I know as I've studied them
If you don't mind I'll take your word with a pinch of salt....
[img] 
[/img]
What is the donald doing then? Odd to attack him when he just published all his accounts that showed he donated BILLIONS to charityBuffet is being very very economical with the truth.
Still its you so oddness is to be expected
To add:
Buffet states that he is currently being audited though is still able to release his returns.....
What's Trumps excuse now??
When will the n-word recording be released then?
That will be the final nail for Trump. will it be the morning of the polls, or the week before?
When is the point of maximum damage?
What's Trumps excuse now??
well in the absence of fact lets get with the spirit of the Trump Campaign and just make some shit up.
3 Reasons best one gets to be locked up in a small cell with Hillary when President Trump sends her down....
1) He's actually not that successful and has way less money than claimed hence his I'm awesome game would fall apart.
2) They are full of stuff that if looked at more closely would land him in jail
3) They have some massive payouts for off the record settlements that would finish him.
Mr Leb - look it all up yourself. I've been following Buffet for 30 years and had a personal investment in Berkshire Hathaway for a while. Google Hedge Fund Re-Insurers, very tax efficient way to run hedge fund money, the whole sector grew out of copying Buffet's model. I was quite close to investing in Fidelis a new firm launched last year setup by a Brit.
On a lighter note, Dutch humour
http://www.luckytv.nl/time-of-my-life/
When is the point of maximum damage?
they will be released to minimise the damage of any further wikileaks hilary info (tho the last lot were amazingly dull)
I suspect both camps are trying to dig out as much nasty shit about each other as possible
Trump really has dragged the election into the gutter, the problem is that, as weve seen with brexit, politicians using racist/xenophobic hate speak etc emboldens the nastier elements of society. Weve had a Tory conference with a barrage of xenophobic measures designed to appease our nation of bigots 🙁 .