[svelte]

[quote=poorgradstudent]At this point I think he just landed a triple jump over three Sharks. There may have been a ring of fire as well.[/quote]

lol! I would have said the same thing even before tonight!

[svelte]

[quote=poorgradstudent]

Whatever Nate Silver says.

I think with Nevada the remaining uncertainty is the fact Clinton hasn’t broken 50% in any polls. There are enough undecideds and Gary Johnson voters that if they broke hard for Trump at the end it could flip.
[/quote]

The history of flipping at this late date is not high. Here is a great graphic:

Is There Any Precedent For A Trump Comeback?

Since 1952 it has only flipped once after mid October, and that was just barely.

[svelte]

[quote=moneymaker]Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to me represent the voice of reason. To be willing to go against your party publicly for what they believe in is a good virtue in my opinion, oh yeah and I’m a registered Democrat too.[/quote]

I agree with you…those are two good Republicans. I do have a few issues with each of them (like I do with all politicians) but overall I think they are good grounded respectable people. I’d throw McCain on that list also.

[svelte]

[quote=ucodegen]
The correct statement is:

Donald Trump’s campaign says a British man is countering claims that the GOP presidential nominee groped a woman on a cross-country flight more than three decades ago.

Which is a stretch from “Trump camp puts forward..” The line “Trump camp puts forward witness to refute sex assault claim” is from article editors.
[/quote]

No, it is the “Trump camp puts forward…”:

Oct 14, 10:55 AM:
Defending running mate Donald Trump, Republican vice presidential candidate Mike Pence told TODAY’s Matt Lauer and Savannah Guthrie Friday that the evidence to disprove Trump’s accusers was just “hours” away from being made public.

“Stay tuned, there’s more information coming forward,” Pence explained during a live interview.

http://www.today.com/news/mike-pence-today-show-says-evidence-disproving-trump-s-accusers-t103941

“In an exclusive interview arranged by the campaign, Gilberthorpe said he was on the flight — in either 1980 or 1981— where Jessica Leeds claimed Trump groped her.”

http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/

If Pence says information is “coming forward” and then the Trump campaign arranges an interview with that source, then the Trump camp put that information forward. Period.

[svelte]

[quote=ucodegen]
My opinion is that there are too many people trying to get their two minutes of fame in the whole situation.

Considering that Gilberthorpe (who made the claims that he witnessed the whole thing) also made claims that he procured boys for under-aged sex parties for high-ranking British politicians in 2014 – means that your source may be questionable, as well as his statement. I don’t think he could be used to show Trump was innocent by not committing sexual harassment nor that he was even on the plane.
[/quote]

Wait, but wasn’t it the Trump camp that found and presented Gilberthorpe?

So you’re saying the Trump camp supplied a false witness?

Say it ain’t so~! 🙂

http://nypost.com/2016/10/14/trump-camp-puts-forward-witness-to-refute-sex-assault-claim/

[svelte]

[quote=Blogstar][quote=svelte]Even Republican studies have shown attacking Hillary on her husband, her age, her stamina, her health or her looks does not work.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-bill-clinton-attacks-republicans-229760

And what does Trump choose to emphasize?

His policies? What he’ll do as president? No, he focuses on Hillary’s husband and her health.

A 300 pound doofus.[/quote]

Be careful of the fat shaming.[/quote]

lol, you are right Blog. My mistake, apologies.

I should go high instead of low. 🙂

[svelte]

[quote=flu]
I think the concern of our younger generation being doomed is overblown. They’ll be fine, or at least a good portion of them. The rest, well personal choices maybe not so fine, but that’s no different from any other generation.

I think the pattern I’ve seen with most of the more successful ones are all the same… Reasonable education, strong work ethics, and good money management skills instilled from their parents and a no-excuses why I can’t do something.

I guess what type of career you have will also bias you in the type of milenials you see.[/quote]

Totally agree. And we could say the same thing about prior generations: A lot of people born in the 20s, 30s, and 40s thought the teens of the 70s were totally effed up…that those born in the 60s and 70s were lazy hippy bastards who would never amount to much. I still remember. My how times have changed.

[svelte]

[quote=njtosd][quote=svelte]

I’m not OK if someone believes women discussing Don or Bill, but don’t believe the women discussing the other. That’s just insane and shows an inability to use critical thinking.[/quote]

I’m sure those accusing Don are just as likely to be honest as the ones accusing Bill. Not sure if it seemed otherwise in my post…[/quote]

No worries. It wasn’t clear, glad you clarified.

[svelte]

Many of my HS friends joined fraternities when they entered college, and I could never figure out what the draw was…I’d visit their frat houses and it looked like the exact environment that would make me miserable.

My best friend in HS joined a frat at one of the largest, most prestigious universities in California. He died during initiation.

This was decades ago – frats have always been questionable.

[svelte]

[quote=njtosd]
Revenge is a dish best served cold. I would save that up, too, if I were one of those women. Not because I didn’t care – but because it’s so much more valuable in the right context.[/quote]

I’m OK if someone believes these women are telling the truth all these years later and use that rule with both Don and Bill.

I’m OK if someone believes these women aren’t truthful if they wait until years later to say anything and use that rule with both Don and Bill.

I’m not OK if someone believes women discussing Don or Bill, but don’t believe the women discussing the other. That’s just insane and shows an inability to use critical thinking.

[svelte]

[quote=bearishgurl]Bill isn’t just now being accused of anything. He was accused shortly after or a few years after he sexually assaulted or conducted himself in a lewd and lascivious manner with many women (not to mention his dozens of consensual affairs). These women aren’t just now coming forward. Their stories (and related media frenzy accompanying them) is old, very well-known news which is all on the record.
[/quote]

No Shit they didn’t just come out and say something now. But when they did come out years ago, the events were years old at that point! I still remember wondering why it took them years after the events to say anything! Apparently you conveniently forget that part.

Paula Jones – claims event happened 1991, waits until 1994 (after he’s elected!) to file suit.

Juanita Broderick – claims event happened in 1978, waited until 1999 to say anything.

Kathleen Wiley – claims event happened in 1993, waited until 1998 to say anything.

Gennifer Flowers – claims affair ended in 1980 when Chelsea was born, waited until 1992 to say anything.

Do your research before you take a position, BG!

[quote=bearishgurl]

Trump’s recent accusers … just came out of the blue after all these years. Where were these women when these incidences (presumably) took place? I’ve never heard of them and I have a l-o-o-ong memory.[/quote]

If you have a long memory, you wouldn’t have backed yourself into another corner.

Since you believe Trump’s innocence because the women didn’t report it immediately, you must now believe Bill’s also!

I’ll get you some water. Might make it easier for you to eat your words.

[svelte]

Even Republican studies have shown attacking Hillary on her husband, her age, her stamina, her health or her looks does not work.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-bill-clinton-attacks-republicans-229760

And what does Trump choose to emphasize?

His policies? What he’ll do as president? No, he focuses on Hillary’s husband and her health.

A 300 pound doofus.

[svelte]

[quote=bearishgurl]
Frankly, I’m tired of hearing about all these “bimbo eruptions” that the Clinton Campaign has recently dug up. These women have had up to 34 years to come forward to “complain” about the way Trump treated them but did not choose to do so until the Clinton campaign dug them out of the archives and made them an offer they couldn’t refuse. I don’t consider any of them “victims,” ESPecially the now 74-year-old former “beauty queen” who claimed she was once groped while Trump’s seat-mate on a commercial flight 34 years ago, lol …..[/quote]

Hypocrite again!

Bill gets accused years afterwards – his wife shouldn’t be prez.

Don gets accused years afterwards – they waited too long to say something, ignore them please.

[svelte]

[quote=flu][quote=svelte]And now, three hours after I received by ballot, I have voted. Filled out, signed, stamped, and in the mail box.[/quote]

The most important question I have to ask you….What did you vote for Prop 60?

:)[/quote]

I know you were joking but I voted yes.

Reasoning: OSHA mandates that dental health care workers wear gloves, surgical masks, protective eyewear, and protective clothing in specified circumstances to reduce the risk of exposures to bloodborne pathogens.

I would consider adult video actors another occupation that can be exposed to bloodborne pathogens. They deserve to be protected.

True it might drive video production out of state, but I doubt it. I figure the reason it is produced in LA is all the sweet young things that come to LA to be stars (huge supply of potential performers) and the large supply of infrastructure (stages, sets, crews). Few if any other cities are as well prepared. Besides, whether it drives business away should not be a consideration in protecting workers.

[svelte]

And now, three hours after I received by ballot, I have voted. Filled out, signed, stamped, and in the mail box.

[Author]

Posts