Is Trump Video Surprising?

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, kapikui said:

 

That said, I've never made any secret that I don't think Trump is in this to win.  He is in it to do as much damage to the Republican party as possible.  He wants to give the presidency and both houses of congress to the democrats and get favors from a sitting president that he wouldn't be able to use or do if HE were president. Hillary was falling in her numbers again.  Every time that happens, Trump does or says something to destroy his chances.  This is no different. 

Disturbing...  one of my biggest problems with Trump is his whole campaign has felt more to me like a cross between a sales pitch and a publicity stunt than his actual convictions.  Makes me wonder what would happen if he decided to unofficially change parties . . . again . . . while in office, as he appears to have no deeply held convictions whatsoever other than shameless self promotion.  

That said, maybe Pence will keep him in line . . . 

Edited October 9, 2016 by DoctorLemon

[Just_A_Guy]

8 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

As you probably know, a video of Trump making vulgar comments was recently leaked. Because of this, he has lost a lot of support and several people have unendorsed him. After watching part of this video (censored), it doesn't seem that shocking that he said these things. I am trying to understand why this has affected his campaign so much, as he has said awful things in the past. 

Is anyone out there surprised by what he said in the video? Does anyone think it is shockingly uncharacteristic of him? 

And, does anyone think he should drop out and let Pence be the candidate because he has no chance of getting elected now?

No, this is no surprise.  We knew what the snake was when we picked it up.

Trump would never drop out; it's not in his nature.  Were he to do so, running Pence in his place wouldn't be enough; because Pence (and everyone else who endorsed Trump) knew full well who and what Trump was when they endorsed him and the media won't let them walk away from that.  (Pity.  I like Pence, a lot.)

Even if Trump bailed, the fact of his nomination would be a cloud over the party for the rest of the campaign unless he were replaced by a NeverTrumper like Romney or Kasich or Mike Lee--and I rather suspect that if that happened, the Trump faction would suddenly be a lot more amenable to the prospect of a Hillary presidency.

No, the hand for defeat has been dealt; and there is nothing left but to play it through.

[mirkwood]

Trump is a horrible, awful man. 

Hillary is Ether 8 embodied.  LDS should think really hard about that for a while.

I would take Trump over her every day of the week.  That said, I don't like any of my choices.  I may skip that box on my ballot this time as I vote.

Edited October 9, 2016 by mirkwood

[NeuroTypical]

Just want to make sure, as we are talking about how horrible Trump is, that we remember these names:

Quote

Paula Jones: Claims Bill Clinton propositioned and exposed himself to her in 1991. Clinton eventually settled with Jones out of court for $850,000, but never admitted to any wrongdoing.

Juanita Broaddrick: Alleges Bill Clinton raped her in 1978.

Kathleen Willey: Alleged that Bill Clinton had sexually assaulted her during his first term as President.

Eileen Wellstone: Alleges Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1969.

Carolyn Moffet: Alleges that she had to flee a hotel room after Clinton demanded she perform sex acts on him in 1979.

Elizabeth Ward Gracen: Alleges she was forced by Clinton to have sex with him in 1982.

Becky Brown: (Chelsea Clinton’s nanny) Her Arkansas State Trooper husband claims Clinton attempted to seduce her in while the two were in governor’s mansion.

Helen Dowdy: (Wife of one of Hillary’s cousins) Alleges Clinton groped her on the dance floor of a wedding in 1986.

Cristy Zercher: Told Star magazine that Clinton groped her for over 40 minutes once, when she was a flight attendant aboard Clinton’s campaign jet in 1991-92.

We elected Bill Clinton knowing some of those names, and re-elected him knowing the rest.  

Has anyone accused Trump of rape or assault?

[Just_A_Guy]

Yes.

[yjacket]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Just want to make sure, as we are talking about how horrible Trump is, that we remember these names:

We elected Bill Clinton knowing some of those names, and re-elected him knowing the rest.  

Has anyone accused Trump of rape or assault?

Oh don't worry, in true #NeverTrumper fashion they will ignore the massive list of Clinton infractions (sexual assaults, dead bodies, public corruption, etc.) claim that Clinton has more moral fiber than Trump that she is more of a "conservative" and vote for her!

I completely get not voting for Trump-but to claim to be to "conservative" and claim the moral high ground by voting for Clinton over Trump is ludicrous-they are just wolves in sheep clothing . . really big government liberals wrapped in the Republican party-good riddance to them.

[Guest MormonGator]

19 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yes.

 I wanted to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. After all, if I spoke to people who hated you, ex-wives and failed business associates I could make you out to be a scumbag too. That goes for anyone.

However, enough is enough. This man obviously has serious problems with self control. And worse, he might be a sexual predator. That's not something I say lightly. Yes, Bill Clinton obviously is one too but you can't justify a wrong by pointing to another one. If you rob a bank you can't say "But this girl down the road is selling meth to five year olds. Leave me alone and go get her." 

Edited October 9, 2016 by MormonGator

[jerome1232]

Is Bill Clinton running for president? No? 

Comparing Trump to a guy that was impeached just doesn't do much to make me think "oh, Trump is only as bad as a president that was impeached, he's just swell then"

Edited October 9, 2016 by jerome1232

[yjacket]

29 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

 I wanted to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. After all, if I spoke to people who hated you, ex-wives and failed business associates I could make you out to be a scumbag too. That goes for anyone.

However, enough is enough. This man obviously has serious problems with self control. And worse, he might be a sexual predator. That's not something I say lightly. Yes, Bill Clinton obviously is one too but you can't justify a wrong by pointing to another one. If you rob a bank you can't say "But this girl down the road is selling meth to five year olds. Leave me alone and go get her." 

There might be more, or there might be less:

The article lists 3 incidents.  1 with his an ex-wife. 1 with a the wife/girlfriend of a business partner with whom he was suing prior to this incident and 1 with a 13 year old.  

I hate sexual assault and no one should ever have to deal with it . . .but I also quite frankly don't give a whole lot of credence to incidents that happened a long time ago that the individual is just now bringing to light b/c #1 memories are extremely faulty and many times unless someone was actually recording the incident it's really difficult to say with 100% accuracy, xyz happened.

Unfortunately rape and sexual assault has turned into a guilty until proven innocent crime in the US.  A woman who accuses someone of sexual assault must automatically be believed or else the other party is misogynist. And yet, again it is proven that eye-witness accounts in general are notoriously faulty, so the actual memory of what happened may or may not be accurate as to what actually happened.

I'm of the theory you need to report the event right away or quite frankly your story doesn't hold too much water with me (yes that even goes for people like Bill Clinton).  Where I will change my mind on this is when a plethora of evidence starts coming up (like Bill Cosby and Clinton). So yes, if we start seeing quite a bit of evidence, I will change my mind on this with Trump . . . as of right now my mind is that he is your typical vulgar, uncouth CEO. Is it possible he is a predator, sure, but I'd like to actually see evidence that he was at this Epistein party.

Also remember a lot of this is changing as more and more women enter the workforce (it wasn't long ago that having a playboy centerfold hanging up in the office wasn't really that big of a deal).

Edited October 9, 2016 by yjacket

[yjacket]

10 minutes ago, jerome1232 said:

Is Bill Clinton running for president? No? 

It's about the hypocrisy; Clinton will come off all sanctimonious about how she has been fighting for women's rights and how much of a slimball Trump is, yet the record shows that she was willing to cut the knees off of all the accusers of her husband.  She didn't automatically believe them, she targeted them and went after them.

They are all corrupt, they are all dirty-Clinton isn't any cleaner than Trump (more likely a lot dirtier).

Again, I've said it before the fight that is currently being wagged on the surface looks like it's just Clinton vs. Trump; R vs. D. ,etc. but it is way more than that.  Below the surface, the war that is being waged right now is the current cabal of insiders thugs (Skull&Bones, CFR, globalists, etc.) vs. an external thug who isn't part of the "in" crowd.

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, jerome1232 said:

Comparing Trump to a guy that was impeached just doesn't do much to make me think "oh, Trump is only as bad as a president that was impeached, he's just swell then"

We're not comparing Trump to Clinton.  We're comparing people's reactions to Trump, to people's reactions to Clinton.  Because we often find the reactions are different (i.e. one gets ignored/defended/justified/minimized, and the other one gets accused/judged.  And if one finds onesself doing that, one is discovering onesself committing an act of hypocracy.  

Basically, in the public arena of discussions, you basically lose a lot of persuasive power if you're a dang hypocrite. (Not saying you personally, jerome, just the general "you".)

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yes.

Fair enough.  So, Clinton has more, and Clinton has settled one case by giving a bunch of money.  After Ivanka's “I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”, and after the other one was withdrawn, Trump has one.  Not sure of the outcome of the suit involving the 13 yr old.  Surely it doesn't deserve to just be dismissed out of hand.

Regarding the OP's question - none of this is surprising.  Alexander Hamilton also had one, which he admitted to in his Reynolds Pamphlet.

Edited October 9, 2016 by NeuroTypical

[Guest MormonGator]

@NeuroTypical isn't telling us the truth. In church this morning I saw him wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat! 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

We're not comparing Trump to Clinton.  We're comparing people's reactions to Trump, to people's reactions to Clinton.  Because we often find the reactions are different (i.e. one gets ignored/defended/justified/minimized, and the other one gets accused/judged.  And if one finds onesself doing that, one is discovering onesself committing an act of hypocracy.  

This is effective--to a point--when dealing with those who are on-record as supporting Bill Clinton.  Less so for the ideological/Religious Right folks who never did embrace him.  Trump supporters need to be very careful if they try this argument on us; because it boils down to "you already sold to a sexual libertine/predator like Bill Clinton once; why not twice?".  And we're over here thinking "wait--I don't know about you, but I never sold out to a sexual libertine/predator."

Edited October 9, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[carlimac]

I'm interested in Anatess's view on this whole bruhaha. And any others who have been staunch Trump supporters inspite of, well...trump himself.  Can even they look past this?  I haven't been around for several months so I don't know if JAG or someone else has won her or any others over to the third party side yet or not. 

This isn't meant to taunt her. I'm really curious to know how Trump supporters who also are faithful and religious feel about the race now.  I've always thought Anatess had good solid arguments for all things moral.  What now?

 

 

[carlimac]

And by the way,  I saw a funny tweet last night." At least we avoided the killer blow that would have been Marco Rubio's October Surprise: The late-paid water bill from 1994." 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, carlimac said:

I'm interested in Anatess's view on this whole bruhaha. And any others who have been staunch Trump supporters inspite of, well...trump himself.  Can even they look past this?  I haven't been around for several months so I don't know if JAG or someone else has won her or any others over to the third party side yet or not. 

This isn't meant to taunt her. I'm really curious to know how Trump supporters who also are faithful and religious feel about the race now.  I've always thought Anatess had good solid arguments for all things moral.  What now?

 

 

Remember, even if this shows Trump is a man of very low morals, Clinton was the champion of the abomination known as partial birth abortion.  It is kind of hard to go below that one.

Edited October 9, 2016 by DoctorLemon

[prisonchaplain]

7 hours ago, jerome1232 said:

Is Bill Clinton running for president? No? 

Comparing Trump to a guy that was impeached just doesn't do much to make me think "oh, Trump is only as bad as a president that was impeached, he's just swell then"

The point of comparing Trump to Clinton is demonstrating the media's over-the-top feigned outrage and their bias against GOP candidates.  Personally, I see Trump as having deep personal moral failures, and Clinton as being a serious threat to religious liberty, and to the lives of the unborn.

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

The point of comparing Trump to Clinton is demonstrating the media's over-the-top feigned outrage and their bias against GOP candidates.  Personally, I see Trump as having deep personal moral failures, and Clinton as being a serious threat to religious liberty, and to the lives of the unborn.

That's the thing... in some ways i am not a true conservative because i am open to at least questioning conservative ideas on taxation, immigration and the economy (or perhaps accepting it, as my views are constantly evolving), but i simply cannot bring myself to support anyone who is going to be supporting abortion, the spread of secularism, and all that.  So i always wind up voting republican, even if I don't buy it all.

Guess I have a political opinion to offend just about everyone!

Edited October 10, 2016 by DoctorLemon

[prisonchaplain]

@DoctorLemon welcome to the silent majority.

[anatess2]

19 hours ago, carlimac said:

I'm interested in Anatess's view on this whole bruhaha. And any others who have been staunch Trump supporters inspite of, well...trump himself.  Can even they look past this?  I haven't been around for several months so I don't know if JAG or someone else has won her or any others over to the third party side yet or not. 

This isn't meant to taunt her. I'm really curious to know how Trump supporters who also are faithful and religious feel about the race now.  I've always thought Anatess had good solid arguments for all things moral.  What now?

 

 

Thank you for mentioning me.  I was just gonna blow by this thread as I am sooooo tired.  We have been on post-Hurricane clean-up work for the last 3 days - no, my property had zero damage - but I'm one of the very very lucky ones.  My FIL, for example, has 7 branches of a fallen oak puncture right through the ceiling... anyway, Mormon Helping Hands is SUPER AWESOME!  With Katrina, we took a couple trucks and just drove parallel to I-10 until we saw damaged homes and started fixing one after another until we ran out of provisions.  Took 2 weeks and the boys didn't even make it halfway past Missisippi.  This time, we have an 800 number, RS taking charge of the phone banks and logging "service tickets" into some software and the EQ pulling "service tickets" on their portable electronic devices as they go perform the service and "close the tickets".  My 2 teen-age boys fixed so many fences they can probably start a fencing company with all the skills they learned...  We'll be doing this for the next 3 weekends at least!

Okay, Trump.

It is OCTOBER.  This is just going to get worse.  I'm not surprised.  AT ALL.  Okay, let me give you MY perspective from someone who grew up in a political family.  My uncle is one of the most amazing political personalities in my country.  He is currently an adviser to President Duterte.  He was chosen, even as somebody that is considered a "small town politician" because of his 50+ years record as a staunch anti-oligarchy/anti-corruption political force that went toe-to-toe with Marcos even as he served in the Assembly (same as Congress) under the Marcos Presidency and went toe-to-toe again with Marcos' oligarch opponents after Marcos' exile.  My uncle's leadership with effective and clean governance is unimpeachable.  Guess what happens every single election as we campaign for my uncle... we have to defend again and again and again and again and again the fact that my uncle has several children out of wedlock from different mothers in a long span of years in a country where family values is soooo important that divorce is illegal.

This is why Republicans are sooo easy to defeat in political campaigns.  All you have to do is wage an all out negative campaign to bury issues of governance.  Because, if the talk on the stump is about governance, Republicans win- every single time.  My uncle won his elections most of the time because my dad, who is the campaign manager, has made it a science to fight negative attacks with issues of governance.  The only times my uncle lost was when he has to fight against big money who can saturate the press with negative ad buys and buy votes if that doesn't work.  My father, of course, is your paragon of virtue.  His moral principles are unimpeachable.  But, unlike my uncle, my dad does not have the strong skillset for secular governance.  He knows what to do, what needs to happen - he advises all the politicians in my family - and he has not led us astray yet.  But, when he has to sit on that executive chair and make decisions between 2 or more impossible choices... to be honest, his moral strength becomes a weakness in making impossible secular choices.  He knows this, so he has never run for political office.  He just can't stomach it.

You don't need to look much farther than Mitt Romney - the squeaky clean guy who, by November, became an out-of-touch rich kid who is a sexist, racist, homophobe bigot who has binders of women who won't give them contraception, leaves his employees to die, bullies his classmates, ties fido to the top rack of his van and evades taxes.

This is the kind of campaign that the Democrats will wage.  Every single time.  Because there's no winning on the issues.  With a complicit press, even squeaky-clean Romney is a hard sell.  And without a guy on the Executive chair, you can seed Congress with as many Republicans as you want nothing will ever come out of it because CONGRESS IS BROKEN.

That's why... even as a lot of Republicans tar and feather Paul Ryan for "selling out", I am firm on my stance that he needs to remain in that seat as House Speaker.  We need a Ryan on that chair because of his unshakeable "stickler for process" principles.  He is more concerned about getting Congress to work again than what actually has to get pushed up to get there.  WE NEED THIS.  This is a broken government and before you can get anything done, it needs to get fixed so that ideological differences once again gets debated on the Congress floor instead of used simply as vote-buying campaign-smearing job-security-gaining talking points!

Trump is another one that NEEDS TO WIN.  He is instrumental to fix a broken government.  His role is to break up the political process that has set up camps in hard ideological football-team-like sides that has brought the government to a halt the past 16 years.  Trump is the ONLY ONE that can do it simply by the fact that he holds no loyalty to any of the football-teams and is impervious to these ideologies that sound good but is in-actionable.

It is a MAJOR PLUS that Trump's instinctive stances align with what I believe is what needs to happen in the USA - especially with trade and foreign policy... 2 things that directly impact the Philippines and 2 things that both Republicans and Democrats disagree with Trump on.  He is the vehicle where the moral objectives of the religious right CAN BE MADE TO INFLUENCE governance.

But yeah... Republicans and their moral sensibilities always forget the immediate issues in lieu of this idea that it is more important to have a President that is a paragon of virtue than someone who can lead the secular and temporal health of a nation.  Your prophet needs to be a paragon of virtue.  You need to be a paragon of virtue.  They and you are a spiritual leader.  Your President needs to be an effective governor.  If he's also a paragon of virtue so much the better.  Therefore, just like God chooses non-paragons-of-virtue (and commands them to do not-very-comfortable-to-the-sensibilities acts) to pave the way such that Free Agency can reign over the land and Spiritual Leaders can have the opportunity to influence people, the office of the President is the same.  That's why people like Dr. Ben Carson and Jeff Sessions and myself remain solidly in the side of Trump.

 

Edited October 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Still_Small_Voice]

We have the choice between a complete sexual pervert and the murderer Hillary Clinton.  The American voters put us in this position.  I wanted Ted Cruz or Rubio but they gave me Trump.

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

We have the choice between a complete sexual pervert and the murderer Hillary Clinton.  The American voters put us in this position.  I wanted Ted Cruz or Rubio but they gave me Trump.

If I was American and Ted Cruz or Rubio was the Republican candidate, I wouldn't think twice about pulling the lever for them.  But, Cruz and Rubio... especially Cruz, not as much Rubio... is the same politician profile that has halted government for the past 16 years.  Rubio's record in Florida shows he is easily corruptible (not necessarily personal gain but more party gain).

Newt Gingrich is THE GUY that the USA needs - but he fell because of the adultery allegations.  I'll give you another example of someone who I believe would be better - Arnold Schwarzenegger (yes, he's not natural born so he can't be President).  His governorship has showed that he has the ability to keep government working even against a brick wall of opposition.  But then, he's another one of those that had to try to shake off sexual assault accusations during the campaign.

 

Edited October 10, 2016 by anatess2

[Larry Cotrell]

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

If I was American and Ted Cruz or Rubio was the Republican candidate, I wouldn't think twice about pulling the lever for them.  But, Cruz and Rubio... especially Cruz... is the same politician profile that has halted government for the past 16 years.

Trump epitomizes politician profile. He tells people what they want to hear so that he can get votes. He won't really build a wall. He won't really deport all of the illegals. And most importantly, he won't make America great again. It's all political rhetoric.

[anatess2]

4 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

Trump epitomizes politician profile. He tells people what they want to hear so that he can get votes. He won't really build a wall. He won't really deport all of the illegals. And most importantly, he won't make America great again. It's all political rhetoric.

Of course, there's not a single thing that supports that viewpoint other than... media opinions.