Stormy Daniels vs. The Donald

[funhusker]

31 minutes ago, commando said:

the right wing sights have been running with the al capone comparison pretty strong

I don't think they were wrong.  That was right up there with Maddow "exposing" Trumps years old tax return.....

[Moiraine]

3 hours ago, TheSker said:

Donald Trump has run pageants, hotels and casinos.  He's on his third marriage.

 

He's a reality television personality.

 

I think few, evangelicals included, are surprised about accusations regarding his personal behavior.

 

Many things about his behavior came out in the months and weeks before the election.  This stuff isn't exactly "hot off the press".

 

 

The fact he cheated on his wife isn't why this is a story. Nor is the fact she's a porn star. It's the agreement, alleged threats, the payment and whether it was legal.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Moiraine

[TheSker]

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

The fact he cheated on his wife isn't why this is a story.

Didn't say it was.

 

And didn't say that in my post.

[Moiraine]

4 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Didn't say it was.

 

And didn't say that in my post.

 

 

When you say, basically, the cheating's not a big deal to people because everyone knows he's a lecher, you're implying that his being a lecher was what was made out to be the big deal.

If you're just talking about the interview itself adding nothing because it's already been reported on, that makes sense.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Moiraine

[JJ Husker]

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

When say, basically, that it's not a big deal because everyone knows he's a lecher, you're implying that his being a lecher was what was made out to be the big deal.

 

Thanks for teaching me a new word today. Had to google lecher...made sense once I saw the definition. Unfortunately, the low morality, womanizing, etc. is not enough to bother many people any more. I’ve seen many say that stuff doesn’t move the needle for them. We have extremely low (read no) moral requirements for the highest office in the land. I blame Bill Clinton for making us immune to this sh#t. That alone should be enough to alienate his religious/evangelical base but they hypocritically look the other way.

[TheSker]

3 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

If you're just talking about the interview itself adding nothing because it's already been reported on, that makes sense.

Correct.

 

I'm saying it's not news.

[teachercd]

I thought AC did a good job with the interview.

I thought she did a good job telling what happened.

I believed everything she said.

 

[TheSker]

12 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

When you say, basically, the cheating's not a big deal to people because everyone knows he's a lecher, you're implying that his being a lecher was what was made out to be the big deal.

I didn't use the word cheating in my post, nor did I reference cheating specifically.

 

Lifestyle and behavior goes beyond one facet.

[JJ Husker]

5 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I thought AC did a good job with the interview.

I thought she did a good job telling what happened.

I believed everything she said.

 

 

Yeah, I thought she was very believable but I didn't believe/trust her lawyer. Par for the course I guess.

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

Thanks for teaching me a new word today. Had to google lecher...made sense once I saw the definition. Unfortunately, the low morality, womanizing, etc. is not enough to bother many people any more. I’ve seen many say that stuff doesn’t move the needle for them. We have extremely low (read no) moral requirements for the highest office in the land. I blame Bill Clinton for making us immune to this sh#t. That alone should be enough to alienate his religious/evangelical base but they hypocritically look the other way.

 

This stuff existed long before Slick Willy. JFK was banging Marilyn Monroe. 

My thoughts on the interview were that it all seemed believable. There wasn't much of anything new revealed but they did confirm somethings that hadn't been confirmed before. We know that someone spanked the President of the United States with a magazine with his face on it. It's not exactly consequential news, but man is it crazy when you reflect on it.

 

Also, I see people on Twitter saying the illegal campaign contribution thing isn't going to be a big deal. But it's important that that issue was hit on. If Mueller does decide to look into that, it's going to mean bad news for Michael Cohen. He's got a really broad mandate to investigate possible illegal activity centering on the 2016 election, and I don't see how it isn't relevant.

[Moiraine]

2 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

Thanks for teaching me a new word today. Had to google lecher...made sense once I saw the definition. Unfortunately, the low morality, womanizing, etc. is not enough to bother many people any more. I’ve seen many say that stuff doesn’t move the needle for them. We have extremely low (read no) moral requirements for the highest office in the land. I blame Bill Clinton for making us immune to this sh#t. That alone should be enough to alienate his religious/evangelical base but they hypocritically look the other way.

 

 

I don't think the fact Clinton cheated mattered that much when it came to whether he was a good president. I don't think it matters much with Trump either. (He's a bad president regardless). What I don't like is the hypocrites (especially my fellow Christians) who went nuts over it with Clinton, and for Trump say "he's changed." If you went crazy about Clinton doing it, you should also go crazy about Trump doing it.

Please note I'm not talking about any of the sexual assault accusations with either of them. That's a different thing.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Moiraine

[JJ Husker]

I'll stand by my rationale that if we expected more upright behavior from our elected officials that they would also perform better in their respective offices. One may not directly lead to the other, i.e. Jimmy Carter or JFK, but I do think we should have some semblance of a morality requirement for the office. If we did, Trump wouldn't have even been elected. And when I say "we" I mean the voters as a collective. I'm just sort of tired of people saying this type of behavior doesn't matter as long as they're a good President. It should and does matter and when known abead of time it is a serious warning sign as to what type of President they'll be. We need to expect more and have higher standards. Without higher expectations we'll just keep getting more of the bare minimum we expect. IMO that isn't good enough. I may be preaching to the choir but I don't think I need to defend the thought that having higher moral expectations would prevent many of the problems we are currently experiencing.

[Danny Bateman]

Oh definitely, @Comfortably Numb. We could even branch that off into a separate discussion about whether there is currently enough incentive to attract good presidential candidates. The salary definitely isn't attracting top-flight talent, and all the crap you have to put up with and the way you have to bare your soul (and dirty laundry) to the nation probably scares a lot of people off. Trump is a bit of an exception in this case, because he bared his soul and too many of us didn't blink. He also stands to gain massively financially from the new tax bill. The conflicts of interest inherent in someone so transparently still plugged into their personal business continues to irk me. Jimmy Carter had to sell his damn peanut farm.

 

I would also agree with @Moiraine in that this is useful as way to out the hypocrites. Obviously the so-called religious right has failed miserably in this regard. The moralizing we heard from them during the Clinton era in the 90s is glaringly absent now.

[commando]

correct

 

 

[TGHusker]

As a Christian and conservative, I sure cannot stand for any moralization that goes on in support of Trump.   A dead clock is right 2 times during a 24 hour day.  Trump may be 'right' on our issues a couple of times but that gives us no reason to support the guy or not to call him out on the 1438 minutes he is wrong the rest of the day.  Giving lip service to issues that evangelical voters thought were important is not reason enough to stand with him.  

Of equal concern is the Republican party's huge fail in allowing this guy to get nominated in the first place. Too many big egos in the room that allowed Trump to take them down one by one.  Then the continued ineptitude of the party to reign him in and hold him accountable only speaks for the party's willingness to compromise long term political good will for short term gain.