Americans Change the TV Channel as Networks Plunge

Hey, knock yourself out. Explain how "Man up" is misogynist. Please.

 

I'm not voting for Trump. Nor am I voting for Hillary.

I have to say though, how the hell is it that these people slinging poo at Trump (And I believe some assertions against him as a sexual predator are accurate) are JUST NOW coming out?

It's just ridiculous. I don't get it. It does feel the fix is in, and everyone here KNOWS I am no Trump fan. It reeks of another Sanders take over by the Clintons.

Shameful.

This entire election is such a let-down. No matter who wins those of us scraping boots will lose.

 

Uh, there's not really a lot of mystery to that.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/13/13272904/trump-women-accuse-response
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...rumps-accusers-waited-to-come-forward-w444878
http://fortune.com/2016/10/14/donald-trump-sexual-assault-accusers/

 

Exactly... And if more people had cable, less and less would watch ABC, NBC, and CBS because those stations are terribly biased.

 

*Well, the term "man up" means to be brave or tough enough to deal with an unpleasant situation. You're saying that women aren't brave or tough enough to deal with an unpleasant situation. And it's not that I disagree for the most part, but from a liberal standpoint, you're being misogynistic.

*don't hate the messenger, I didn't set the liberal standards.

 

Even if we grant that the saying necessarily suggests women are less capable -- and I'm not conceding that point -- it's not misogynistic. It would be, as I said, mildly sexist.

Misogyny is different than simple sexism. One can be sexist (believe in or indulge gender stereotypes) without being misogynistic (dislike, hatred or fear of women).
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-mysteries-love/201502/12-ways-spot-misogynist

 

Three opinionated liberal rags is all you can come up with. You just proved Aphotic's point.

 

He says it is illegal for you to read the emails but not illegal for him, so really it is illegal to know anything about the emails except what he tells you. That is the stance of the corporate propaganda media: It should be illegal for you to listen to anyone but them and illegal to say,think or do anything but what they tell you.

 

Careful, you don't want to fall into this wonderful basket of deplorables, and if I'm not mistaken, a sexist falls right in.

I know I know, It's hilarious. That's why we all made memes and gear out of that comment.

 

LOL? What? THAT is your rebuttal? "Fortune" is a liberal rag?

Fail.

- - - Updated - - -

Um, okay. Whatever. Trump isn't being criticized for saying anything as mild as "man up." Your false equivalency is staggering.

 

Look. Just weeks before the election, NBC suddenly remembers that they have a hot mic moment on Trump from his days when he was in entertainment and not politics so they run it. Suddenly like a flock of seagulls, women start coming out and claiming Trump grabbed and kissed them. You don't find it a coincidence that Trump said this in 2005 and girls start coming forward ONLY after it gets released in 2016? He made it easy for the Clinton campaign to round up some girls that had former ties to Trump, so old has-beens that are needing some money, and have them come forward.

So the excuse here is that Trump did everything that survivors of sexual assault say they’re afraid of if they make their accusations public. You don't find that odd, not even a little, correct?

 

Not talking about Trump. I'm talking about his "basket of irredeemable deplorables." We're all (every one of his supporters, or half now) homophobes, racists, SEXISTS, misogynists, and islamophobes. Probably forgetting a few. I just wanted you to know that with your mild sexism of "man up" (because lots of Trump supporters out there have said less than that but are considered deplorable), you're now a deplorable. And irredeemable. I hope you're happy with yourself.

 

Did you bother reading any of the three links I provided? Like I said, there really isn't any mystery here. Maybe read the explanations there, and then make specific rebuttals to them.

Sure. 12-plus unrelated people, all looking for money (even though none have actually asked for money, and the statute of limitations ran out long ago in most cases, so they can't even sue Trump), and thus all wiling to put their personal reputations on the line just to accuse Trump of things he didn't do.

Never mind that many of these people told friends or family about the incident when it happened. So it's not like they're suddenly making stuff up.

And never mind that many of these people were reluctant to come forward -- several of them were tracked down by reporters and had to be persuaded to tell their story. Not exactly the actions of gold-diggers.

Oh, and never mind that we have Trump himself copping to exactly the sort of behavior many of these women describe.

Are they all telling the truth? Don't know. Can you just dismiss them all as liars? Of course not. Not without actually taking the time to discredit them in some relevant fashion.

Not sure what you mean here. Could you clarify?

 

I read the first source... Willing to put their personal reputations on the line? Are you serious? But ah, they told their friends and family a long time ago, THAT changes everything.

". . .copping to exactly the sort of behavior many of these women describe."

BINGO! Trump says you can do that when you're a star, and he plainly says he never did it when asked eleventy thousand times by Cooper in the 2nd debate, just that you can. But suddenly 12 girls all come out saying that's exactly what he did to them, and they were too scared to speak of it before, but were able to be tracked down by reporters.

*scoff*

 

Hillary wasn't wrong. By "deplorables", she meant racists and white supremacists.

Here's some poll data for you:
http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/poll-two-thirds-trump-supporters-think-obama-muslim

Two-thirds of Trump supporters think Obama is a Muslim, and roughly the same number believe he wasn't born in the United States.

Here's some more:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-race-idUSKCN0ZE2SW

40%-plus of Trump supporters describe blacks as "criminal", "lazy" and "violent."

There was some detailed polling of Trump supporters in South Carolina, which found all sorts of disheartening things.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/2...d-trumps-supporters-for-intolerance.html?_r=0

A third of Trump supporters wanted to ban LGBT people from entering the country.

A third believed the Japanese internment during World War II was a good idea.

Three times as many Trump supporters (31%) agreed with the statement that "whites are a superior race" than did Republicans in general.

Heck, 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation -- a percentage far higher than that of any other candidate.

Was Hillary's statement impolitic? Yep. But it was accurate. Trump has the overwhelming support of the sewer dwellers. They're not necessarily a majority of his support in the general -- he also draws in Hillary haters, people who vote straight party tickets without question, and people who just want to blow everything up and don't care that Trump is more of a menace than the elites they want to replace. But they were a very large part of his support in the Republican primary, and continue to be his loudest and most committed supporters.

 

Can you tell me how many "Trump supporters" were polled? Thanks in advance.

 

Trump bragged about it. He was asked ONCE by Cooper about it, and of course he denied every actually doing it. That proves nothing one way or the other.

There is no particular validity to simply dismissing the accusations out of hand. It is NOT weird that this would prompt them to come forward.

For one thing, once they started coming forward, others would realize they weren't alone. That's one big reason people stay silent: If it's he said, she said, who is going to believe the nobody instead of the powerful, wealthy man?

For another, there was Trump bragging about having done it. When he denied having done it on stage, is it really that hard to understand that someone he HAD done it to would get angry? Angry enough to finally come forward?

Does that prove their accusations are true? No. But it certainly doesn't make it reasonable to just call them all liars and gold-diggers. You don't want it to be true; I get that. But wishing doesn't make it so.

 

I'm not sure what your concern is, but all of my links contain links to the detailed poll methodology. In the South Carolina polls, for instance, there were two polls -- one of voters in general a few days before the GOP primary, one an exit poll during the GOP primary. In each case, they asked people who they supported.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-white-republicans-more-racist-than-white-democrats/


Feel free to dismount your high horse anytime.

Self-righteous liberal posturing is rarely reflective of reality.

 

Um, what do you think your image-bomb proved? We are talking about Trump supporters, not Republicans in general.

I have never said Republicans IN GENERAL are heavily racist.

 

There's more evidence every day.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/17/wikileaks-journalists-clinton-staff-homes-before-hillarys-campaign-launch/

 

I only have to know one thing. All of Herman Cain's accusers disappeared the day he stepped out of the campaign, ditto for the accusers of Ben Carson.
Bill Clinton's accusers keep hanging around. As do Hillary's.

 

It's a vast left-wing conspiracy (hey it worked for Hillary).

 

I would imagine that most people on this forum don't watch much TV.

 

Wow. That's ... shallow.

And completely irrelevant. What about Trump's accusers? You have no way of knowing if they will hang around or not.