Stage 5 of Kotites debate cycle is in full flow. I predict he will find faults with my post instead of answering a simple question.

I was right.

---

We don't. The Brits are a mess right now.

Shows what happens when you go anti establishment, the markets don't like it. Would see similar in a Trump presidency.


The New leader however is very popular in the opinion polls. However as a woman she better watch herself around President Trump.

---

Don't have time to review the whole thread, so pardon me if this has already been pointed out. 

 

I've heard it said rape and sexual assault aren't about sex, but power.  It is the assertion of one's power over someone who is helpless to resist, for reasons of actual or perceived weakness.  True sexual predators get off on the power, not the sex act.

 

I don't know if Donald is a groper, but his statement about "grab them by the _______" because you can get away with it when you are "a star", speaks to what he wants to do with his power.

 

If we are stupid enough to give this man more power than he already has, he'll be grabbing his perceived enemies by the genitals. He pretty much told Hillary that in the debate with the "you'd be in jail" quip.  The trumpettes like this about him, because they think he'll be the authoritarian that will subjugate the Mexicans, Muslims, Iranians, and the GOP establishment. The problem is, when you disagree with him - and you inevitably will - he's going to give you the same treatment, no matter who is wrong or right.

 

Other men and women do great things with their power.  They adopt orphans, they help eradicate diseases, they fight hunger, they try to make the world a better place.

 

Donald just wants to grab the genitals of whoever he wants on any given day. 

 

He is a petty, incredibly small-minded human being that has made the world a little worse via twitter for the last 5 years.  He will not behave like Eisenhower, Lincoln, or T. Roosevelt, he will behave pretty much like Burlosconi, Pinochet, or Marcos (No way he's up there with the Hitlers and Stalins, gives him too much credit).

 

While I understand anger at the establishment, I don't understand cutting off your nose to spite your face.  That's what we would have done if we elected Donald.  Now, thanks to his own big mouth, it doesn't look like we will.

 

What a wonderful October surprise.

---

For the love of God.. you are thick. I do not care about whether or not Trump is being truthful. I do not care if he was making a joke.


I do care that there is a blanket excuse that was made which does not accept the possibility the incident was not consensual simply because one person in the incident (it could be any incident) says it was. You cannot absolve a person from the possibility of wrongdoing simply by getting their version of events. Period.


This is not about humor or Trump.

Thats not what was said. What was said is that if you presume that what Trump said to be pure truth then you also have to assume that the "lets me" part is also true. Which would mean it is not "crime"



"You cannot absolve a person from the possibility of wrongdoing simply by getting their version of events."


You cannot judge a person to have commited a crime based on a joke, with no evidence and no input from people that it supposedly happened to.


You keep saying this isn't about Trump when this whole thread is about Trump and the non issue that you are so upset about.


At least be honest with yourself when you are being destroyed in debate. Its not a good look for you.

---

Only in America...we have our choice of:

 

A:  a woman bashing chauvinistic pig

 

or

 

B: a lying, war criminal, borderline extortionist, and oh yeah, murderer

 

WAY TO GO 'MERICA!!

It truly is sad that one of these two will win.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

IT DOESN'T [BAD WORD REMOVED] MATTER IF IT IS TRUE OR NOT! I DON'T CARE.


Answer the question I posed. Honestly. Can we as a society absolve any man over any potential improper touching simply because the man involved claims "she let me" without having been there, seen it, or heard from the woman who allegedly "let" him?

The gift that keeps on giving.

---

Wow.  Still arguing over a non-issue.

 

There's a theory that when a story like this, though not policy, can be a death blow because it confirms what the populace had a concern regarding the politician.

 

It's a non-issue regarding policy.  But it confirms the type of man he is.  And that confirmation verifies for many that he's not fit to be president.

---

We don't talk about sexually assaulting women.

Question, did you actually listen to the conversation?  Not read it but actually listen to it?  Did you hear the pauses, the inflection in his voice?  

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Question, did you actually listen to the conversation?  Not read it but actually listen to it?  Did you hear the pauses, the inflection in his voice?  

 

Uhhh.. How could anyone not have heard the conversation?  I mean, it's your opinion.  And that's fine.  That wasn't joking...  That was a dude talking about how he feels entitled because of his social status and wealth to get away with advancing on women without their initial consent.

 

That's what this is about.

 

Consent v.  un-wanted advances that can be defined as sexual assault.

---

Don't have time to review the whole thread, so pardon me if this has already been pointed out. 

 

I've heard it said rape and sexual assault aren't about sex, but power.  It is the assertion of one's power over someone who is helpless to resist, for reasons of actual or perceived weakness.  True sexual predators get off on the power, not the sex act.

 

I don't know if Donald is a groper, but his statement about "grab them by the _______" because you can get away with it when you are "a star", speaks to what he wants to do with his power.

 

If we are stupid enough to give this man more power than he already has, he'll be grabbing his perceived enemies by the genitals. He pretty much told Hillary that in the debate with the "you'd be in jail" quip.  The trumpettes like this about him, because they think he'll be the authoritarian that will subjugate the Mexicans, Muslims, Iranians, and the GOP establishment. The problem is, when you disagree with him - and you inevitably will - he's going to give you the same treatment, no matter who is wrong or right.

 

Other men and women do great things with their power.  They adopt orphans, they help eradicate diseases, they fight hunger, they try to make the world a better place.

 

Donald just wants to grab the genitals of whoever he wants on any given day. 

 

He is a petty, incredibly small-minded human being that has made the world a little worse via twitter for the last 5 years.  He will not behave like Eisenhower, Lincoln, or T. Roosevelt, he will behave pretty much like Burlosconi, Pinochet, or Marcos (No way he's up there with the Hitlers and Stalins, gives him too much credit).

 

While I understand anger at the establishment, I don't understand cutting off your nose to spite your face.  That's what we would have done if we elected Donald.  Now, thanks to his own big mouth, it doesn't look like we will.

 

What a wonderful October surprise.

 

Quoted for Truth.

---

Thats not what was said. What was said is that if you presume that what Trump said to be pure truth then you also have to assume that the "lets me" part is also true. Which would mean it is not "crime"



"You cannot absolve a person from the possibility of wrongdoing simply by getting their version of events."


You cannot judge a person to have commited a crime based on a joke, with no evidence and no input from people that it supposedly happened to.


You keep saying this isn't about Trump when this whole thread is about Trump and the non issue that you are so upset about.


At least be honest with yourself when you are being destroyed in debate. Its not a good look for you.

 

The "let me" doesn't mean consent. It means they fear the consequences of responding negatively.

 

If I walk outside and get punched in the face by a random person, but don't fight back or report the crime, it doesn't mean I have consented to being punched in the face, it just means I didn't want to fight in the street or the hassle and attention of reporting the crime.

---

No, you just invoked the memory of another infamous linguistic argument.

 

In the case under discussion, acceptance, or not, is exactly NOT the point. There are two levels at which Trump can be judged from his recorded statements, neither of which result in him being anything less than a disrespectful, arrogant jerk.

 

If he wasn't joking, that he has actually walked up to women and grabbed their crotch, he's a disrespectful, arrogant jerk. If it wasn't accepted, it's sexual assault, even if it happens without him getting slapped or reported. He seemed to feel empowered to do it because of his star status. If he's right, does it make him any less of a disrespectful, arrogant jerk? I mean, seriously, what adult does that, even if they will get away with it? Pimps, maybe.

 

If he was joking, and it was just locker room banter with the guys...oh wait, he wasn't with his buddies, bonding after a tough day on the course, he was with strangers on a bus, yet he felt comfortable enough to talk about using his star status to grope and kiss women. He can't help himself so he keeps a breath freshener handy so as to leave a good impression. He can't sully the memory of what he assumes will be a special moment for the objects of his attention with his bad breath. I suppose in that way he was a little bit less disrespectful.

 

It's just one more indication Donald Trump is a disrespectful, arrogant jerk. Nothing we didn't know before. It doesn't necessarily disqualify him for the presidency, but it does matter when evaluating his character.

24 pages later and finally a post condemning Trump over this incident I can agree with.  +1

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Thats not what was said. What was said is that if you presume that what Trump said to be pure truth then you also have to assume that the "lets me" part is also true. Which would mean it is not "crime"



"You cannot absolve a person from the possibility of wrongdoing simply by getting their version of events."


You cannot judge a person to have commited a crime based on a joke, with no evidence and no input from people that it supposedly happened to.


You keep saying this isn't about Trump when this whole thread is about Trump and the non issue that you are so upset about.


At least be honest with yourself when you are being destroyed in debate. Its not a good look for you.

Every post I have made on this from the time the definition of the word "let" was introduced has been about the false argument that a person cannot be given a blanket excuse that since they said an act was consensual it must be so. From that post pages ago, my argument has never been about Trump, whether he actually did it, whether he was joking or anything else. Go back and see for yourself. I have been saying the same thing a hundred ways. You and others have been coming in and making this an argument about Trump's guilt, intention or innocence and I have been consistently fighting against the notion a person cannot be automatically given a free pass simply because they say a woman let them do something. It does not matter if we are talking about this incident or a person on trial for rape. You cannot simply draw a conclusion about a situation based on one person's account of an event. Trump was the basis of an argument, "he says they let him so it must not have been a big deal." I could care less about him. I care that an argument is made that a guy's account is all that is needed to make a judgment of what was or was not a consensual event without even taking a moment to get any details. A blanket excuse was made ..because Trump.. that defies logic and I rightfully called it out as bull manure. You agreed with the only point I was ever trying to make. So how is that getting destroyed in a debate? I cannot help if you were arguing about something different.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

The "let me" doesn't mean consent. It means they fear the consequences of responding negatively.

 

If I walk outside and get punched in the face by a random person, but don't fight back or report the crime, it doesn't mean I have consented to being punched in the face, it just means I didn't want to fight in the street or the hassle and attention of reporting the crime.

 

Are all Australians as lazy and socially inept as you?

---

Just think. McCain is a foul mouthed dude, which apparently offends Donald. Lol.

As the banter goes on here regarding thin skinned, who cares,etc...Donald Tweets this gem


"The very foul mouthed Sen. John McCain begged for my support during his primary (I gave, he won), then dropped me over locker room remarks!"


Seriously. He truly is delusional.


Foul mouthed? Cmon man. Just locker room, manly talk, Donald.

---

Blakes Life Matters

Are all Australians as lazy and socially inept as you?

 

I'm British. Many people don't report crimes, especially if they think there will be no conviction.

---

Every post I have made on this from the time the definition of the word "let" was introduced has been about the false argument that a person cannot be given a blanket excuse that since they said an act was consensual it must be so. From that post pages ago, my argument has never been about Trump, whether he actually did it, whether he was joking or anything else. Go back and see for yourself. I have been saying the same thing a hundred ways. You and others have been coming in and making this an argument about Trump's guilt, intention or innocence and I have been consistently fighting against the notion a person cannot be automatically given a free pass simply because they say a woman let them do something. It does not matter if we are talking about this incident or a person on trial for rape. You cannot simply draw a conclusion about a situation based on one person's account of an event. Trump was the basis of an argument, "he says they let him so it must not have been a big deal." I could care less about him. I care that an argument is made that a guy's account is all that is needed to make a judgment of what was or was not a consensual event without even taking a moment to get any details. A blanket excuse was made ..because Trump.. that defies logic and I rightfully called it out as bull manure. You agreed with the only point I was ever trying to make. So how is that getting destroyed in a debate? I cannot help if you were arguing about something different.

That's not what Bunnie said though as she has already pointed out.


Listen to yourself man.


"I care that an argument is made that a guy's account is all that is needed to make a judgment of what was or was not a consensual event without even taking a moment to get any details."


That's what this whole was thread has been about. You can't just take what Bunnie said out of context as it was completely to do with what Trump said.


I must add a stage 6: Tries to claim we are arguing about different points. You did this in the homosexuality thread too before agreeing with me.


All I said was that there is a small possibility that a man/women could be lieing when they say something. That is common knowledge and a universal truth.


You have just been posting vague statements and saying it isn't about Trump whilst constantly referring back to a post made about Trump in a thread about Trump.


Or is your whole argument based on the semantics of you not understanding someones view? That's step 4 I believe.

---

With your candidates I'd be regretting the whole getting rid of the Brits thing.

Well you got me there.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

The "let me" doesn't mean consent. It means they fear the consequences of responding negatively.


If I walk outside and get punched in the face by a random person, but don't fight back or report the crime, it doesn't mean I have consented to being punched in the face, it just means I didn't want to fight in the street or the hassle and attention of reporting the crime.

How do you know that it doesn't mean consent? What evidence do you have?(even if the thing he said was actually a joke and shouldn't be taking literally)


If someone punched you on the street you wouldn't punch them back?

---

Don't have time to review the whole thread, so pardon me if this has already been pointed out. 

 

I've heard it said rape and sexual assault aren't about sex, but power.  It is the assertion of one's power over someone who is helpless to resist, for reasons of actual or perceived weakness.  True sexual predators get off on the power, not the sex act.

 

I don't know if Donald is a groper, but his statement about "grab them by the _______" because you can get away with it when you are "a star", speaks to what he wants to do with his power.

 

If we are stupid enough to give this man more power than he already has, he'll be grabbing his perceived enemies by the genitals. He pretty much told Hillary that in the debate with the "you'd be in jail" quip.  The trumpettes like this about him, because they think he'll be the authoritarian that will subjugate the Mexicans, Muslims, Iranians, and the GOP establishment. The problem is, when you disagree with him - and you inevitably will - he's going to give you the same treatment, no matter who is wrong or right.

 

Other men and women do great things with their power.  They adopt orphans, they help eradicate diseases, they fight hunger, they try to make the world a better place.

 

Donald just wants to grab the genitals of whoever he wants on any given day. 

 

He is a petty, incredibly small-minded human being that has made the world a little worse via twitter for the last 5 years.  He will not behave like Eisenhower, Lincoln, or T. Roosevelt, he will behave pretty much like Burlosconi, Pinochet, or Marcos (No way he's up there with the Hitlers and Stalins, gives him too much credit).

 

While I understand anger at the establishment, I don't understand cutting off your nose to spite your face.  That's what we would have done if we elected Donald.  Now, thanks to his own big mouth, it doesn't look like we will.

 

What a wonderful October surprise.

Sadly the other option is no better.  Great post!

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.