Not My Type?

Once again it is you and only you showing massive bias and that is proven FACT

He has never made misogynistic comments THAT is fact and yours is a falsehood.

Cheating is irrelevant. Lying is irrelevant when one is a politician They all do it and he no more than anyone.

Paying off a porn star is irrelevant.

What is relevant is there is no evidence he committed this specific crime and the accusation does in fact have evidence against it. He nor anyone else needs to present \evidence against it as the burden is strictly on the accuser

 

Really?

Well I don't know about you, but every time something like this comes up, the right tends to bring up Clinton and the idea that he is a "rapist".

And with Biden, that he is a "groper" and a "pedophile".

 

I believe a person's character is relevant, especially the president of the United States.

Trump lies no more than anyone? That's a laugh. He's a politician? I thought his supporters didn't want the usual lying politician.

Interesting that you don't care about his character or honesty.

 

Yes and I have always opposed those labels.

Too many men are falsely accused these days which is why I always side with presumption of innocence regardless of who it is.

 

If you care about one persons character or honesty you have to care about them all and every politician lies as much as trump does.

I never gave any indication of being a trump supporter. He is simply who we have right now. He is no more honest or better than Obama or clinton or anyone else he merely has better policies and only a few of those.

 

Oh come on. You just lost any credibility you had.

So you are not a Trump supporter.

Okay.

So anyway, it's absolutely possible he's lying about this (and any of the other allegations) and the woman (women) is (are) telling the truth. Right?

 

What I stated was absolutely factual and accurate. So no it did nothing one way or the other for my credibility.

Yes anything is possible but that is not a valid argument.

The principle to follow is presumption of innocence, She is making a specific accusation with no evidence while other evidence discredits her.

 

What evidence do you have that all other politicians lie as much as Trump, who is notorious.

There is no true evidence that discredits her any more than the evidence that discredits the liar in chief.

Your "evidence" is not a valid argument.

Fact is, it's as possible that Trump is lying just as much as it's possible she is lying. You don't know. You can't know.

 

Because it is documented trump is NOT notorious you simply have a bias against him lying while always defending lies from dems


Yes there is true evidence discrediting her and I posted it.

Fact it is irrelevant that trump lied as he is not making the accusation. Her credibility is the only one which is relevant

 

There are websites dedicated to the lies Trump tells...it's in the thousands.

It's hilarious that you are talking about "evidence" and what is credible, and than make blanket statements like ALL politicians lie just as much.

That's just a ridiculous claim with no evidence.

There is no true evidence. None. She says one thing, he says another. That's it.

The FACT IS, and you already admitted it, he could be lying and she could be telling the truth. YOU DON'T KNOW. YOU CAN'T KNOW.

 

There were websites dedicated to Obama lies and clinton lies and they were each in the thousands as well

I stated truth about politicians.

Yes there is true evidence that discredits her and there is no burden of evidence on him

I never said I know I have consistently stated the same thing.

Could be means NOTHING

 

Links?

There is no true evidence. All you have is the idea that she copied a TV show with a similar "plot". That's true evidence?

But a photo of them together laughing at a party is not in any way evidence of them having met?

Sounds like bias to me.

Seeing as you don't actually know, because you simply can't....

let's assume Trump is lying about this like you admit he does and like you admit is possible in regard to this.

Let's assume she and any of the other women who accuse Trump are telling the truth. Or that there is lock down proof he raped or assaulted any or all of these women.

Then what? Just theoretically.

 

Only a total fool would call that bias.

Once again there is no need for evidence for trumps story only for hers and the evidence discredits her.

That is fact not opinion or bias this thread has clearly proven it is you and only you dripping with partisan bias

I am not dealing in hypotheses I am crushing your TDS knee jerk partisan claims

 

It's obvious bias...only a biased fool would say it isn't.

Look, there is no case, there is no "evidence" at all.

Bull, you're so biased and blind you can't see the obvious bias of yourself and others...anyone could have predicted, including as the accuser did herself, that she would immediately and swiftly be attacked as a liar by Trump and the right wing no matter what. And this thread falls right in line with that.

For someone who is not a Trump supporter, you sure sound and act like one.

You're so biased you won't deal in hypotheses, except for the fact that all you've got is hypotheses.

The TDS is all yours, buddy!

 

Tough to rape someone when you cant get hard.

 

Voice of experience?

 

I've ATTEMPTED to have sex with many a chick...

If you're not attracted, it ain't happening.

 

So Trump tried to rape her, but he couldn't get it up.

 

Maybe. Maybe not.

I wouldnt consider rape if she thinks its sexy, though.

 

Heck people, democrats think Caitlyn Jenner is a "real" woman for gosh sake. This woman looks like a guy and Trump definitely wouldn't touch her.

 

But that isn’t all that was said about Clinton. We were told by the media, politicians, and the public that rape accusations against Clinton were only politically motivated and therefore not credible. That’s a fact, and it’s a big reason people have a hard time believing women or any accusers today. I hate it. It’s terrible. But it’s that way because of actions taken in the past. It’s not excusing any behavior, it’s just stating facts.

Please quote me where I have called any accuser a liar without evidence. Yes I defend anyone who is called a liar without proof.

I’ll take your word I guess on the women. I’m sure you know all the details of all 24 cases well enough make such a statement!

You may want to actually read up on some of these cases, not just parrot some headline you saw.

Oh boy. These 24 cases you reference are public knowledge, no? Why use such an obvious deflection?

It’s tragic that it’s so difficult for abused people to come forward. It’s tragic that false accusers make it worse.

You tell me why some accusers make it all up. I don’t know what motivates them.

Obviously we disagree on ethics and morality, but where I come from it’s frowned upon to bash someone’s behavior without some idea of how you could do better.

There are investigations. If any produce proof Trump is an offender I’ll stand with you calling for consequences.

You link to a thread where you speculate and jump to conclusions and are subsequently shown your error. I’m dazzled.

And questions that hit close to home or you can’t answer are not serious. Got it.

My question had nothing to do with you or I running for office.

Really? I’m going to be lectured on morals by people who think JFK and Monroe having an affair is on par with banging slaves? And lectured by people who will convict political opponents of rape without trial, believe any squirrelly story if it suits their purpose, all the while ignoring rape, abuse, and trafficking of immigrants?
.

You interjected the notion I believe only progressives dislike rape in post #329. I never made such a claim but you insinuated I did.

I appreciate the ad hominem. It verifies I’m on the right track.

Progressives seem to believe in only the ethics, morals, (or you pick the word that’s acceptable to you) that advance their cause. They are subjective and can change on a whim depending on circumstances. My above example of selectivity in who’s an acceptable rapist or victim with immigrants is a case in point.
You claim to be a progressive but you don’t seem to know much about their foundations. You may want to look into the underpinnings of the worldview.

I think you have a surface understanding of what progressivism is.

I think we’re just very different people. You seem intent on picking a winner and loser in every situation. You are very binary. You can’t fathom the concept of taking in information and processing it without immediately jumping to conclusions. For example, you have to believe Trump is lying and the women you cite aren’t. Trump could have assaulted 83 people we have never heard of and all 24 (never mind the number 24 is bogus) of the ones you cite could be lying. We just don’t know. You accuse others of cultism, yet put yourself out there as a textbook example.


.

My initial response to you was to try and get you to examine your assertions that anyone you disagree with on Trump’s witty statement is a cultist and hypnotized. I’m still trying to get you to see it’s your own party’s past actions that cause the current reaction. You have taken us down all kinds of rabbit holes because you can’t face that fact. You never will.

Just google “sexual morals” or “sexual values” please. I haven’t the energy for any more of this nonsense.

I’m not trying to be rude, but is English your native tongue? Please read what I wrote. You will see you are in error.

He does not.

Evidence of what?

Have you researched these 24 instances you saw in a news headline? If you had, you would not be using the 24 number.

If I say you assaulted me, is that really evidence? I’ve no way to know if they are truthful or not. When they come forward with something more than stories told to reporters we can examine it together. Frankly, they can lawyer up and get down to brass tacks. It’s not my job to litigate this fuster cluck. You seem to think you are judge, jury and executioner all rolled into one. Again, this is where we really differ on the issue. I’m willing to wait for all the facts to come out before determining who’s wrong or right. You have to make an instant judgement based mostly on emotion.

Don’t know. That’s why I’m not running around calling them liars.

Isn’t that the logical thing to do?

Now I know you haven’t done anything but read a headline and run with it.

I have repeatedly. You are the one compelled to jump to conclusions.

You can’t figure that out on your own? And you want to tell me my ideas are screwy? If you want to convict people in your mind on whatever evidence you pick and choose it’s your right. But I’ll pass.

And you never will if all you do is read and parrot headlines.

I have stated unequivocally more than once that I am against slander of anyone. I suppose that’s a 3rd grade level value but I’m sticking with it.

 

She doesn't.

But we now know you get your news from Fox type media.

 

It's excusing behavior. This thread is about Trump If you want to talk about somebody else, open a new thread.

Sure. As soon as you quote me saying that you called somebody a liar.

Stop the smoke screen. There is too much evidence that Trump has committed sexual assault. And you just want to hide it.

My answer did. I guess it went way over your head. Try re-reading it.

Not "on par". And you have shown over and over that you have no idea of what the word "morals" means. As you show in the next paragraph.

"Progressive" is a political ideology. If you understood even the most basic concepts in Ethics you would know that applying a certain standard ethical and moral position to people because they hold a particular political idoeology is one of the most obvious indicators that you don't know what you are talking about.

.
That seals the deal. Wrong!

You don't even know the difference between morals and ethics. So... that's that.

I, on the other hand, am absolutely certain that you don't have any understanding whatsoever of what progressivism is

BTW, read my sig.

I have plenty of evidence that Trump is a liar. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. An enormous amount of evidence that Trump is a liar. I have none that the women are lying. I also have evidence that Trump has a history of abusing women. I also have plenty of evidence that Trump has no empathy for fellow human beings. The conclusion as to what to believe is easy.

Yeah, and reindeer could one day learn to fly. We just don't know that either.

"Argumentum ad Ignorantiam"

Bottom line: all these smokescreens, strawman arguments and logical fallacies are an obvious attempt at diluting the fact that Trump is a sexual assailant..

What are you calling them?

 

If you only wanted to discuss Trump you shouldn’t have discussed the subject I initially responded to. You changed the subject I only responded to that change.

That’s exactly my point. You are having a discussion with me. You keep bringing up the accusers being called liars. I haven’t done that. Asking you to quote me was a last ditch attempt to get you to communicate with me, not your straw men.

I don’t want to hide anything. I want all the information possible. From both sides.

Try reading my question and responding to it. Or not. Or respond with something irrelevant.
Yep, you went with irrelevant.

Gonna back off the banging slave thing? Seems wise.
I know exactly what morals are. And I’ve demonstrated they aren’t worth much if we aren’t able to be honest with ourselves about them. Claiming to care about rape in one instance but showing we don’t by our actions in other cases is not cool with me. Your morals are clearly much different.

How can you ignore the glaring moral issues of any political ideology? Oh wait, I’ll bet you think conservatives, Republicans, Trump, anyone who supports a Trump policy, and independents you don’t agree with are lacking morals, but Progressives are just political. Exempt from scrutiny on moral issues.

Political ideology that can’t be evaluated by positions on moral issues. It’s a brave new world I guess...

.

I gave you a factual real world example. I understand why all you can say is “wrong”.

Ummm. Ok. From the guy who has to be told to google the terms I’ve used previously because he thinks they are imaginary and meaningless. This thread is turning into one of those I’m not sure if I’m arguing with a false flag operative or the real deal.

As certain as you are about Trump being a rapist? I understand enough to know nothing in progressivism is as we are led to believe. From the term “progressive” right on down the line.

I’ve read and chuckled over it more than once.
And here you are going on about a 24 women headline completely in the dark on details.

You only have what you want. Not what’s available. I’d encourage you to try going outside your comfort zone and getting information from more diverse sources.

Then your conclusions may not be as easy but at least they will have a chance of being fair and even correct.

I’ve seen loads of irony on this forum but this is a clear winner. By at least a furlong. You have manifested this fallacy in almost every post while I have been arguing the opposite. That we should reserve judgment on everyone until things can be proven.

Oh, I thought you were employing all these tactics to avoid facing the reality that your ideas are responsible for far too many people not taking these issues seriously anymore.

I don’t have your strange compulsion to call them anything. I’m content to listen to what they have to say and to see if any of the formal legal cases are able to enlighten us further. Pobody is nerfect, but I’m not a big fan of name calling in general.

 

You brought up Clinton. Now the "lying" question is not about Trump or the 24. It's about you.
YOU said

To which I responded...

Your credibility is now in question.

Ok. So are you going to speak up for the 24 women who accused Trump and have been accused by Trump supporters of "lying" the same way you spoke up for Trump?

Ok. What is a moral principle? And don't give me a dictionary definition. Explain what it is from the point of view of Ethics (capital "E") and how a moral principle relates to ethical (lowercase "e") behavior.

I used to teach Ethics at a College I used to work at. This is a very basic question I asked my students. You will get a Grade.

That's a nonsensical statement. Different political ideologies can have the same moral imperative and they simply propose different forms of achieving or solving it. In the majority of cases.... (if not in all cases)... the way to achieve the moral goal is a combination of several ideologies. In practice, the application of an ethical solution is not an ideologically "pure" action. For example, all political parties have the moral and ethical goal of stopping or reducing gun violence. The solution is not either to ban all guns (as I would propose) or to allow everybody to have guns (as gun advocates propose). The actual solution will be something in the middle. A combination of ideologies. This is true for all moral imperatives. And any pretense that "progressives believe" or "conservatives believe"... as if they were unmovable ideologies in a moral sense, is pure nonsense.

I'll tell you one thing: every time you feel like telling me what I "think"... Every single time.... You will be wrong!

I have made my case against Trump. You have made no case against his 24 accusers, or in favor, or for Trump ... any case whatsoever.... And you have homework to do...