Why Trumpers? I am truly baffled

Quote: zippyboy

Seen outside a Trump rally here in Washington State. Sums it up nicely.

Wonder what kind of vehicle the Hillary version is and what it looks like?

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: zippyboy

Seen outside a Trump rally here in Washington State. Sums it up nicely.

Wonder what kind of vehicle the Hillary version is and what it looks like?

Hillary's male supporters are more confident about the size of their manhood, so they feel no need to go to such lengths....

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Why would I waste even a minute of my time researching something that is almost twenty years in the past, is probably apocryphal, and even if true, doesn't have the slightest shred of relevance to anything whatsoever, and even more importantly, who besides you gives a crap? You may indeed be correct, but so bloody what??????

Your character flaws are implied by your obsession with something ridiculously trivial. Your motives, whatever they are, that cause you to chew on this non-issue for so long must be bizarre indeed. Whatever damage was done to you was self-inflicted. Now, if you want to discuss the actual election, per the title of this thread, please feel free. But whether or not the f*** Bill Clinton was sterile in 1999 is not the least bit germane to the discussions at hand. So drop it!

The stories about Chelsea's paternity and those quotes are from 2015. The stories about Bill's sterility are from 1999, and are about him saying that he believed he was sterile before Chelsea was born.

The relevance is simply that if it is true, Hillary was unfaithful, and that contradicts what MathExtremist said.

Quote: bobbartop

Is there anyone left on this forum who has not yet been insulted by this endlessly argumentative know-it-all troll?

He has not insulted ams yet to my knowledge.

Quote: Dalex64

The stories about Chelsea's paternity and those quotes are from 2015. The stories about Bill's sterility are from 1999, and are about him saying that he believed he was sterile before Chelsea was born.

The relevance is simply that if it is true, Hillary was unfaithful, and that contradicts what MathExtremist said.

How do you reach this conclusion without information that will never be available to you? I think it's obvious Chelsea is Bill's genetic daughter. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that your factoids are true, specifically that Bill is/was sterile.

If they wanted a child, and he couldn't father one, there are a sperm banks. There are family friends who might have helped, either naturally or via artificial insemination. Ever see the movie The Big Chill? It can be a loving couple's decision to grow a child via surrogacy of either or both parents. Bill himself was adopted by his second father. IF they went that route, it's incredibly private and beyond public disclosure except if they wanted to disclose it.

The point is, so what, and how is it your or anybody's business. The crap part is making the inquiry in the first place. She is their legal, beloved daughter, however that came about, loves them in return, and they have functioned as a family through the longest, most negative scrutiny any American family has ever faced. Ever.

Quote: Dalex64

The stories about Chelsea's paternity and those quotes are from 2015. The stories about Bill's sterility are from 1999, and are about him saying that he believed he was sterile before Chelsea was born.

The relevance is simply that if it is true, Hillary was unfaithful, and that contradicts what MathExtremist said.

Nope, not in the slightest. I wasn't talking about Chelsea's genetic code, I was talking about Hillary's fidelity. Chelsea could have genetic code from two entirely different humans than either Bill or Hillary and it would have nothing to do with whether Hillary had ever stepped out on Bill.

Now, Donald Trump -- his stepping out on Ivana was well documented. So you're bending over backwards trying to draw a moral equivalence there, but you won't find one. There is no historical evidence that Hillary ever cheated on Bill, and using Bill's infidelity as a knock against Hillary is ludicrous.

But this is so, so typical of Trump and his rhetorically-challenged devotees -- every time someone levels a well-founded criticism of Donald Trump, the retort comes as a paraphrase of the schoolyard taunt "I know you are but what am I?"

I am absolutely not trying to draw a moral equivalence.

This isn't about Trump at all. To use some hyperbole, I would never vote for Trump in a million years.

All I am talking about is whether or not Hillary stepped out on Bill.

It has nothing to do with the election now, it has nothing to do with who I am going to vote for. It is just about, and I'm paraphrasing, "hillary never did anything bad to bill" and me saying "she might have". it doesn't go any farther than that.

I'm not using bill's infidelity as a knock against hillary - I am using an article about bill's infidelity to point out that at the time of chelsea's conception, BILL may have THOUGHT he was sterile, or at least according to bill's accuser, was TELLING people that he was sterile. That is all that was - to point out that bill may have been, or may thought he have been, sterile.

I am not denying that there may have been a sperm donor, bill may have been lying about being sterile, or bill may have thought he was sterile but really wasn't as sterile as he thought he was.

As for the other two parts, Hubbel's no comment and Chelsea's rather vague answer to the question - if he had just denied it rather than saying no comment, or chelsea's answer were more clear and direct, then I never would have contemplated these things.

Trump's cheating certainly was not my motivation to say "well hillary did it too" - just the simple statement that you thought hillary was a perfect wife in this regard, and me saying that she might not have been.

I am a hillary supporter, for president this fall, and it astounds me that just because I said something bad about her I am being labeled as a Trump lover, a weed smoker, and a rhetorically-challenged Trump devotee.

Of course he (or she? lol) took up two parking spots. I mean...of course.

Quote: Dalex64

I am absolutely not trying to draw a moral equivalence.

This isn't about Trump at all. To use some hyperbole, I would never vote for Trump in a million years.

All I am talking about is whether or not Hillary stepped out on Bill.

It has nothing to do with the election now, it has nothing to do with who I am going to vote for. It is just about, and I'm paraphrasing, "hillary never did anything bad to bill" and me saying "she might have". it doesn't go any farther than that.

I'm not using bill's infidelity as a knock against hillary - I am using an article about bill's infidelity to point out that at the time of chelsea's conception, BILL may have THOUGHT he was sterile, or at least according to bill's accuser, was TELLING people that he was sterile. That is all that was - to point out that bill may have been, or may thought he have been, sterile.

I am not denying that there may have been a sperm donor, bill may have been lying about being sterile, or bill may have thought he was sterile but really wasn't as sterile as he thought he was.

As for the other two parts, Hubbel's no comment and Chelsea's rather vague answer to the question - if he had just denied it rather than saying no comment, or chelsea's answer were more clear and direct, then I never would have contemplated these things.

Trump's cheating certainly was not my motivation to say "well hillary did it too" - just the simple statement that you thought hillary was a perfect wife in this regard, and me saying that she might not have been.

I am a hillary supporter, for president this fall, and it astounds me that just because I said something bad about her I am being labeled as a Trump lover, a weed smoker, and a rhetorically-challenged Trump devotee.

Well, if you didn't babble nonsense like "you thought Hillary was a perfect wife," people might treat your posts with the dignity and deference you clearly feel they deserve.

Also, there's still the "who gives a crap" angle. You have to realize, people have been slinging mud at Hillary for months, including on this forum. You point out something as stupidly trivial as this non-issue, you look like a Trumper--otherwise, why bring it up when there are so many other important issues to discuss?

Quote: Dalex64

I am absolutely not trying to draw a moral equivalence.

This isn't about Trump at all. To use some hyperbole, I would never vote for Trump in a million years.

All I am talking about is whether or not Hillary stepped out on Bill.

It has nothing to do with the election now, it has nothing to do with who I am going to vote for. It is just about, and I'm paraphrasing, "hillary never did anything bad to bill" and me saying "she might have". it doesn't go any farther than that.

I'm not using bill's infidelity as a knock against hillary - I am using an article about bill's infidelity to point out that at the time of chelsea's conception, BILL may have THOUGHT he was sterile, or at least according to bill's accuser, was TELLING people that he was sterile. That is all that was - to point out that bill may have been, or may thought he have been, sterile.

I am not denying that there may have been a sperm donor, bill may have been lying about being sterile, or bill may have thought he was sterile but really wasn't as sterile as he thought he was.

As for the other two parts, Hubbel's no comment and Chelsea's rather vague answer to the question - if he had just denied it rather than saying no comment, or chelsea's answer were more clear and direct, then I never would have contemplated these things.

Trump's cheating certainly was not my motivation to say "well hillary did it too" - just the simple statement that you thought hillary was a perfect wife in this regard, and me saying that she might not have been.

I am a hillary supporter, for president this fall, and it astounds me that just because I said something bad about her I am being labeled as a Trump lover, a weed smoker, and a rhetorically-challenged Trump devotee.

Yeah right, you are a Hillary supporter. And I don't know which one is more laughable, your supporting of the Clintons or RonC's still "undecided" on Trump?

All I see is so much hatred from you toward the Clintons. And I have to ask you this question again,
why do you have so much hatred for Bill, Hillary, and perhaps Chelsea also?

Your innuendo and nonsense about the Clintons had given an impression that you are very afraid that Mrs. Clinton will destroy your "My America", and take away all of your guns. And it would not surprise me that you are one of the "Second Amendment People" in Trump's mind when he suggested violence against Mrs. Clinton.

Quote: Dalex64

I am absolutely not trying to draw a moral equivalence.

Of course you are. Otherwise why bother making the comparison in the first place?

Quote:

It has nothing to do with the election now, it has nothing to do with who I am going to vote for. It is just about, and I'm paraphrasing, "hillary never did anything bad to bill" and me saying "she might have". it doesn't go any farther than that.
...
As for the other two parts, Hubbel's no comment and Chelsea's rather vague answer to the question - if he had just denied it rather than saying no comment, or chelsea's answer were more clear and direct, then I never would have contemplated these things.

That's because you appear to be predisposed to conspiracy theories and you haven't internalized the rights granted to Americans under the 5th and 14th Amendments, namely the right to due process, a.k.a. "innocent until proven guilty."

In this case, that perverse logic manifests itself by you saying "if he had denied it, I never would have contemplated these things." But for rational, clear thinkers not prone to suggestion and wild flights of fancy, that's not the way it works. Unfounded accusations, unrefuted though they may be, carry no weight whatsoever. What does the evidence say? That is all that matters.

Under your logic, since Donald Trump has never denied being a Russian spy or a secret half-chimpanzee chimera, you must think he is. Right?

Quote: AZDuffman

Wonder what kind of vehicle the Hillary version is and what it looks like?

Prius, of course. Or one of those bitty Honda's that I can't recall the name of.

Doing my route it's almost perfectly stereotypical. The one anomaly was a Trump sticker on a Smart (same house I punched out the dog). The polarity is nothing short of shocking.

It's also strange to see nearly no support for Hilary, and, given the level of opulence on my route, how many Sanders signs still dot the yards. If bumper stickers were of any significance, Trump would win on a level you couldn't even imagine.

It's weird.

Quote: Face

Prius, of course. Or one of those bitty Honda's that I can't recall the name of.

Doing my route it's almost perfectly stereotypical. The one anomaly was a Trump sticker on a Smart (same house I punched out the dog). The polarity is nothing short of shocking.

It's also strange to see nearly no support for Hilary, and, given the level of opulence on my route, how many Sanders signs still dot the yards. If bumper stickers were of any significance, Trump would win on a level you couldn't even imagine.

It's weird.

Honda Fit?

I saw the same thing last year delivering the luggage. Plenty of "Bernie!" bumper stickers, very few for Hillary. These days I see a few for Trump but hardly any for Hillary.

I had the misfortune to have to work the convention center here just as the Hillary rally was letting out. Streets full of stereotypical feminists that regular guys would try to avoid and their omega-males in tow. I couldn't see what they drove, but you just had to picture them in a Prius or Fit. It was like someone called central casting for 300 people.

Quote: AZDuffman

Honda Fit?

I saw the same thing last year delivering the luggage. Plenty of "Bernie!" bumper stickers, very few for Hillary. These days I see a few for Trump but hardly any for Hillary.

I had the misfortune to have to work the convention center here just as the Hillary rally was letting out. Streets full of stereotypical feminists that regular guys would try to avoid and their omega-males in tow. I couldn't see what they drove, but you just had to picture them in a Prius or Fit. It was like someone called central casting for 300 people.

Lol, that's exactly it...



I prefer the older bitty Hondas...



;)

It's the same around here. There's a homestead up the road, sprawling acreage, big farmhouse, that's been rockin' the Bernie poster for seems a year now. Another retired single man has one, plenty of stickers on the road, and I seem to hear that name often enough.

I remember that one Hil sticker on the Prius, I saw a sign, tucked behind a porch swing just yesterday, at the home of two older retired teachers. In the last 6 months, I could probably count all the signs and stickers for her I've seen on two hands.

Granted, much has to do with where I live. Seeing a pickup with some combination of 6' American, Gadsden, Rebel, or BlueLivesMatter flag is a several times a day occurrence. 'Round here Trump signs abound. Pickups certainly lead the road stats, with Mom and Pop local company vehicles right behind them. I've seen painted Trump signs, where someone has taken an hour of their life just to make them. They're everywhere.

It the 'burbs that shook me. It's one thing to see a Trump sign in the country, but the amount I've seen in lake-front-property land took me by surprise. And not just "Concrete Magnate Mr Xxxxx's" house but "Dr. Xxxxxxxxx, MD's" house, too.

I'm with ME. I want to understand the driving force behind it.

Hillary turned me into a newt.

Quote: Face

It the 'burbs that shook me. It's one thing to see a Trump sign in the country, but the amount I've seen in lake-front-property land took me by surprise. And not just "Concrete Magnate Mr Xxxxx's" house but "Dr. Xxxxxxxxx, MD's" house, too.

I'm with ME. I want to understand the driving force behind it.

Many things but IMHO boils down to message. All pols say the same nonsense. Trump beat what, 18 other candidates? But he really beat just one since they all have the same consultants running the same game. Like the mechanic who tells the 19 year old stripper that the car needs headlight fluid one week and charges her extra for lugnut holes the next, these consultants spew out nonsense.

Don't attack Obama, say how you want these guys wives to have men in the bathroom with them to show you are "inclusive." Wear this, don't say that. All while they bill out at $10k per day. It never works, but they get hired cycle after cycle. As bad as the GOP is at this game, Hillary pays them even more and is even more risk adverse. Probably the most focus group tested candidate ever.

It is all like GM cars used to be, Bring in a group, find what they don't like, make a boring car that offends nobody.

Trump and Bernie said piss on this to all that. Each speaks to their own base in their own way. Bernie speaks to unashamed liberals who want a Euro-type socialist system. They see only what they want, fancy cafes and time off work. Stagnant economies and high unemployment meet with a "Meh."

Trump speaks to many but the blue collar white population that the GOP is embarrassed to have and the Democrats have pissed on and disowned for 2 decades. The GOP figures they got nowhere else to go. The Democrats figure if they keep a stranglehold on minorities that just having upper class white liberals will let them thread the needle.

8 years of a crappy, potemkin economy has lots of people pissed the hell off. The GOP tried to squash Trump, right to the end. The Dems by virtue of a smaller field and more rigged system did squash Bernie. Bernie voters remember.

This is old news, of course Webb Hubble is
Chelsea's dad, she looks just like him and
nothing like Bill. Webb and Hill were tight
as peanuts in a shell at one time, Hill idolized
the guy. Clinton aide Larry Nichols said that
Bill had admitted that Hubble was indeed the
father of Chelsea. This is old old OLD news.

Quote: EvenBob

This is old news, of course Webb Hubble is
Chelsea's dad, she looks just like him and
nothing like Bill. Webb and Hill were tight
as peanuts in a shell at one time, Hill idolized
the guy. Clinton aide Larry Nichols said that
Bill had admitted that Hubble was indeed the
father of Chelsea. This is old old OLD news.

Oh that the baby daddy. Honestly I see no resemblance besides she looks like the Joker.

Quote: EvenBob

This is old news, of course Webb Hubble is
Chelsea's dad, she looks just like him and
nothing like Bill. Webb and Hill were tight
as peanuts in a shell at one time, Hill idolized
the guy. Clinton aide Larry Nichols said that
Bill had admitted that Hubble was indeed the
father of Chelsea. This is old old OLD news.

Of course! If two people sort of resemble one another, they MUST be father and daughter!

This is a load of crap, even for you.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

This is a load of crap, even for you.

Even for me? I very rarely post now, you
must know me from a past life here. You
sound like Larry, how come nobody has
found you out yet. Only the guys from
the old GG talk like that to me, maybe you're
Garnbaby, or whatever his name was.

Babs will get you, have no worries.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Of course! If two people sort of resemble one another, they MUST be father and daughter!

This is a load of crap, even for you.

Hey now, let's not jump to conclusions. There's a lot to be said for making inquiries about heredity from physical appearances. By that logic, of course, Donald Trump has a lot of answering to do. He is apparently the four-way crossbreed of a horse, a caterpillar, a blobfish, and a plastic troll doll:





Call the National Enquirer! This is important news based on legitimate scientific inquiry and sound reasoning!

While I don't think Trump is the solution, Hillary seems to side with the problem. Globalism is a problem. Watch the 1988 movie "They Live", this seems to ring true. Also, look at a map that shows where the Syrian refugee's will be sent; it's like a seed map of the nation.

You mention 1933 Germany (alluding to Hitler), watch a documentary "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told." Every time I see something stated in that film that is questionable, I fact check it and it's just about always dead on. The one exception was that Hitler is still revered in Croatia, which has some truth as a major politician there spoke publicly about him and some Croatian ww2 vets revere him as well; but generally he is not. I wish my Grandpa was still around, he was a WW2 vet and a Professor of European history; I always like to have things reviewed by experts. I am not claiming Hitler was innocent or that atrocities did not occur; simply that the history we generally get is told by the winning side and paints a story that makes them look good.

I know for a fact that Democrats make up stuff to complain about Trump, because I work with them. I've campaigned for democrats, some I respect and trust; Hillary is not in that category. The last politician I wanted to win the presidency was Ron Paul, however Trump may fight some of the problems with our country. Illegal immigration, taking in refugees when we are not financially sound, illegal drugs (there is a Heroin epidemic and Trump and Kasich are the only politicians that have mentioned it.) I do like some of what Hillary says on solar power, I have met Bill Clinton and like him. I like Trumps daughters, he should clone them and distribute the 18 year old hyper age (to 18, then normal speed after) clones nationwide to his supporters.

Quote: billionaireben

While I don't think Trump is the solution, Hillary seems to side with the problem. Globalism is a problem.

Actually, global trade and commerce enhances every nation's prosperity. Far from being a "problem," globalism is what makes our economy tick. We would be much poorer if we sold to and bought from only domestic markets. My favorite example of this is how American cars in the 70s and 80s were criminally defective deathtraps that wouldn't last over 100,000 miles. American cars are almost as good as Japanese ones these days precisely because of globalism. (You want a couple of examples of roaring success from shutting off global trade, take a gander at Cuba and North Korea.)

You see, Adam Smith articulated the Principle of Comparative Advantage well over two centuries ago, but hardly anyone understands it. Trade is a fundamental good. It enables everyone who participates in markets to have more choices and get more for their money. I can't believe the ignorant dialogue--from both sides--that attacks trade agreements as "costing jobs." A LACK of trade agreements costs jobs.

In a very narrow, parochial, limited sense, free trade can cause temporary unemployment in some sectors. But that's because the other guys can make Product X better/more cheaply than we can. THEREFORE, they, not we, should be making that product! Yes, workers in obsolete industries will have to be retrained. But that's better than a futile effort to keep those industries alive! Trump and conservatives in general are selling the Rust Belt a bill of goods, that somehow we can turn back the clock to the 1950s by sealing ourselves off from global competition. It can't be done, and we shouldn't try.

Quote: EvenBob

Even for me? I very rarely post now, you
must know me from a past life here. You
sound like Larry, how come nobody has
found you out yet. Only the guys from
the old GG talk like that to me, maybe you're
Garnbaby, or whatever his name was.

Babs will get you, have no worries.

Dream on, Bob buddy :) Babs has no axe to grind with me. (And yes, I overdid it just now with RonC, but she gave me a warning, which I understand.)

Please adhere to your new very rare posting frequency.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Actually, global trade and commerce enhances every nation's prosperity. Far from being a "problem," globalism is what makes our economy tick.

This article, from a libertarian think tank no less, makes the compelling argument that the size of government (that is, taxation and spending levels) are mostly independent of levels of regulation on matters like trade. The conclusions are pretty interesting.

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/1/12732168/economic-freedom-score-america-welfare-state