• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, but you can remind me if it gets thrown out again. ;)

It hasn't been thrown out.

1st time it was dismissed due to not being the proper jurisdiction
2nd time it was voluntarily dismissed by the complainant.
 
You mean as opposed to the attitudes to women pre-1970's?

You know things like...

  • Women should be in the home raising kids, not in the work force.
  • Women should not have their own opinions
  • Women should be demure and respectful in front of men
  • Women should accept any abuse from their husbands because it was their fault
  • Women were valued by their husband not their own achievements
  • Women weren't entitled to the vote
  • Women were property of their fathers and then husbands

Leftist want to encourage young men to use as many women as they can and somehow this leads to the BS above?
See if you can get your mind out of the past, none of that is accepted or even expected, I'm 43 and I've never seen that attitude towards women in my entire life.
 
Leftist want to encourage young men to use as many women as they can and somehow this leads to the BS above?
See if you can get your mind out of the past, none of that is accepted or even expected, I'm 43 and I've never seen that attitude towards women in my entire life.

"Leftist?" I think you need to provide citations that assertion. Not that I expect you to, given your amazing history of presenting goatse-sourced nonsense and driving on.
 
The claim that leftists are to blame for Trump's actions is hilariously laughable, and the idea that it's led to less respect for women is even more funny.

First, evidence? Your claim logger, and it's a crazy one so you better have some good evidence for it. Secondly, sexual crime is way down over the last few decades. Your claim that older people respected women more is outright false on every conceivable metric, but the most salient one is of course, rates of sexual crimes against them. Thus, you'd need something that overcomes that.

But what is the real kicker to me, the best part, is that people who claim their values are so superior to the values of others (which they always misrepresent as well) are also completely confident in their assessment that their values are losing badly in the free marketplace of ideas, thus necessitating extraordinary actions to 'correct' for the weakness of them. They view them* as so strong and brave, yet act as if they are weak and cowardly! It's the best.

EDIT: *Their values.
 
Last edited:
The claim that leftists are to blame for Trump's actions is hilariously laughable, and the idea that it's led to less respect for women is even more funny.

First, evidence? You claim logger, and it's a crazy one so you better have some good evidence for it. Secondly, sexual crime is way down over the last few decades. Your claim that older people respected women more is outright false on every conceivable metric, but the most salient one is of course, rates of sexual crimes against them. Thus, you'd need something that overcomes that.

But what is the real kicker to me, the best part, is that people who claim their values are so superior to the values of others (which they always misrepresent as well) are also completely confident in their assessment that their values are losing badly in the free marketplace of ideas, thus necessitating extraordinary actions to 'correct' for the weakness of them. They view them as so strong and brave, yet act as if they are weak and cowardly! It's the best.
Lol

I never said that, if you think that it isn't my problem.

All I said is we shouldn't be encouraging young men to view women as a potential sex partner, it has many terrible side effects.
 
None of what you said about him is real.

Which part wasn't true?
That he has been involved in many many projects?
That he tries to get projects done on time and on budget?
That he is not the one who personally inspects all of the work?
That he says he doesn't like to pay for work that doesn't meet the specifications?
That some of the times the person who wasn't paid in full did not fulfill the contract?
That many times these disputes are not cut and dried?
 
Leftist want to encourage young men to use as many women as they can and somehow this leads to the BS above?
See if you can get your mind out of the past, none of that is accepted or even expected, I'm 43 and I've never seen that attitude towards women in my entire life.

This is like something from an alternative universe.

Leftists don't want "young men to use as many women as they can", they want women to be free and able to use their bodies in the way they determine they want to do so, whether then means they can sleep with whoever they want to, go and get a job, express their own opinions, get an education, and be their own person. That no one else has the right to tell any other human what decisions they cannot make in regards to their own bodies.

As to the list I posted, you can't have been looking very hard. All of them still exist in places about the world, and yes, that even includes the US for a lot of them.

While, thankfully, women have had the right to vote in most places since 1900, women in Saudi Arabia only got to vote for the first time just last year!

Sadly the tribal attitudes towards women found in the Middle East and Western Asia have been brought to the US and women who step out of line are killed in Honour Killings because they shamed their families.

One of Hillary's big policies is Equal Pay for Equal Work. In the US many professions that are typically seen as "Women's Work" are paid far less than "Male" equivalent work despite similar educational requirements and work hours, etc. Even when employed in the same roles within the same companies, women can be paid less than their male colleagues for doing the exact same work.

Perhaps you should open up your eyes and take a look at reality and you might see that the Attitudes towards a Woman are totally different that towards a Man.

Just look at the Presidential race itself...

Hillary is expected to smile and look friendly, no one expects Donald too
If Hillary is too loud, she's shrill. Donald is assertive when speaking loudly.
If Hillary is too quiet she is diminutive. If Donald speaks quietly he's being sincere and open.

I could go on.

The History of women throughout is one of being disrespected and viewed as little more then property. Women today are respected far more than they have ever been, but there is still a lot of work to do and more of that is breaking down the cultural and traditional male views on women being beneath them and of little to no value other than as things to be used (something that your own posting seems to suggest).
 
A thought about Trump and his fat comments: isn't Chris Christie a pal of Donald's?

Chris Christie is fat.
 
A thought about Trump and his fat comments: isn't Chris Christie a pal of Donald's?

Chris Christie is fat.

Fat men are not the same to Trump, that much is obvious. Women are sex objects and they make good Trumpettes spreading the Donald's word. Trumpettes must be at least minimally good lookers.
 
Fat men are not the same to Trump, that much is obvious. Women are sex objects and they make good Trumpettes spreading the Donald's word. Trumpettes must be at least minimally good lookers.

I read that as "... minimally good hookers" and was going to chastise you for picking on Melanija, as that's a scurrilous and unproven rumor and certainly beneath us to repeat, even if some people say..... :D
 
The Atlantic endorses a candidate for the 3rd time in its history, and it is not Donald Trump:

Donald Trump, on the other hand, has no record of public service and no qualifications for public office. His affect is that of an infomercial huckster; he traffics in conspiracy theories and racist invective; he is appallingly sexist; he is erratic, secretive, and xenophobic; he expresses admiration for authoritarian rulers, and evinces authoritarian tendencies himself. He is easily goaded, a poor quality for someone seeking control of America’s nuclear arsenal. He is an enemy of fact-based discourse; he is ignorant of, and indifferent to, the Constitution; he appears not to read.
 
Hundreds claim Trump did not pay them.
I am not a Trump supporter but I will probably be a Trump voter. Here is why I am not swayed by those articles.
Trump has been involved with 1,000s? of projects some of them very large with many many vendors.
Trump appears to try to get projects done on time and on budget.
He does say he doesn't like to pay for work that doesn't meet the specifications.
He is not the one who is personally inspecting all of the work.
I would expect that some times the people who are not being paid did not fulfill their side of the contract.
I also would not be surprised if overzealous project managers have refused to pay the full amount for jobs that deserved full payment
Many times these disputes are not cut and dried as to who is correct.
So these suits are not enough to sway my vote.

I have been sued or countered sued a few times. When I read the claims from their lawyers I would have been convinced if I wasn't the other party. In my cases I won.
My employer was reported in an overtime dispute and lost and had to pay the back overtime like something mentioned in the article. They are not bad people and thought they had a case but the labor board disagreed.


A half-decade after the Friels’ encounter, in 1990, as Trump neared the opening of his third Atlantic City casino, he was once again attempting to pay contractors less than he owed. In casino*commission records of an audit, it was revealed that Trump’s companies owed a total of $69.5 million to 253 subcontractors on the Taj Mahal project. Some already had sued Trump, the state audit said; others were negotiating with Trump to try to recover what they could. The companies and their hundreds of workers had installed walls, chandeliers, plumbing, lighting and even the casino’s trademark minarets.

One of the builders was Marty Rosenberg, vice president of Atlantic Plate Glass Co., who said he was owed about $1.5 million for work at the Taj Mahal. When it became clear Trump was not going to pay in full, Rosenberg took on an informal leadership role, representing about 100 to 150 contractors in negotiations with Trump.

Rosenberg’s mission: with Trump offering as little as 30 cents on the dollar to some of the contractors, Rosenberg wanted to get as much as he could for the small businesses, most staffed by younger tradesmen with modest incomes and often families to support.

"Yes, there were a lot of other companies," he said of those Trump left waiting to get paid. "Yes, some did not survive."

Rosenberg said his company was among the lucky ones. He had to delay paying his own suppliers to the project. The negotiations led to him eventually getting about 70 cents on the dollar for his work, and he was able to pay all of his suppliers in full.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/



The notion that Donald didn't pay them because they did a terrible job is ridiculous. A handful, sure maybe. But 253 at $70m? No way. Even if it were true it would be more evidence of his incompetence (a competent person would not have hundreds of incompetent contractors working on the biggest project he has ever done).

The notion that someone else decided to screw over that many people for that much money on Donald's behalf without his approval or knowledge is insane and again would be proof of his total incompetence if true. But it is not. He was the one in charge, and he was the one with the obvious motive. And when these people tried to get their money, instead of apologizing and paying them, he tried to get them to take much less than than he owed.

There are only two explanations for this. First is he didn't have the money. But no way he didn't realize he didn't have enough money to pay everyone until after they had already finished. He should have done everything he could have to come up with the money (borrow it, sell assets, take on investors) if he wanted the casino finished. Instead he figured that he could finish the casino without having to come up with more money if he stiffed contractors instead. And since this is the course of action than benefits him the most and he doesn't give a **** about anyone but himself, I doubt it was a difficult decision. Or maybe he did have the money and decided that the best course of action was to not pay them anyway because he is that greedy.


Anyway, Donald is completely amoral. He will screw over anyone if it benefits him and he thinks he can get away with it. That's why he has stiffed so many contractors. That's why he started a scam university that tricked gullible people into giving him all their money. I doubt doing these sorts of things bother him at all. He probably thinks that cheating people out of money makes him a smart businessman.
 
logger said:
Leftist want to encourage young men to use as many women as they can...
This is like something from an alternative universe.

... the cultural and traditional male views on women being beneath them and of little to no value other than as things to be used (something that your own posting seems to suggest).

Beat me to it. Dang New Zealanders waking up before everyone else.
Trump, and clearly some of his supporters, seem to be stuck with this archaic notion that women are somehow incapable if independent thought and action, particularly when it comes to sex.

Trump, at 70, seems is beyond redemption, but nobody in their 40's or younger should still cling to this ridiculous position.

This is exactly why his poll numbers are so low with women and that is not going to change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom