Hillary Clinton is Done

[Trakar]

The fidelity issue bothers me. But again I have to weigh the ups and downs of the whole person. Even forgiveness has shadings.

It bothers me, in the sense that if he does this to a woman I assume he loves, has married and given a stake in his career,...what respect does he have for me, my goals and understandings, my regard and consideration for our nation?

But I could not care less about his and Hillary's relationship.

For example, I may hold a grudge against Bill for his unfaithfulness. It would weigh some upon my decision to trust him. But I also hold a grudge against George W whose reason for taking us into a war proved false. That would weigh infinitely more with my trust.

certainly.

And if it were between Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump, I would, with a bitter taste in my mouth, probably vote for Hillary.

ETA: Unless you can convince me otherwise...

I would choose Stein, but my heart wouldn't be in it, as I understand that third parties, cannot win national elections in the U.S. as a practical matter.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It bothers me, in the sense that if he does this to a woman I assume he loves, has married and given a stake in his career,...what respect does he have for me, my goals and understandings, my regard and consideration for our nation? ....

Ignoring for the moment no one is electing Billary, are you saying a man that cheats couldn't possibly love his parents?

 

[Trakar]

Ignoring for the moment no one is electing Billary, are you saying a man that cheats couldn't possibly love his parents?

A life time of eye-rolling seems to have scrambled your language centers, what are you talking about.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

A life time of eye-rolling seems to have scrambled your language centers, what are you talking about.

It's not complicated. You said Bill Clinton's infidelity meant you couldn't trust him. I call BS on that premise.

 

[Loss Leader]

It's not complicated. You said Bill Clinton's infidelity meant you couldn't trust him. I call BS on that premise.

It's far more complicated. Bill's infidelity means he's not trustworthy. The fact that Hillary continues to associate with an untrustworthy person means she has bad personal judgment. And that means she shouldn't be President ... or something

 

[Foolmewunz]

It's far more complicated. Bill's infidelity means he's not trustworthy. The fact that Hillary continues to associate with an untrustworthy person means she has bad personal judgment. And that means she shouldn't be President ... or something

Funny how Ike's years of deceiving his wife didn't reduce the trust nor the esteem that Republicans place in him. How about JFK and moderates? FDR and progressives?

I think the general criteria is similar to logger's disinterest in hearing the background of his favorite candidates. "I don't like the guy in the first place, so I'll hold this against him."

 

[Trakar]

It's far more complicated. Bill's infidelity means he's not trustworthy. The fact that Hillary continues to associate with an untrustworthy person means she has bad personal judgment. And that means she shouldn't be President ... or something

You are both going through some pretty extreme contortions looking for meanings that were never implied nor intended. I merely said that I understood that if Bill Clinton could lie to his wife to do what he did, that I have no reason to doubt that he could and would lie to people who mean virtually nothing to him personally if it suited him to do so.

And as I have stated previously and clearly, I don't think that anything Bill did reflects on his wife (much less impacting his love for his parents -wherever that came from).

My problems with Hillary are almost entirely related to her foreign and domestic policy preferences.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Anyone could "lie to people who mean virtually nothing to him personally if it suited him to do so." Why single philanderers out?

 

[Trakar]

Anyone could "lie to people who mean virtually nothing to him personally if it suited him to do so." Why single philanderers out?

"could" I can't speak to, "would" concerns me more. I didn't single out philanderers, I merely included them among a large variety of personal flaws and failings that involve deceit in the pursuit of personal advantage and selfish gain.

Not that any of this dims my personal assessment of Slick Willy as one of, if not the, best executive officer this nation has had in the modern era. I voted for him twice and even with my questions of his integrity, if he were eligible for another term, I don't know for a fact that I wouldn't support him again. That said, Hillary isn't Bill.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

".., That said, Hillary isn't Bill.

Well, a glimmer of actual thinking.

As for 'wouldn't vote for Bill again', we had a decent 8 years with Bill. No lying us into a war, an economy that wasn't half bad, some compromising I wish we hadn't needed but at least stuff got done, and all that while the right wingers were doing everything they could to trash his Presidency.

I would vote for him again. I don't give a rip about his penis problems. I don't think the forcing himself on women was ever substantiated.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't think the forcing himself on women was ever substantiated.

Neither was Cosby's. Until it was.

But here's the thing: even if you consider these allegations as unproven, Hillary's conduct towards those women is not unsubstantiated. She tried to destroy any woman who accused her husband of inappropriate behavior. She did the exact opposite of what she now claims should be done for people who say they are the victims of sexual assault.

Hillary never cared about the rights of women. She only ever cared about protecting her own status, which she achieved by marriage. Hillary is anti-feminist.

 

[Loss Leader]

Neither was Cosby's. Until it was.

But here's the thing: even if you consider these allegations as unproven, Hillary's conduct towards those women is not unsubstantiated. She tried to destroy any woman who accused her husband of inappropriate behavior. She did the exact opposite of what she now claims should be done for people who say they are the victims of sexual assault.

Hillary never cared about the rights of women. She only ever cared about protecting her own status, which she achieved by marriage. Hillary is anti-feminist.

I'm a little afraid to ask, but exactly how did HRC try to destroy anyone?

Do you consider any female Republicans to be antifeminist?

 

[bruto]

Neither was Cosby's. Until it was.

But here's the thing: even if you consider these allegations as unproven, Hillary's conduct towards those women is not unsubstantiated. She tried to destroy any woman who accused her husband of inappropriate behavior. She did the exact opposite of what she now claims should be done for people who say they are the victims of sexual assault.

Hillary never cared about the rights of women. She only ever cared about protecting her own status, which she achieved by marriage. Hillary is anti-feminist.

While what you say may well be true, I don't think the explanations you've given for what you say are sufficient.

For one thing, of course, saying an allegation might be true of one person because it was true of another is a deep, deep hole out of which one can never climb. It's true, after all, of everyone and every thing. No doubt, Bill's conduct was reprehensible, his enjoyment of a powerful position inappropriate, and the ethics of consent blur here, but as far as I know, we have no evidence that he was guilty of coercion.

For another, although Hillary's conduct may well have been ugly and unseemly with regard to certain women, it is, as far as we know, limited to women who had relations with her husband. Even allowing that he got around a good deal, that's a very small sample, and unless you do have evidence that the sex involved was assault, it cannot be used to describe what she thinks should be done about sexual assault.

I have no doubt Hillary's conduct falls quite far from the exemplary here, but one must guard against a chain of surmises leading to a conclusion.

 

[logger]

Just wanted to add, these are democrat women who are accusing him, they actually worked for the cause of democrats. Many of you ought to investigate them and their claims, it is chilling. For it to be dismissed out of hand because Bill is your hero, I think is tragic.

 

[Loss Leader]

Just wanted to add, these are democrat women who are accusing him, they actually worked for the cause of democrats. Many of you ought to investigate them and their claims, it is chilling. For it to be dismissed out of hand because Bill is your hero, I think is tragic.

I don't think that's at all fair. These claims (as vague as they are) have been investigated by all sorts of authorities over the course of decades. None have ever concluded that the President was guilty of sexual assault. The fact that there are a number of claims doesn't make any one of them more true.

 

[logger]

I don't think that's at all fair. These claims (as vague as they are) have been investigated by all sorts of authorities over the course of decades. None have ever concluded that the President was guilty of sexual assault. The fact that there are a number of claims doesn't make any one of them more true.

Its very difficult for a woman to accuse rape and have it stick. But this man has a pattern, he has admitted to two affairs and accused of multiple others. Its enough for me to reject him in any private or public sector job. Does it disqualify his wife? Probably not, but there are judgements here that need to be examined.
She simply has a lifetime of bad decisions which will carry over into the presidency.

 

[Loss Leader]

Its very difficult for a woman to accuse rape and have it stick. But this man has a pattern, he has admitted to two affairs and accused of multiple others. Its enough for me to reject him in any private or public sector job. Does it disqualify his wife? Probably not, but there are judgements here that need to be examined.
She simply has a lifetime of bad decisions which will carry over into the presidency.

You're conflating affairs and rape. Evidence of affairs has nothing to do with allegations of rape. Don't pretend that they do. The fact that I own two dogs is not evidence that I raped a cat.

As regards how HRC has dealt with infidelity, I don't understand why her marriage is anybody's business but her own.

 

[Meadmaker]

But this man has a pattern, he has admitted to two affairs and accused of multiple others. Its enough for me to reject him in any private or public sector job.

If that's how you feel, fine, and good on you for standing up for the sanctity of marriage, assuming you apply that across the board, regardless of ideology or party affiliation.

Just understand that you are pretty close to alone in your views. The majority of people don't care. Some people pretend to care, but most of those are just trying to score political points.

 

[Foolmewunz]

If that's how you feel, fine, and good on you for standing up for the sanctity of marriage, assuming you apply that across the board, regardless of ideology or party affiliation.

Just understand that you are pretty close to alone in your views. The majority of people don't care. Some people pretend to care, but most of those are just trying to score political points.

Hilited:

This is very true. I remember being in Taipei when Monica-gate unfolded. Remembering the previous item resembling such a "scandal", Gary Hart's transgressions getting him driven out of the Democratic Party, I figured Clinton would be impeached, drawn and quartered, run out of town on a rail and then made to clean the erasers after school. I remember asking friends when I saw the "meh" reaction, "When did America turn into Italy?"

Oh, there was outrage... and quite likely the same folks who are still outraged: The Clinton Derangement Syndrome sufferers and blatant partisans.

 

[Darat]

But...who cares?

No, seriously, who cares? I don't care. I don't think most people care. I know 20 years ago the Republicans made fools of themselves trying to get a lot of people to care, but, when it was all said and done, we still didn't care. The only thing they accomplished was to ensure that for generations to come, Junior High School government teachers would say, as if with one voice, "Let's talk about Andrew Johnson."

Your team really need to back off on the personal life. It just isn't significant.

It's that old righties view of a woman's place being a step behind her owner i.e. husband.