I don't see this hurting him. The truth is that a lot of women like rich assholes who treat them like shit. And lots of guys would want to be rich like Trump and have their pick of hot women. This is just going to humanize him in the eyes of his supporters and make him seem more like a normal guy. I mean what straight guy doesn't talk about women like this in private conversations with their bros?
I don't believe for a second that anyone is actually outraged by this. In fact this is exactly the kind of faux outrage culture and political correctness that Trump's followers are so against. Nobody will even care about this in a few days because they will be talking about the latest over the top thing Trump has said.
I've always found it amusing that a party that tries to sell people on living their lives by Biblical law is also the party that uses the term "politically correct" so often to try and weasel out of their own misogyny and racism.
Thing is Trump and his supporters are politically correct social justice warriors. Complete with faux outrage and playing the perpetual victim. It's just targeted differently.
@bfun you were right. I really didn't see this as anywhere near the worst thing he's said. But I guess you get more leeway talking about Muslims, Mexicans, and war heroes.
Women are now coming forward saying Trump groped them, including a woman who says he fondled her breasts and reached up her skirt while she was sitting next to him on a plane. We are also now hearing that he liked to go backstage during teenage beauty pageants and stare at underage teenage girls while they were changing. Some of the girls were only 15 years old. No surprises that a guy who brags about getting creepy with women actually likes getting creepy with women. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...men-accuse-trump-of-unwanted-sexual-touching/
They both should resign or be forced to. The wikileaks prove Shillary the duplicitous crook everyone knew she was. She shouldn't get to be president because the opposition is unelectable.
Got caught being given questions early from CNN. Conspired to cheat Bernie Sanders out of the nomination. Open neo-conservative shill to big banks, Friends of Bill VIP treatment, etc. But by all means, stay focused on Wikileaks and Russia. The same Russia that definitely didn't hack her private server. But 100% did this. Because Liar McLiar SuitPants said so.
There's an email with a single question about the death penalty. Clinton's campaign responds to that by saying it's not a new question for Clinton. That's the sum total of the "scandal" there. Big nothing. I've already told you that the DNC could simply name Clinton as the nominee without a primary if they chose to. That's what the Libertarian and Green parties do. Instead, they allowed Sanders to run as a Democrat (he's a life-long independent) and Clinton won the popular vote and the required number of delegates. Yes, Wasserman-Schultz was terrible and *big surprise* the DNC preferred a long time Democrat to win the nomination, but they're a private political party. It isn't really a scandal that Sanders wasn't hugely popular with the DNC. Clinton is not a progressive when it comes to banking/finance and Wall St., but then neither is the Democratic party as a whole. Try naming the number of progressive members of Congress, for example. Combine that with the GOP and, unfortunately, the U.S. as a whole is at best centrist to moderate right-wing for those things.
How is it not a big deal? Only one question leaked because it was flagged for concern. But it's a clear indicator that access to all questions were there. They were just comfortable with the rest. Sanders didn't know the questions coming his way... There is also an email about pushing the press towards giving Cruz and Trump more coverage. Since they were thought to be easier opponents in a general election. The whole thing seems scripted. Can't say that a GOP/Trump presidency is the answer so I guess it worked.
Brazille was the person that worked with CNN and had a position with the DNC. She only provides the death penalty question. I don't see where you're getting "clear indicator" of anything else. Besides, the debate questions cover pretty familiar ground most of the time, and they can always give a non-answer to things they don't like/aren't prepared for.
The leaks aren't sinister as the stuff coming out about Trump. But she sucks as a presidential candidate and at the very least is willing operate in the gray area. It seems there is some truth to the liberal media bias as well. Some of those 'reporters' are DNC propaganda ministers like Faux News is with the GOP. Bernie Sanders was the only genuine candidate this year. I wish he ran as an independent to fuck over the democratic party. Trump is doing a good job of imploding the republican party.
They actually did a study on media bias during the primaries. And it was biased against Clinton. Not hard to believe considering all coverage devoted to Benghazi (GOP led House investigation ultimately concluded Clinton did nothing wrong), the email server (FBI concluded Clinton didn't break the law), and the Clinton Foundation (no quid pro quo ever found). Huge amounts of negative coverage for nada. http://usuncut.com/politics/harvard-study-media-primaries/
Maybe any publicity is good publicity? Especially that early on... some excerpts from that article. I wonder if they had access to some of the emails, they would still conclude it was just for ad revenue. So far these sources are on Shillary's payroll: CNN, Politico NYTimes (wikileaks partner) Boston Globe CNBC Wall Street Journal (wikileaks partner) Washington Post (wikileaks partner) No doubt one of the partner sites gave them a heads up to craft the Russian hack story. To be fair, a more legit GOP nominee would've locked down the Faux News propaganda machine. But Trump managed to even fracture their brand of 'news' lol.
lol... that seems too well orchestrated for Trump. He wouldn't be anything but a pawn in something like that. I think the next 4-8 years go very badly for him. He has rallied uneducated under-earners but his brand relies on the typically educated, liberal, high-income demographic. I don't see how anybody will want to be associated after this.
Riiiiiight...they're on Clinton's "payroll", but they did wall-to-wall coverage of GOP talking points that had no basis in fact like Benghazi, the email server, and the Clinton Foundation.
The best thing that could happen to Trump at this point is to lose the election. He wouldn't have to actually do anything or produce any results. Which is great for him because he's dangerously incompetent, and I think on some level even he knows that. He could spend the next 4-8 years playing the victim, saying the system was rigged and there was a liberal/globalist conspiracy against him. He could probably even launch his own alt right conservative news network as bfun suggested and make a ton of money.