For those that Ha ha'd

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-22-2018, 04:54 PM)Dill Wrote: I believe you said  "you should be mad that the Democrats candidate was so bad that they lost to one of the worst people in the world during the election... oh and hey, I hear she's gearing up for 2020. Go Hillary. Trump will eat her alive this time."

Didn't Trump identify Clinton as "the worst" during the election? And according to a recent tweet, "Crooked" Hillary Clinton "is the worst (and biggest) loser of all time. She just can’t stop, which is so good for the Republican Party. Hillary, get on with your life and give it another try in three years!" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-challenges-hillary-clinton-us-presidential-election-2020-twitter-latest-a8062501.html

Where do you see the differences between your views and Trump's here? Like him, you even urge her to run again. Show me where I am WRONG.

Also, all this talk of "worst" begs the question of how that is defined. The candidate who was most civil, who know most about government and world politics, and who won the popular vote is somehow "the worst"; while the the most uncivil candidate who knew the least about government and lost the popular vote is only "2nd worst."  

I certainly understand the "mentality" of a man who publicly calls women "horseface" and "pig" and "Pocahantas" to "get his name back in the spotlight."  It is the mentality of a misogynist.

The real issue here is the mentality of people who say they are also not ok with the misogyny--then blink and shake their heads and support Trump anyway. That is why he is public office shaming the country.

Wikipedia has a decent timeline of the Trump-Daniels affair.

You claim that Daniel's "credibility" is shot because she "recanted the recant."  Trump denied that Cohen was his lawyer, then "recanted," then denied that he paid her 130,000 dollars, then "recanted."  If "recanting" the standard for Daniel's credibility, why not for him too, if you don't "blindly follow Trump"?

And if Trump paid Daniels 130,000 to keep silent, then it is Trump who has to "prove it,"  not her.

Also, you might step back a moment to take in the big picture. You are defending a President who may have violated campaign laws to pay off a porn star through his "fixer" whose job was to kill scandals for that president and his friends--a man whose MO is to deny deny deny deny until he has to admit charges against him. 

Part of the picture is that you and others claims to "understand how he thinks" and still want him for president.

You didn't give me MY Reason as to why Trump won. Both candidates were terrible choices, but the reason why she lost is pretty simple.

She catered to the rich. Trump got out there and got the middle class riled up with promises of Jobs and an Improved Economy.
The Middle Class doesn't give a whip about BeYonce bouncing her butt on stage or Madonna promising people BJ's if you vote for Hillary. That shit doesn't put food on the table. Her message about how to build the economy and get people jobs was never heard or materialized.

Bill even told her to switch her focus or she will lose. That is why she lost the election.