World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[Ack]

The punishment for Billy Bush is that he is Billy Bush.

And now things are starting to go the Bill Cosby route.

[dsheinem]

Locker room or "guy" talk might be something along the lines of "i'd love to hit that!" or "her tits are phenomenal!" or even "i made her scream last night!" and the like - but none of those are bragging about past (nor implying future) non-consenting sexual assault. Dismissing comments about "just start kissing, don't even ask" or "grab them by the pussy" or "they let me do it, i can do anything" as sexual bravado is either ignorant of the acceptable boundaries of "guy talk" or just blinded by political preferences.

[marurun]

In many ways, they've bought into what those on my side have been told for years, that we need to separate our personal morals from our politics, much like many Democrats were able to do with Pres. Clinton.

As I take a moment to wade into waters from which I may not make it out alive...

Clinton's particular failings were not nearly so brazen as Trump's, and not nearly so misogynistic. Trumps abuses were sexual assault and treating women like objects. And Clinton's failings didn't include personality traits most commonly associated with toddlers. He was still able to be a keen negotiator and a dedicated politician and public servant. You might not agree with Clinton's legislative and executive legacy (and I certainly don't at times), but he was a far better president and leader than Donald Trump has any hope of being. Trump routinely appeals to negative and divisive emotions. That's why BMF is so at wit's end over all this.

[BogusMeatFactory]

Almost all the people I know supporting Trump do so because they think he's slightly less bad than Hillary. I also have friends that are full-on conservative, and will not vote for either candidate.

I do know a few that are full-on supporters, and they've known he was a moral reprobate well before all the rest of this stuff hit. In many ways, they've bought into what those on my side have been told for years, that we need to separate our personal morals from our politics, much like many Democrats were able to do with Pres. Clinton.

I feel anyone who does not vote is not making a statement at all. I don't care too much for either candidate and certainly do not want the same routine for another four years. My vote is for Trump even with his "Locker Room" talk. Not saying what he said was right, but then it was unofficial guy talk that we sometimes slip out. Say, why no static on the celebrity Billy Bush?! Trump was talking undercuff on that bus, but Bush had the loud laughter!

I'll take a headstrong business man who states we should have taken the oil in Iraq to prevent what has happened now over the failed policies these last few years.

Now, I want to make it clear that I am upset or angry at your opinion, but I am actually very curious to know more about the makeup of this opinion. I am not trying to undermine you, but when you say that you do not like the same routine for another four years, what exactly is the routine you are describing. I genuinely like to know these things, because they can offer a different perspective that may or may not have some merit to me. I have been talking to a lot of people who do not agree with me and I am always welcoming to learn about why they believe what they believe.

I am not saying that your thoughts are invalid on this front, although I can safely say that some people I have talked to are, because they say ridiculous things like Bill Clinton raped a 12 year old and that Hillary is a demon that goes by the name of Hapshetaphit (I made that name up, but there is a person who genuinely believes that she is a demon).

Again, I am not saying you believe that, because the reality of the situation is, everyone is a human being and everyone comes from a different world when making decisions. People burned by the coal industry collapse in the U.S. want to support him, because they believe he will bring that industry back. It makes sense as to why they are supporting him, because they want to be able to provide for their families. Although I don't believe he will be able to do that is besides the point.

As for the political routine and being tired of it, my perspective is that Donald Trump will not change any of that. He can't change Congress. All he can do is make it difficult for anything to get done if he decides to flex his veto power and place the country in a standstill. What he can change is how the world perceives the U.S. by moving troops around (not declaring war) and interacting with global leaders. Most importantly, the president is a role model for the nation. They can mold young minds.

I would also like to make it clear that his sexual assault commentary is not a tipping point for me. It was long ago when he labeled mexican's rapists and drug dealers, or that people should be violently removed from his rallies and when he wants to imprison and prosecute the media and his opposition or that he wants to bomb a country because they made rude hand gestures at our armed forces. These aren't minor issues to me. These are indicative of an unstable human being. The status quo has its flaws, sure, but those flaws exist by the divisive nature of the party system and a constant push and pull for control, power and doing it, "My Way," so that porkbarrelling is an absolutely necessity to get anything done.

Do I believe that some politicians need to get out of Washington? Absolutely. Remember that you can vote for your congressional representatives as well. It is also not that hard to contact them. You would be surprised. Do your research there and make the right choices.

[Erik_Twice]

I am also convinced that half of Trump's supporters online are not real

Astroturfing is increasingly common in all facets of life and that includes politics.

Here in Spain the biggest forums have all been invaded by Podemos' cybervolunteers as well as a growing number of shills by other political parties. Half of the messages in Forocoches, the biggest Spanish-speaking forum, are made by shills and alt-right shills are the reason for the sudden jump in racist attitudes on that forum.

I think people must realize that online conversations on any topic are being driven by shills, outrage peddlers and professional harrasers. This is both our present and our future.

[Blu]

I've actually seen a lot of very obvious automated trolling on my Facebook feed, both from lefties and righties. It's pretty obvious when you get different people posting stuff, and it has the exact same wording between "personal" posts. It's hard to get a feel for what's legit and what's not. So much of it is meant to create ideological momentum, this idea that everyone is thinking like this, creating a bandwagon effect.

This post really resonates with me Sarge. On both sides, there's so much rhetoric and work towards building momentum, that individual voices and the perspectives they bring--as to why they may support a particular candidate--are lost. I should say by this I mean voices that are reasonable, not voices that drift into fear mongering, bigoted, or otherwise vastly irrational lines of thought. Much of the work that I do in my role at the university I work at, does revolve around helping students take another's perspective, so that they're not washed away by assumptions others make. I don't need the one Trump supporter down the hall being chastised/picked out of a crowd for supporting his candidacy without at least first trying to make the inroads of understanding the "Why?". I see less and less of the civil discourse that perhaps what I'm used to. It doesn't help that we can often communicate this behind the visage of the internet, where it's easy to keyboard warrior it all out, too.

Just wanted to say I appreciated your voice and that the groupthink / hiveminding is realer than ever, and it's literally the greatest instance of "A Lesser of Two Evils" in any election cycle I've been a part of. I was Bernie through and through, and that's not happening. Hell, I could've been okay with Kasich (even though he's bled Ohio's budget dry in areas that affect women adversely). I'm definitely not okay with the level of demagoguery that Trump has brought though. I think we're left with two choices that each side feels don't bring any dignity to the Presidency. That just plain sucks in terms of trying to mend an apparent divide.

Locker room or "guy" talk might be something along the lines of "i'd love to hit that!" or "her tits are phenomenal!" or even "i made her scream last night!" and the like - but none of those are bragging about past (nor implying future) non-consenting sexual assault. Dismissing comments about "just start kissing, don't even ask" or "grab them by the pussy" or "they let me do it, i can do anything" as sexual bravado is either ignorant of the acceptable boundaries of "guy talk" or just blinded by political preferences.

In any place of employment, especially in a university setting, this type of talk you outlined is usually grounds where a sexual misconduct/harassment policy may take hold. I know our HR department has clear guidelines for what is appropriate and what is not and may adversely affect your employment. Following through with actions, like Donald Trump is now being accused of, constitutes an alleged sexual assault. I don’t think there’s place for it anywhere in a work setting. It's simply indefensible in my eyes.

The most heartbreaking of all of these leaked tapes, is that the woman (Arianne Zucker) Billy Bush and Donald Trump speak about, meets with the two not short after. This woman has no context of the type of nasty shit they've been talking about. That's she's been reduced to an object in their eyes before she greets them as they disembark. She handles some awkward interactions with grace that really are just the tip of the iceberg. These situations are pretty prevalent, which is why I think Twitter exploded in the way it did with all the sharing of women's accounts of sexual assault.

[J T]

Just took a look at my Voter's Guide.



Hmmmm... seems like a pretty glaring omission in a resume for such an important job.

[MrPopo]

While I think Trump is a dumpster fire, Eisenhower had no elected experience either. Neither did Taylor, Grant, or Hoover.

[Ack]

While I think Trump is a dumpster fire, Eisenhower had no elected experience either. Neither did Taylor, Grant, or Hoover.

And President Obama had less than four year's experience on the national level.

[samsonlonghair]

While I think Trump is a dumpster fire, Eisenhower had no elected experience either. Neither did Taylor, Grant, or Hoover.

This is something of a false equivalency.

Eisenhower, Taylor, and Grant were war heroes who rode into the presidency on the backs of their military victories. While I agree that being a war hero doesn't qualify one for presidency, I don't think it's a necessarily a bad idea for the commander-in-chief to have spent some time in the trenches himself before he ponders sending troops into battle.

Hoover is another beast. He had no elected experience, but he had tons of experience in the executive branch through his appointments as Secretary of Commerce and head of the FDA.

Trump isn't a war hero by any means. If anything, he seems dismissive of veterans' contributions. He also has no experience in the executive branch.