Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | ... | 109
17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650701 13-Oct-2016 21:02
Send private message

Fred99:

 

 

 

When Anderson Cooper asked Trump during the second presidential debate whether Trump had ever groped women in the way he described on the tapes, Trump said, “No, I have not.”

 

All three women who accused Trump of assault said that watching Trump’s denial on TV made them angry, because it so closely mirrored their own experiences — being groped or kissed by Trump suddenly and without consent.

 

 

 

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

 

 

If he is guilty on these matters, he should be brought to justice, but if he isn't, they should be. 

 

The truth won't come out till well after it's too late either way, but I'd feel pretty grim if it cost him the presidency and turned out to be incorrect. (because who has motive and that person has gone to those lengths to be president and is now in charge of the free world. That's a pretty bad perversion of an election.

 

 

 

If he loses fair and square because he wasn't the right guy for the job (which I firmly believe is the case), that's fine.


Mad Scientist
18921 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2458

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650710 13-Oct-2016 21:19
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

If he loses fair and square because he wasn't the right guy for the job (which I firmly believe is the case), that's fine.

 

 

Fair and square? I thought all politics are dirty.


Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3716

Subscriber

  Reply # 1650712 13-Oct-2016 21:22
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

If he is guilty on these matters, he should be brought to justice, but if he isn't, they should be. 

 

The truth won't come out till well after it's too late either way, but I'd feel pretty grim if it cost him the presidency and turned out to be incorrect. (because who has motive and that person has gone to those lengths to be president and is now in charge of the free world. That's a pretty bad perversion of an election.

 

If he loses fair and square because he wasn't the right guy for the job (which I firmly believe is the case), that's fine.

 

 

There is something funny going on with the quotes but I believe the above is what was said.

 

Many women in this situation point out that it can be very difficult to be the first to go public with such a complaint, especially when the person involved is well-known and you are a nobody. Once one person does say something, a trickle often turns into a flood. This is what happened with Cosby, to use that example, and it has happened with many others. Of course there is always the possibility of someone jumping on a bandwaggon, or trying to have their 15 minutes of fame, but these kinds of complaints do need to be taken seriously and assessed carefully.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


BDFL - Memuneh
61192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11974

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650713 13-Oct-2016 21:22
One person supports this post
Send private message

Sideface:

 

Repeal The 19th Amendment - Trump Supporters Want To Take Away Women's Right To Vote

A new analysis shows that if only women cast ballots in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton would dominate at the polls with a commanding 458 electoral votes over Donald Trump's 80.
If only men voted, Trump would take 350 to Clinton's 188.

So some of the Republican nominee's most ardent supporters began tweeting about repealing the 19th Amendment of the Constitution, which in 1920 gave women the right to vote.

 

 

And of course they have huge problems with the rest of the population complaining about the 2nd Amendment. Because... guns.





17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650714 13-Oct-2016 21:22
Send private message

joker97:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

If he loses fair and square because he wasn't the right guy for the job (which I firmly believe is the case), that's fine.

 

 

Fair and square? I thought all politics are dirty.

 

 

So long as EVERYONE tells the truth, then the result should be the right one. That means not having someone make stuff up about a candidate to swing opinion against them (and I am not just talking about these women and Trump). 

 

I believe it's fair and reasonable that anything reflecting the truth (good and bad) be made public, and that with that data, voters make their choice. I have a SERIOUS problem with an election being stolen by dishonestly discrediting your opponent, no matter what kind of Doophus he or she may be.

 

 

 

(and yes I am aware that Trump has told a bunch of lies and (mostly) exaggerated)


BDFL - Memuneh
61192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11974

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650715 13-Oct-2016 21:25
Send private message

networkn:

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

 

Because we all know that sometimes a woman goes to complain about something and the police look at the other guy, the rich one and think "Nah..."

 

There's wonders in numbers. When one see that it can be brought forward because others had the same experience they will do.





17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650728 13-Oct-2016 21:34
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

 

 

There is something funny going on with the quotes but I believe the above is what was said.

 

Many women in this situation point out that it can be very difficult to be the first to go public with such a complaint, especially when the person involved is well-known and you are a nobody. Once one person does say something, a trickle often turns into a flood. This is what happened with Cosby, to use that example, and it has happened with many others. Of course there is always the possibility of someone jumping on a bandwaggon, or trying to have their 15 minutes of fame, but these kinds of complaints do need to be taken seriously and assessed carefully.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's really hard to make comments like I am making without looking like a bad guy but... They have had MONTHS since he was the Republican Nominee,that would have been the time to do it, so that there was time for an investigation. Arguably he has more power and influence than he has ever had before, so the argument they wouldn't be believed  back then isn't much more valid than it would be now..

 

The problem is that now... There is no chance for the truth to come out, whatever that is, in time for the Election. This will cost him the election, and if it turns out there is no truth to those claims.. The implications are pretty scary.

 

 


7194 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3752


  Reply # 1650730 13-Oct-2016 21:37
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

 

 

 

Doesn't work like that - when it comes to being violated by a "respected" person with authority.  They know they can get away with it, time and time again - and they do.

 

There's a pretty obvious trigger for breaching their threshold - they just witnessed some extremely damning proof of character by the perpetrator, a bare faced denial - and suddenly what they've sat on for years might be believed.

 

Sure - it could be BS.  The cap fits though in so many other ways, for now I'm believing the women, and Trump's credibility remains at zero for many reasons, including his history of being a serial liar, misogynist, racist etc.

 

Being the "big boss" owner of beauty pageants - "allowing" him access to young women's changing rooms isn't a good look either.

 

 


Mad Scientist
18921 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2458

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650731 13-Oct-2016 21:38
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

 

 

There is something funny going on with the quotes but I believe the above is what was said.

 

Many women in this situation point out that it can be very difficult to be the first to go public with such a complaint, especially when the person involved is well-known and you are a nobody. Once one person does say something, a trickle often turns into a flood. This is what happened with Cosby, to use that example, and it has happened with many others. Of course there is always the possibility of someone jumping on a bandwaggon, or trying to have their 15 minutes of fame, but these kinds of complaints do need to be taken seriously and assessed carefully.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's really hard to make comments like I am making without looking like a bad guy but... They have had MONTHS since he was the Republican Nominee,that would have been the time to do it, so that there was time for an investigation. Arguably he has more power and influence than he has ever had before, so the argument they wouldn't be believed  back then isn't much more valid than it would be now..

 

The problem is that now... There is no chance for the truth to come out, whatever that is, in time for the Election. This will cost him the election, and if it turns out there is no truth to those claims.. The implications are pretty scary.

 

 

 

 

This isn't costing him the election. The tapes that preceeded did. The audio recording absolutely incinerated the GOP, turning everyone against him and him against everyone.


17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650732 13-Oct-2016 21:40
Send private message

freitasm:

 

networkn:

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

 

Because we all know that sometimes a woman goes to complain about something and the police look at the other guy, the rich one and think "Nah..."

 

There's wonders in numbers. When one see that it can be brought forward because others had the same experience they will do.

 

 

Well, if she (or they) did that, and were turned away, then that should come out in the investigation and those officers should be disciplined accordingly. If she chose to not come forward because she decided that would be the case, but now is ok coming forward, I'd have an issue with credibility.

 

Let's not forget there have been a lot of instances where people have come forward against public figures, an investigation has been conducted and the person found innocent. In those cases there is a long lasting effect on the victim (the person who was found innocent of the charges in this instance) and the accuser usually

 

gets no punishment. 

 

 


17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650735 13-Oct-2016 21:46
Send private message

Fred99:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

Sure, so they weren't offended enough to complain originally, and they weren't offended badly enough by all his other antics that they didn't think coming forward earlier was in the public's best interest? Basically, they weren't angry by it happening so they didn't really care he was going to run the country, but having him deny it, well all three of them decided at more or less the same instant that their threshold had been breached and it was time to come forward. 

 

 

 

 

Doesn't work like that - when it comes to being violated by a "respected" person with authority.  They know they can get away with it, time and time again - and they do.

 

There's a pretty obvious trigger for breaching their threshold - they just witnessed some extremely damning proof of character by the perpetrator, a bare faced denial - and suddenly what they've sat on for years might be believed.

 

Sure - it could be BS.  The cap fits though in so many other ways, for now I'm believing the women, and Trump's credibility remains at zero for many reasons, including his history of being a serial liar, misogynist, racist etc.

 

Being the "big boss" owner of beauty pageants - "allowing" him access to young women's changing rooms isn't a good look either.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, there are factors on both sides. I CAN see it from both sides. I have an issue with the timing of all of this, the original tape and everything subsequent. It would have been found a long time ago, and for me, this is being used to decide the election.  It feels seedy, and whilst some might be happy the result is going in favour of Clinton, for me the process has been corrupted deliberately and this gives me GRAVE concerns. 

 

For me like it is in law, if the process is correct, and the result is not what I wanted, that is better than the process being wrong, and the result being what I wanted.  David Bain being free is an example of that. Makes me sick, but I am glad the process was followed.

 

 


Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3716

Subscriber

  Reply # 1650737 13-Oct-2016 21:50
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

 

 

It's really hard to make comments like I am making without looking like a bad guy but... They have had MONTHS since he was the Republican Nominee,that would have been the time to do it, so that there was time for an investigation. Arguably he has more power and influence than he has ever had before, so the argument they wouldn't be believed  back then isn't much more valid than it would be now..

 

The problem is that now... There is no chance for the truth to come out, whatever that is, in time for the Election. This will cost him the election, and if it turns out there is no truth to those claims.. The implications are pretty scary.

 

 

 

 

Like a lot of people, I feel a strong dislike for Trump and that overrides my slightly less strong dislike for Clinton. Because I dislike him, and because of many things he has said and done, I am inclined to think the worst of him. You have a valid point, he could be the victim of false accusations and even he deserves a fair go, and if this does turn out to be political shenanigans then I guess that is yet another nail in the coffin of American democracy. But on the balance of probabilities, I think the women are probably telling the truth. If it was just one woman, then maybe, but the more who say this, the more likely it is to have at least some substance. That is usually how these things work. Time will tell.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


17958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1650738 13-Oct-2016 21:54
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

 

 

It's really hard to make comments like I am making without looking like a bad guy but... They have had MONTHS since he was the Republican Nominee,that would have been the time to do it, so that there was time for an investigation. Arguably he has more power and influence than he has ever had before, so the argument they wouldn't be believed  back then isn't much more valid than it would be now..

 

The problem is that now... There is no chance for the truth to come out, whatever that is, in time for the Election. This will cost him the election, and if it turns out there is no truth to those claims.. The implications are pretty scary.

 

 

 

 

Like a lot of people, I feel a strong dislike for Trump and that overrides my slightly less strong dislike for Clinton. Because I dislike him, and because of many things he has said and done, I am inclined to think the worst of him. You have a valid point, he could be the victim of false accusations and even he deserves a fair go, and if this does turn out to be political shenanigans then I guess that is yet another nail in the coffin of American democracy. But on the balance of probabilities, I think the women are probably telling the truth. If it was just one woman, then maybe, but the more who say this, the more likely it is to have at least some substance. That is usually how these things work. Time will tell.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I said, if he is guilty, punish him to the full extent of the law, but if he is innocent, what then? Basically, on the face of it, Clinton set this up to steal an election. That would be worse. You'd have a sitting President in a conspiracy to commit election fraud. Reality is, even if it were true, nothing would come of it, I believe it would be covered up to protect the "presidency" (Institution not person). 

 

Like you said, a nail in the coffin of Democracy. You'd have trouble believing the result of any election after that.

 

If there is credible evidence, there should be a trial (of Trump). If there isn't then something else very bad should happen.

 

 


1765 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 612

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1650741 13-Oct-2016 22:03
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

 

 

As I said, if he is guilty, punish him to the full extent of the law, but if he is innocent, what then? Basically, on the face of it, Clinton set this up to steal an election. That would be worse. You'd have a sitting President in a conspiracy to commit election fraud. Reality is, even if it were true, nothing would come of it, I believe it would be covered up to protect the "presidency" (Institution not person). 

 

Like you said, a nail in the coffin of Democracy. You'd have trouble believing the result of any election after that.

 

If there is credible evidence, there should be a trial (of Trump). If there isn't then something else very bad should happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have to say I find your post ironic. Firstly you say that we shouldn't judge Trump unless he has been proven to do what he has said he did, then you accuse the Clinton campaign of election fraud by releasing Trumps tapes? I don't get it.

 

 

 

Edit: Deleted excessive quotes


Glurp
7990 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3716

Subscriber

  Reply # 1650742 13-Oct-2016 22:04
One person supports this post
Send private message

I stopped believing in election results when Bush beat Gore.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1 | ... | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | ... | 109
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.