Presidential Slugfest 2016 - Debate Watch Party!

[Lyte]

Part of the reason Bill's dumbass behavior is being brought up is because of Hillary's reaction to the alligations. She was viscous! There's a lot of hypocrisy in the Clintons.

[C0LLETTE]

Originally Posted by Lyte

Part of the reason Bill's dumbass behavior is being brought up is because of Hillary's reaction to the alligations. She was viscous! There's a lot of hypocrisy in the Clintons.

You're right. Her response wasn't nice. but they are lucky they didn't cheat with any of my partners cause at least one of them wouldn't have lived long enough to be given a box seat at a presidential debate. Having a 12 year "affair" with someone's husband is hardly a case of sexual abuse. Unless you want to accept that it was his wife that was being abused.

[DapperButch]

Originally Posted by Lyte

Part of the reason Bill's dumbass behavior is being brought up is because of Hillary's reaction to the alligations. She was viscous! There's a lot of hypocrisy in the Clintons.

Originally Posted by C0LLETTE

You're right. Her response wasn't nice. but they are lucky they didn't cheat with any of my partners cause at least one of them wouldn't have lived long enough to be given a box seat at a presidential debate. Having a 12 year "affair" with someone's husband is hardly a case of sexual abuse. Unless you want to accept that it was his wife that was being abused.

Fact checking stuff:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iously-attack/

[BullDog]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

Fact checking stuff:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iously-attack/

Thank you!

[Lyte]

Summery of that article reads... "Overall, we rate the claim Mostly False."

Mostly false still leaves a hell of a lotta room for truth. Also, that article does not represent the sum total of all of his or her comments.

Facts are that he came out hard (no pun intended ) denying everything, so she had to come out equally hard defending.

Originally Posted by DapperButch

Fact checking stuff:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iously-attack/

[DapperButch]

Originally Posted by Lyte

Summery of that article reads... "Overall, we rate the claim Mostly False."

Mostly false still leaves a hell of a lotta room for truth. Also, that article does not represent the sum total of all of his or her comments.

Facts are that he came out hard (no pun intended ) denying everything, so she had to come out equally hard defending.

Yes.

I took notice of this article after I read your post because I didn't recall her being as harsh as you described. I was aware that i was in grad school over that time period so I knew that I had missed a lot of the details.

[BullDog]

The article cited by Dapper was looking specifically at the allegations made by Trump at the debate. That was its purpose and it explained what it meant by mostly false, which doesn't lead to a reasonable interpretation of "viscous."

Viscous is an extremely strong word to use to accuse someone of something.

[Lyte]

"Viscous" is also subjective and open to interpretation. Therefore, some may think a certain comment is vicious while others may not.

Everyone gets to decide what means what to them.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Lyte

Summery of that article reads... "Overall, we rate the claim Mostly False."

Mostly false still leaves a hell of a lotta room for truth. Also, that article does not represent the sum total of all of his or her comments.

Facts are that he came out hard (no pun intended ) denying everything, so she had to come out equally hard defending.

Actually, "mostly" anything leaves minimal room for any other option, because it's "most" not "least" or "equally" or "possibly".

No one on this Earth is going to be wholly one thing or another. Even Trump can be 'good' on certain days and to/for certain people. For example, I'd like to think that he treats his children well but given the Frontline story I saw about his and Hillary's history up through the campaign, that's unlikely as his own father was extremely harsh and he is very much like his father.

People love to rip Hillary about Bill's indiscretions and there was certainly a political spin there but there was also a woman who was betrayed, not just publicly but worldwide, by her husband. I can't imagine how horrible that would feel if it were me. And people blamed her for that. We rail against victim blaming but it's okay when it comes to her? Sure, she's responsible for her part in whatever happened afterwards, but it seems to get lost by the wayside time and time again that she was lied to as well as the rest of us.

If this were a court of law, would her husband's indiscretions be allowed in as evidence and go to state of mind or would they be ruled out? <----pondering

This isn't Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, people. Politics = lying and secrecy. Is it right? No. Is it unusual? No. Is lying or secrecy better, worse or neutral to a 'bomb them all and let God figure it out' mentality?

There isn't a perfect option and there are issues with ALL of the candidates, even the ones on the outside of the limelight. You choose the one that best supports your personal beliefs and/or best supports your ability to live a full and open life and hope for the best. That's all any of us can do.

[Lyte]

"Most" could be anything from 51% to 99% of something. It is just more of ... whatever.. than it is less of whatever.

More importantly, it's just the opinion of article writer that most of what Hillary said wasn't vicious. His/Her opinion is neither right or wrong. It's simply an opinion.

Originally Posted by Gemme

Actually, "mostly" anything leaves minimal room for any other option, because it's "most" not "least" or "equally" or "possibly"

[C0LLETTE]

Originally Posted by Lyte

"Most" could be anything from 51% to 99% of something. It is just more of ... whatever.. than it is less of whatever.

More importantly, it's just the opinion of article writer that most of what Hillary said wasn't vicious. His/Her opinion is neither right or wrong. It's simply an opinion.

Most is more than less. Though sometimes less is more. But most is not necessarily more than more However sometimes more is most which begs the question: is less more or less than lesser when lesser is still more than most.Fewer rats is still more than no rats but no rats is still less than more rats. It's a vicious circle.