It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Fat shaming anger at Trump proves feminist hypocrisiy

page: 14
62
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: intrepid

He a misogynistic bastard.

Still a better choice than Hillary.


I don't think he is. He has women in positions of power in his companies, and his campaign. He trained his daughter to be a wise business woman.

Misogynist - A misogynist is a person who hates or doesn't trust women. Misogynist is from Greek misogynḗs, from the prefix miso- "hatred" plus gynḗ "a woman." The English suffix -ist means "person who does something."

I don't see that he hates women.
I don't see that he doesn't trust women.

I do see he doesn't like fat chicks though. That does not in any way make him a misogynist. It makes him picky, even a little shallow, but that's it.

So, he says some mean things. That's all they ever have on him.


edit on 29-9-2016 by poncho1982 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: poncho1982

I really don't care one way or another.

It's not like we have a real choice this time around.

It's either Trump, who probably won't make things worse, and Hillary.

Who will make things worse.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: poncho1982
I do see he doesn't like fat chicks though. That does not in any way make him a misogynist. It makes him picky, even a little shallow, but that's it.

So, he says some mean things. That's all they ever have on him.


I remember the original speech by JFK that he adheres to:



"I say here and now my fellow Americans, fat chicks shall not be allowed. Marilyn, get me a sandwich."

Yeah, Trump is presidential.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

I don't care really.

He has a right to his opinions on a woman's looks.

So do you, so do I.

They have a right to not like it.

It's a wash.

Again, that's all they have.

Mean man said mean things!



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree wholeheartedly.

Hillary is poison to this country.

Actually, once again I have to use my vote as a vote against someone. I will be voting against Hillary.

edit on 29-9-2016 by poncho1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

Cripes IDK about that. Say what you want about Trump but in that arena he's a kitten compared to a pit bull.


That's where you're wrong kiddo.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   
It's only sexism, misogynistic, bigotry, or racism when the right does it.

What are you some kind of bigot for not knowing this?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor

originally posted by: intrepid

Cripes IDK about that. Say what you want about Trump but in that arena he's a kitten compared to a pit bull.


That's where you're wrong kiddo.


It wasn't a compliment.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeplorableBasket
It's only sexism, misogynistic, bigotry, or racism when the right does it.

What are you some kind of bigot for not knowing this?


Oh jeez, here we go again. I've run out of crosses.




posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

No. You've run out of excuses.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   
We can go on all day about who is more deplorable as a president and bemoan the absence of 3rd party candidates.

But the Supreme Court and congress won't change. Not unless we put term limits on everyone.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
But the Supreme Court and congress won't change. Not unless we put term limits on everyone.


As to Congress... totally. The SC though? Cripes, pushing one justice through the system takes forever. 9?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I prefer the suggestion made in a radio commercial by a bar.

Politicians serve two mandatory terms. One in office, the other in prison.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

We do want change, don't we?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: poncho1982

I really don't care one way or another.

It's not like we have a real choice this time around.

It's either Trump, who probably won't make things worse, and Hillary.

Who will make things worse.


They're honestly both hopeless in any scenario other than a super majority. I don't think either will be better or worse than the other, they both have a long history of similar policy, and an even longer history of screwing up everything they touch. In my case the only determining factor I've found is what personality matters more, because issues of substance don't.

I know you don't like Clinton, but you should give her another look on her merits and ignore the scandals. I've done the same with Trump. I could see myself voting Trump even though it's not likely right now.

This is the most unimportant election we've ever had.
edit on 29-9-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So everyone should vote for Hillary because Trump said mean things.



People should reject them both....."All or Nothing" is the wrong call....make a Strong 3rd party showing and get them in Future debates with at least 6% showing this election cycle.....Brace ourselves for 4 years, until we can vote these "Devil's" out !



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yeah but there's time constraints. Scalia's been dead since Feb and his seat isn't filled. Maybe if you did it in an incremental way but then you would still have vacancies. The SCOTUS is a hard one to reform.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MountainLaurel

A 3rd party candidate would be futile. Not with the established congress and supreme court.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MountainLaurel

A 3rd party candidate would be futile. Not with the established congress and supreme court.


Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.




posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

ya gotta start somewhere.




top topics



 
62
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join