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.

 

Republican who once lamented not being able to call women 'sluts' loses to a women

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Notice how this poster always posts political pieces for one side, then abandons the thread? Classic NPC shill behaviour.


Mods: anyone still manning this ship?? whyn't this political bating? (Letter I ommited for effect)




posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Another race that was very disturbing was IL-3. The GOP candidate was a self-professed Nazi and while he was never going to win the seat he still managed to get around 25% of the vote. Either those 25% are so blinded by partisan politics that they can't see anything beyond R and D or they actually support Nazi ideology. Either option is pretty bad.


The real ugliness came out in full swing this midterm. The overt racism is almost mind boggling for a first world country who's backbone was immigrants.

But I guess when you go to war over slavery, wipe out indigenous people almost completely, nazis running for office and racist robocalls and failed church mass murders are all not that surprising any more.

The new America.
But it's business as usual for the privy ones.



]]]]]]]]]



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


First, I'm sure you are, but this is a disingenuous argument. You know this isn't about a persons sexual experiences, but just deep seated misogyny and your statement is meant to deflect from the real issue.

Second, if you blatantly support a sexist (or a racist) then you are culpable for their sexism (or racism). That's the deal with support.

Third, really? That is your honest take on the issue? You seem smarter then that, and with the disingenuous first point, I think you know better.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz


That shouldn't be the case though. The world isn't as black and white as a blanket statement.


It isn’t, but our politicians have made our politics that way.

When you have someone like Trump who requires his supporters to constantly overlook his inflammatory rhetoric just to support him this will be the end result.

And it’s not ending with Trump. Other GOP candidates have taken on the same campaign style, which pretty much equates to leave no vote behind. No matter how hateful, vile, racist, bigoted, etc.

I realize most Trump supporters aren’t racist bigots, they just fail to see who they’re being forced to align themselves with. Or they do see and don’t care. And that’s worse.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: hombero
a reply to: BlackJackal

Notice how this poster always posts political pieces for one side, then abandons the thread? Classic NPC shill behaviour.


Mods: anyone still manning this ship?? whyn't this political bating? (Letter I ommited for effect)


Don't like the message kill the thread? You cry about free speech bro? I bet you do cry about free speech, it's in your programming.

It's cute that you are programmed to call people NPC and don't see the irony in that. What is that meme like 3 years old?

Shoot, isn't a meme in and of itself programming? Self replicating viral thoughts?

I got news for you, you are indicating that you are not a playable character with your amount of indoctrination.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: whargoul

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


First, I'm sure you are, but this is a disingenuous argument. You know this isn't about a persons sexual experiences, but just deep seated misogyny and your statement is meant to deflect from the real issue.

Second, if you blatantly support a sexist (or a racist) then you are culpable for their sexism (or racism). That's the deal with support.

Third, really? That is your honest take on the issue? You seem smarter then that, and with the disingenuous first point, I think you know better.


First, no I teart women basically the same as men,. I dont think they are too weak to be criticized or called names. Saying slut is not about misogyny. In fact, I hear far more women call other women sluts than men. Are those women misogynists?

Secondly, my point was that there is no proof the people that voted for him even knew of these comments. So if you vote for a dmeocrat, and then find out they beat their wife, you support wife beating? That is absurd, and you know it.

Third, yes the dems said women should automaticvally be believed, based merely on their sex. In addition, they have railed against men and white people, saying they need to step down or shut up. That is sexism and racsim that apparnetly you are ok with.

I chose to be against all racism and bigotry instead of making excuses for why its oke against grops I dislike.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Again, ellison is second in charge of the DNC.

He defended and hung around with jew hater farrakahn, as did Obama.

So I assume based on your statements here that you ackonwoledge you are defending hating jews like farrakhan.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Another race that was very disturbing was IL-3. The GOP candidate was a self-professed Nazi and while he was never going to win the seat he still managed to get around 25% of the vote. Either those 25% are so blinded by partisan politics that they can't see anything beyond R and D or they actually support Nazi ideology. Either option is pretty bad.


The real ugliness came out in full swing this midterm. The overt racism is almost mind boggling for a first world country who's backbone was immigrants.

But I guess when you go to war over slavery, wipe out indigenous people almost completely, nazis running for office and racist robocalls and failed church mass murders are all not that surprising any more.

The new America.
But it's business as usual for the privy ones.



]]]]]]]]]



Great meme. You win the argument.
Kick rocks.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


You miss the point altogether. Regardless of if those people knew he made those statements those people still voted for him. The perception is that even though those people are not misogynistic they will be labeled so because they voted for that guy.

That's the whole point right there. The Republican party should pull their support for candidates like this. These candidates should never be given the approval of the Republican party or the money of the Republican party. But they are.

If you don't want your voters to be called racists, misogynists, bigots, etc don't trout out flawed candidates.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Another race that was very disturbing was IL-3. The GOP candidate was a self-professed Nazi and while he was never going to win the seat he still managed to get around 25% of the vote. Either those 25% are so blinded by partisan politics that they can't see anything beyond R and D or they actually support Nazi ideology. Either option is pretty bad.


Exactly, it is a disturbing trend in this country. What is even more disturbing is that people still attempt to defend these horrible people.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


You miss the point altogether. Regardless of if those people knew he made those statements those people still voted for him. The perception is that even though those people are not misogynistic they will be labeled so because they voted for that guy.

That's the whole point right there. The Republican party should pull their support for candidates like this. These candidates should never be given the approval of the Republican party or the money of the Republican party. But they are.

If you don't want your voters to be called racists, misogynists, bigots, etc don't trout out flawed candidates.


Keith ellison was the second in charge of the entire dnc, and palled around and defended racist farrakhan.

The dnc not only kept him, they praised him.

Why do you ignore that and focus on only the repubs looking bad when calling promiscuous women sluts is far less troubling that hating all jews?



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Arnie123
False.

One election story doesn't dictate an entire narrative and broadstroke, that's for ignorant OPs.

If the Repubs were such extremes, why not overwhelming wins for Dems yesterday?

Secondly, you have no republican friends, especially ones that are upset about being labeled with whatever label you can think of, not that important enough to even consider you as any measure of indication on any scale, just another group of nobodies.

People vote for a variety of reason and there will be pros and cons, but you go with what you feel will be the better outcome overall.

Ahem, Keith Ellison.


What would have been an "overwhelming" win, in your eyes?

At the local and state levels, democrats did quite well.


Not losing the senate.

Achieving more that what was historically the norm, which they didnt.

Achieving seats like the repubs did in obamas first midterm, which was an overwhelming win.


You do realize the Democrats faced the worst map that either party has ever faced in History and still was able to pick up the House? Also, only 9 Republicans were up for re-election in the Senate and most of those were in heavy red states. The Democrats did great only losing what they did.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Arnie123
False.

One election story doesn't dictate an entire narrative and broadstroke, that's for ignorant OPs.

If the Repubs were such extremes, why not overwhelming wins for Dems yesterday?

Secondly, you have no republican friends, especially ones that are upset about being labeled with whatever label you can think of, not that important enough to even consider you as any measure of indication on any scale, just another group of nobodies.

People vote for a variety of reason and there will be pros and cons, but you go with what you feel will be the better outcome overall.

Ahem, Keith Ellison.


What would have been an "overwhelming" win, in your eyes?

At the local and state levels, democrats did quite well.


Not losing the senate.

Achieving more that what was historically the norm, which they didnt.

Achieving seats like the repubs did in obamas first midterm, which was an overwhelming win.


You do realize the Democrats faced the worst map that either party has ever faced in History and still was able to pick up the House? Also, only 9 Republicans were up for re-election in the Senate and most of those were in heavy red states. The Democrats did great only losing what they did.


Yes I am aware at how you are spinning the narrative.

Unfortunately that is not reality, as even dem pundits agreed this was not a blue wave.

They received far less house seats, whoich were all up, than repubs did during Obamas first midterm.

The dems did ok, so did the republicans.

Neither side had an overwhelming victory.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


You miss the point altogether. Regardless of if those people knew he made those statements those people still voted for him. The perception is that even though those people are not misogynistic they will be labeled so because they voted for that guy.

That's the whole point right there. The Republican party should pull their support for candidates like this. These candidates should never be given the approval of the Republican party or the money of the Republican party. But they are.

If you don't want your voters to be called racists, misogynists, bigots, etc don't trout out flawed candidates.


Keith ellison was the second in charge of the entire dnc, and palled around and defended racist farrakhan.

The dnc not only kept him, they praised him.

Why do you ignore that and focus on only the repubs looking bad when calling promiscuous women sluts is far less troubling that hating all jews?


Yep, Keith Ellison is a # show himself. I agree. However, the difference right now between Democrats and Republicans is that the racist rhetoric of Trump is seeping into the party proper. More and more candidates like this guy are running and being elected.

In the Democratic party Ellison is a one off, The Republican's are facing an epidemic.

LINK



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Arnie123
False.

One election story doesn't dictate an entire narrative and broadstroke, that's for ignorant OPs.

If the Repubs were such extremes, why not overwhelming wins for Dems yesterday?

Secondly, you have no republican friends, especially ones that are upset about being labeled with whatever label you can think of, not that important enough to even consider you as any measure of indication on any scale, just another group of nobodies.

People vote for a variety of reason and there will be pros and cons, but you go with what you feel will be the better outcome overall.

Ahem, Keith Ellison.


What would have been an "overwhelming" win, in your eyes?

At the local and state levels, democrats did quite well.


Not losing the senate.

Achieving more that what was historically the norm, which they didnt.

Achieving seats like the repubs did in obamas first midterm, which was an overwhelming win.


You do realize the Democrats faced the worst map that either party has ever faced in History and still was able to pick up the House? Also, only 9 Republicans were up for re-election in the Senate and most of those were in heavy red states. The Democrats did great only losing what they did.


Yes I am aware at how you are spinning the narrative.

Unfortunately that is not reality, as even dem pundits agreed this was not a blue wave.

They received far less house seats, whoich were all up, than repubs did during Obamas first midterm.

The dems did ok, so did the republicans.

Neither side had an overwhelming victory.


Uh, who said anything about a wave or overwhelming victory? Actually, I accurately predicted the outcome of the election the day before the election.

LINK



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:33 AM
link   
So, obviously you were upset by 78.5% of votes for Crazy Eyes. Beto was way to close for sane people to feel comfortable, which hopefully speaks to Cruz being unlikeable.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: BlackJackal

First, I am ok with calling some women sluts.

Same with men who sleep around.

Are women special snowflakes that cant be criticized or joked about?

Second, do you have any proof that those 47.2 percent that voted for him were even aware of these comments? yet you brazenly claim they were ok with them with no proof they even knew the comments were made.

Third, the highest levels of the democrats ran on the idea that women must always be believed over men. In other words, based on your sex, something you have no control over, you are judges as being more likely to be a liar.

That is actual bigotry that was pushed front and center by the leaders of the democratic party.

So is it your contention that anyone who voted for a democrat is bigotted?


You miss the point altogether. Regardless of if those people knew he made those statements those people still voted for him. The perception is that even though those people are not misogynistic they will be labeled so because they voted for that guy.

That's the whole point right there. The Republican party should pull their support for candidates like this. These candidates should never be given the approval of the Republican party or the money of the Republican party. But they are.

If you don't want your voters to be called racists, misogynists, bigots, etc don't trout out flawed candidates.


Keith ellison was the second in charge of the entire dnc, and palled around and defended racist farrakhan.

The dnc not only kept him, they praised him.

Why do you ignore that and focus on only the repubs looking bad when calling promiscuous women sluts is far less troubling that hating all jews?


Yep, Keith Ellison is a # show himself. I agree. However, the difference right now between Democrats and Republicans is that the racist rhetoric of Trump is seeping into the party proper. More and more candidates like this guy are running and being elected.

In the Democratic party Ellison is a one off, The Republican's are facing an epidemic.

LINK


What racist trump rhetoric?

And I love how you now move the goal posts

Sure Ellison’s racism of palling around with Jew haters isn’t affecting the party

I mean it was the republicans that are constantly in about how evil Israel is and why the embassy shouldn’t be moved to Jerusalem

Oh wait...

Not to mention the racism against whites (and bigotry of low expectations for people of color) and bigotry against men that is front and center in the dem party



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Arnie123
False.

One election story doesn't dictate an entire narrative and broadstroke, that's for ignorant OPs.

If the Repubs were such extremes, why not overwhelming wins for Dems yesterday?

Secondly, you have no republican friends, especially ones that are upset about being labeled with whatever label you can think of, not that important enough to even consider you as any measure of indication on any scale, just another group of nobodies.

People vote for a variety of reason and there will be pros and cons, but you go with what you feel will be the better outcome overall.

Ahem, Keith Ellison.


What would have been an "overwhelming" win, in your eyes?

At the local and state levels, democrats did quite well.


Not losing the senate.

Achieving more that what was historically the norm, which they didnt.

Achieving seats like the repubs did in obamas first midterm, which was an overwhelming win.


You do realize the Democrats faced the worst map that either party has ever faced in History and still was able to pick up the House? Also, only 9 Republicans were up for re-election in the Senate and most of those were in heavy red states. The Democrats did great only losing what they did.


Yes I am aware at how you are spinning the narrative.

Unfortunately that is not reality, as even dem pundits agreed this was not a blue wave.

They received far less house seats, whoich were all up, than repubs did during Obamas first midterm.

The dems did ok, so did the republicans.

Neither side had an overwhelming victory.


Uh, who said anything about a wave or overwhelming victory? Actually, I accurately predicted the outcome of the election the day before the election.

LINK


Wel you responded to a post a made saying what I would have called an overwhelming victory



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: Arnie123
False.

One election story doesn't dictate an entire narrative and broadstroke, that's for ignorant OPs.

If the Repubs were such extremes, why not overwhelming wins for Dems yesterday?

Secondly, you have no republican friends, especially ones that are upset about being labeled with whatever label you can think of, not that important enough to even consider you as any measure of indication on any scale, just another group of nobodies.

People vote for a variety of reason and there will be pros and cons, but you go with what you feel will be the better outcome overall.

Ahem, Keith Ellison.


What would have been an "overwhelming" win, in your eyes?

At the local and state levels, democrats did quite well.


Not losing the senate.

Achieving more that what was historically the norm, which they didnt.

Achieving seats like the repubs did in obamas first midterm, which was an overwhelming win.


Again, at the local level they did do those things.

They didn’t lose the Senate, they never had it.



posted on Nov, 7 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: BlackJackal
Minnesota Republican Jason Lewis used to have a radio show called the "America's Mr. Right". On that show he lamented that he could no longer call women sluts. Well, fast forward to today and he lost his seat to a woman.


Lewis, who was a regular fill-in for Limbaugh's national radio show, also offered a defense of the right-wing radio host for his comments on Fluke, saying, "Now Limbaugh's reasoning was, look, if you're demanding that the taxpayers pay for your contraception, you must use a lot of them and therefore, ergo, you're very sexually active and in the old days, what we used to call people who were in college or even graduate school who were sexually active, we called them sluts."

He continued, "Especially if you want somebody to pay for it. Now you know, obviously that's a stretch. It was meant as an aspect of entertainment radio."


I think it's fair to say that both sides loved their flawed politicians...it's called party blindness

LINK

This is the problem. Many of my Republican friends are upset over being labeled racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic, or bigots. Well, if you don't want to be called those things quit voting for candidates that are those things. This man received 47.2% of the vote and that indicates that almost half of that district is ok with calling women sluts.

This is how the Republicans have become labeled the party of the extremes because Republicans keep supporting deeply flawed candidates.


Spot on, It's the same thing that drove the R's to elect Ellison as AG.

They love their flawed candidates and there are way to many that vote for them.




top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join