Donald Trump Waves Gay Pride Flag at Colorado Rally, Crowd Cheers

[Muscletank 410]

1 hour ago, M Monstre said:

"Crowd cheers", is there any footage of that? You just see waving signs, but for all we know, he could have been booed—the music just seems to conveniently be covering up what's actually going on.

Either way, disgusting that anybody from the LGBTQ community would support him. 

Yes. All gays should obviously vote for Clinton; a woman  on record for the last 20 years who spouted "i believe marriage is between a  man and a woman". The same woman married to the snake that signed "don't ask, don't tell". Remember that juicy bill? The one that forced gay service members to keep their sexuality secret. 

 

Do any of you realise how many suicides and careers were destroyed because of that bill? I swear to God the ignorance and hypocrisy regarding the Clintons and gay issues is breathtaking. 

[REALITY 80,165]

2 minutes ago, Muscletank said:

Yes. All gays should obviously vote for Clinton; a woman  on record for the last 20 years who spouted "i believe marriage is between a  man and a woman". The same woman married to the snake that signed "don't ask, don't tell". Remember that juicy bill? The one that forced gay service members to keep their sexuality secret. 

 

Do any of you realise how many suicides and careers were destroyed because of that bill? I swear to God the ignorance and hypocrisy regarding the Clintons and gay issues is breathtaking. 

I never expressed that Clinton was the better option; I made a statement was expressing my distaste for people of the LGBTQ community, and really anyone, who supports him. He just has so much hate, and a majority of his supporters as well—not saying all of them, but there's a reason why he's doing so well.

Yes, Hillary has expressed her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman, there's no denying that, but at the very least, she's accepting now. She realizes that it's an actual social injustice, and I'm not trying to give a bullsh*t excuse for her, but I'd rather have someone who finally understands it, than have someone like Trump—and Pence—who just blatantly disregard it. This act by Trump was nothing more than him trying to garner some vote from the LGBTQ community.

Bill Clinton signed DADT, and I agree, that was a horrible thing, but he's not running. You cannot bring up things like that about either candidates' spouses, you can bring it up against them, like you've said about Clinton, but Bill's not running. If he were, that'd be a different thing. 

[TerrenceV2 2,001]

1 hour ago, DeathEater said:

The gays that support Trump are the same ones that have hipster beards, crap sense of fashion, won't suck your cock unless you're wearing a condom, won't eat ass, quiet in bed, smell like old people, hate Gaga, wear Fruit of the Loom boxer shorts as underwear, wears boot cut jeans, and go to cheese festivals.  

Wait I wear fruit of the loom underwear 

What underwear are the nice gays wearing exactly? 

[Muscletank 410]

15 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

I never expressed that Clinton was the better option; I made a statement was expressing my distaste for people of the LGBTQ community, and really anyone, who supports him. He just has so much hate, and a majority of his supporters as well—not saying all of them, but there's a reason why he's doing so well.

Yes, Hillary has expressed her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman, there's no denying that, but at the very least, she's accepting now. She realizes that it's an actual social injustice, and I'm not trying to give a bullsh*t excuse for her, but I'd rather have someone who finally understands it, than have someone like Trump—and Pence—who just blatantly disregard it. This act by Trump was nothing more than him trying to garner some vote from the LGBTQ community.

Bill Clinton signed DADT, and I agree, that was a horrible thing, but he's not running. You cannot bring up things like that about either candidates' spouses, you can bring it up against them, like you've said about Clinton, but Bill's not running. If he were, that'd be a different thing. 

You bet your ass Bill is running. Do you honestly think he is gonna sit and play house husband for the next 4 years? You get one, you get them both. That is 100% the fact of the matter. "She realises it's a social injustice"? Really..So what she suddenly had an epiphany the last two years or so, now that it's currently fashionable or reasonably socially acceptable to be pro gay marriage? In the very last debate , she straight up admitted she says stuff to the public, but holds different views behind closed doors. Donald Trump hasn't caused one person to commit suicide because of the shame of their sexuality. The Clintons have; that's the bottom line.

 

It's an anathema to me how she gets a free pass on all this stuff yet Trump flying a flag is seen as "trying to garner votes from the LGBTQ" community. So Hilary can change her mind but he can't? I personally think he doesn't give a **** one way or another about whether someone is gay or not; and seeing the Republican candidate waving a rainbow flag should be seen as a sign of how far the US has come in general, with regard to gay issues. Who cares whether he is doing it for votes or not? The fact he is doing it at all is pretty astonishing! Every single thing Hilary does is "for votes" She isn't making all these promises for fun.

 

I have well to do, middle class gay friends in San Fran who voted for Hillary in the primaries. They could have voted for a principled man like Bernie Sanders, but they chose Hillary, despite the fact she is one of the most divisive and hated candidates of all time; so hated that we are now faced with the very real threat of a Trump Presidency. It's a choice between **** and vomit, where we could have had a decent guy. So gays who voted for Hillary makes as much sense to me as Iraqi Gays voting for skyscrapers.

[AJH219 4,448]

3 minutes ago, Brodinsky said:

Wait I wear fruit of the loom underwear 

What underwear are the nice gays wearing exactly? 

Bikini briefs, jockstraps, and thongs if you're feeling very adventurous  The brand doesn't really matter imo 

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

23 minutes ago, Muscletank said:

Yes. All gays should obviously vote for Clinton; a woman  on record for the last 20 years who spouted "i believe marriage is between a  man and a woman". The same woman married to the snake that signed "don't ask, don't tell". Remember that juicy bill? The one that forced gay service members to keep their sexuality secret. 

 

Do any of you realise how many suicides and careers were destroyed because of that bill? I swear to God the ignorance and hypocrisy regarding the Clintons and gay issues is breathtaking. 

Of the two candidates, Hillary is not the one looking to appoint conservative supreme court justices who will overturn marriage equality and vote against LGTBQ rights. Trump has vowed to do this. So, yes. All gays should vote for Clinton over Trump.

[Muscletank 410]

Pity Obama can't run for a third term...

[REALITY 80,165]

1 minute ago, Muscletank said:

You bet your ass Bill is running. Do you honestly think he is gonna sit and play house husband for the next 4 years? You get one, you get them both. That is 100% the fact of the matter. "She realises it's a social injustice"? Really..So what she suddenly had an epiphany the last two years or so, now that it's currently fashionable or reasonably socially acceptable to be pro gay marriage? In the very last debate , she straight up admitted she says stuff to the public, but holds different views behind closed doors. Donald Trump hasn't caused one person to commit suicide because of the shame of their sexuality. The Clintons have; that's the bottom line.

 

It's an anathema to me how she gets a free pass on all this stuff yet Trump flying a flag is seen as "trying to garner votes from the LGBTQ" community. So Hilary can change her mind but he can't? I personally think he doesn't give a **** one way or another about whether someone is gay or not; and seeing the Republican candidate waving a rainbow flag should be seen as a sign of how far the US has come in general, with regard to gay issues. Who cares whether he is doing it for votes or not? The fact he is doing it at all is pretty astonishing! Every single thing Hilary does is "for votes" She isn't making all these promises for fun.

 

I have well to do, middle class gay friends in San Fran who voted for Hillary in the primaries. They could have voted for a principled man like Bernie Sanders, but they chose Hillary, despite the fact she is one of the most divisive and hated candidates of all time; so hated that we are now faced with the very real threat of a Trump Presidency. It's a choice between **** and vomit, where we could have had a decent guy. So gays voted for Hillary makes as much sense to me as Iraqi Gays voted for skyscrapers.

"Donald Trump hasn't caused one person to commit suicide because of the shame of their sexuality." Okay, well what about their race, their religion, their gender. He's said/done terrible things to minorities and women, that sure, he may not have "caused one person to commit suicide because of their sexuality", but what about when he appoints justices and implements laws that are entire steps backward for the LGBTQ Community?

The difference between the two is that Hillary's going to implement progressive policies, Trump waving the flag isn't him "changing his mind", he's doing it for show. And, are you seriously going to back him up on this?? This isn't "astonishing", if anything, this is something his party's fundamentally against. Watch his campaign make some sort of backhand remark about this, or listen to him change his words, yet again about LGBTQ rights.

Hillary's going to implement progressive policies. We are not going to go backwards with Donald Trump, we just aren't. It's foolish and is completely against what America's about. I mean, the stuff he's said about Muslims, Mexicans, and women, it's just beyond my comprehension on why anything things voting for him is a good idea.

He doesn't even know anything about how government works!

 

[Muscletank 410]

19 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

"Donald Trump hasn't caused one person to commit suicide because of the shame of their sexuality." Okay, well what about their race, their religion, their gender. He's said/done terrible things to minorities and women, that sure, he may not have "caused one person to commit suicide because of their sexuality", but what about when he appoints justices and implements laws that are entire steps backward for the LGBTQ Community?

The difference between the two is that Hillary's going to implement progressive policies, Trump waving the flag isn't him "changing his mind", he's doing it for show. And, are you seriously going to back him up on this?? This isn't "astonishing", if anything, this is something his party's fundamentally against. Watch his campaign make some sort of backhand remark about this, or listen to him change his words, yet again about LGBTQ rights.

Hillary's going to implement progressive policies. We are not going to go backwards with Donald Trump, we just aren't. It's foolish and is completely against what America's about. I mean, the stuff he's said about Muslims, Mexicans, and women, it's just beyond my comprehension on why anything things voting for him is a good idea.

He doesn't even know anything about how government works!

 

 No the difference is you believe she will. What are these progressive policies she's going to implement? War with Russia? Will she make good on her promise to "obliterate Iran"?  I wonder will she assassinate any more Heads of State of other sovereign nations and laugh at it? Maybe want to "drone" more people that threaten to expose her corruption? Are black men still classed as "super predators" in her view? Are Mexicans still considered "taco bowls"? Yet again all of this is ignored. It would be funny if it wasn't so deadly serious and blinkered.

Trump has said "bad things".. Yeah that's just a wee bit less lethal than causing death dontcha think? How can a country of 330 million people have this as a choice???

 

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

20 minutes ago, Muscletank said:

 No the difference is you believe she will. What are these progressive policies she's going to implement? War with Russia? Will she make good on her promise to "obliterate Iran"?  I wonder will she assassinate any more Heads of State of other sovereign nations and laugh at it? Maybe want to "drone" more people that threaten to expose her corruption? Are black men still classed as "super predators" in her view? Are Mexicans still considered "taco bowls"? Yet again all of this is ignored. It would be funny if it wasn't so deadly serious and blinkered.

Trump has said "bad things".. Yeah that's just a wee bit less lethal than causing death dontcha think? How can a country of 330 million people have this as a choice???

 

Trump's foreign policy is no more peaceable than Clinton's with the exception that he has obvious sympathies with Russia. He has made no clear case for how, but still claims he will "defeat ISIS." He speaks cavalierly about the use of nuclear weapons. He also fundamentally has no experience with these matters. So, all this is merely prognostication. Trump has not yet been lethal only because he has never been in a major political office before, and has made no military decisions. His most difficult life decision thus far has been discerning whether Annie Duke or Joan Rivers would make the best apprentice. You cannot measure Clinton's fraught years as Secretary of State against Trump's nonexistent voting record and military history and claim having made no fatal choices makes him better. When people speak to his temperament, they speak of what they expect he will be like as a politician. He has no other past to base this prediction on. Clinton is certainly a flawed candidate, but I and many others clearly think she has a more reasonable temperament than Trump, and will make a much less dangerous president.

[Sylvanas 5,768]

54 minutes ago, Muscletank said:

Donald Trump hasn't caused one person to commit suicide because of the shame of their sexuality. The Clintons have; that's the bottom line.

The fact of the matter is that Hillary's presidency will be 2016-2020. I don't give two shits what she has done or said in the past 20 years because I know that she will protect my rights while the GoP Party Platform for 2016 has explicitly expressed interest in taking them from me. Conversion Therapy is also something the GOP Party Platform wants to protect, a practice that is PROVEN to kill gay kids. Trump's presidency is a VERY real threat to my safety and my well being. Go **** yourself.

[Muscletank 410]

1 minute ago, RichAssPiss said:

Trump's foreign policy is no more peaceable than Clinton's with the exception that he has obvious sympathies with Russia. He has made no clear case for how, but still claims he will "defeat ISIS." He speaks cavalierly about the use of nuclear weapons. He also fundamentally has no experience with these matters. So, all this is merely prognostication. Trump has not yet been lethal only because he has never been in a major political office before, and has made no military decisions. His most difficult life decision thus far has been discerning whether Annie Duke or Joan Rivers would make the best apprentice. You cannot measure Clinton's fraught years as Secretary of State against Trump's nonexistent voting record and military history and claim having made no fatal choices makes him better. When people speak to his temperament, they speak of what they expect he will be like as a politician. He has no other past to base this prediction on. Clinton is certainly a flawed candidate, but I and many others clearly think she has a more reasonable temperament than Trump, and will make a much less dangerous president.

So your argument is , we know she's made some **** decisions but we'll vote for her anyways because we don't know what Trump will be like?  So someone who has indeed been "lethal", yet again gets a free pass?  Well the point is she does have a past and it's pretty horrific. If threatening another nation with complete and utter annihilation is signs of a reasonable temperament to you, then please don't share what a volatile one will be.

In 2008  Obama was WIDLEY criticised by the Clinton Campaign for being a "community organiser" and having no experience. One thing I do agree with Trump on is Hillary has experience, but it is indeed bad experience. In the real world, if someone is consistently **** at their job, you tend to fire them; not give them a promotion to the highest position within the company. Honestly, people have very short memories.

[Stephen 30,433]

3 hours ago, DeathEater said:

The gays that support Trump are the same ones that have hipster beards, crap sense of fashion, won't suck your cock unless you're wearing a condom, won't eat ass, quiet in bed, smell like old people, hate Gaga, wear Fruit of the Loom boxer shorts as underwear, wears boot cut jeans, and go to cheese festivals.  

IJEIKDFMEW IM SCVREEEEEEAMING

[Muscletank 410]

11 minutes ago, Sylvanas said:

The fact of the matter is that Hillary's presidency will be 2016-2020. I don't give two shits what she has done or said in the past 20 years because I know that she will protect my rights while the GoP Party Platform for 2016 has explicitly expressed interest in taking them from me. Conversion Therapy is also something the GOP Party Platform wants to protect, a practice that is PROVEN to kill gay kids. Trump's presidency is a VERY real threat to my safety and my well being. Go **** yourself.

So you don't care that her policies in the past have actually been PROVEN to kill gay people, you only care what you can get out of it for yourself in the future?  You also cannot argue with reason and logic and resort to ad hom attacks. Is Trump going to bring back conversion therapy? Really, is that what you are suggesting?  Please provide a decent source of evidence for this. You also seem to equate criticism of Hillary with seasoned support for Trump. It isn't.  Learn the difference.

 

Oh and if you cannot argue a rational point without being an abusive ****, go **** Yourself ok? You're an imbecile.

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

13 minutes ago, Muscletank said:

So your argument is , we know she's made some **** decisions but we'll vote for her anyways because we don't know what Trump will be like?  So someone who has indeed been "lethal", yet again gets a free pass?  Well the point is she does have a past and it's pretty horrific. If threatening another nation with complete and utter annihilation is signs of a reasonable temperament to you, then please don't share what a volatile one will be.

In 2008  Obama was WIDLEY criticised by the Clinton Campaign for being a "community organiser" and having no experience. One thing I do agree with Trump on is Hillary has experience, but it is indeed bad experience. In the real world, if someone is consistently **** at their job, you tend to fire them; not give them a promotion to the highest position within the company. Honestly, people have very short memories.

No. Your first sentence here does not reflect my argument. My argument is not that we should not vote for Trump because we do not know what he will be like. My argument is that we should not vote for Trump because we rationally can deduce exactly what he will be like. It is just these deductions come largely from his personal and professional life since he has no political past.

I did not suggest anyone get a free pass. I just stated that we as voters are asked to measure Clinton's real political past against whatever we know about Trump. In that comparison, Clinton seems far less dangerous to me and others.