4 ms·

"It was surprising how little flak he got for it." Indeed. The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by t

by jVinc 9y ago

"It was surprising how little flak he got for it." Indeed. The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" did not denounce Obama when he literally sent automated killer robots to kill people in foreign countries not even at war with the united states. In a two party system, you ignore bad things and back your guy, because what is the alternative? Backing the other side? Just Look at all the obvious horrors they are willfully ignoring!

rdtsc 9y ago
> In a two party system, you ignore bad things and back your guy, True, agreed. They could still stand up for what's right. Criticizing your party doesn't mean automatically endorsing the other party. But I was also talking about the mainstream media and the coverage it got there as well. > The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" did not denounce Obama Or look at the recent "shithole" controversy. Trump said "shithole" (which was terrible, of course) and they talked about it for weeks. Forgot which reporter was even crying on screen about it. That's fine, it's good to be critical and scrutinize those in power. But Obama was dropping bombs on pretty much the same countries and everything was relatively quiet, not many tears from reporters there. Democracy Now was covering and other articles here and there. It's because Obama was polite, composed and projected a professional image.
jordigh 9y ago
> The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" What does that have to do with Obama? Trump wasn't in the picture when Obama did any of this. This whole "what about you?" kind of rhetoric is utterly useless and pointless. All it does is reinforce football team politics. Look at each case without trying to diminish one case by saying someone else did something worse. Obama messed up or deliberately did awful things and his actions have got nothing to do with anything anyone said or did about Trump later.

by jVinc 9y ago

rdtsc 9y ago

> In a two party system, you ignore bad things and back your guy, True, agreed. They could still stand up for what's right. Criticizing your party doesn't mean automatically endorsing the other party. But I was also talking about the mainstream media and the coverage it got there as well. > The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" did not denounce Obama Or look at the recent "shithole" controversy. Trump said "shithole" (which was terrible, of course) and they talked about it for weeks. Forgot which reporter was even crying on screen about it. That's fine, it's good to be critical and scrutinize those in power. But Obama was dropping bombs on pretty much the same countries and everything was relatively quiet, not many tears from reporters there. Democracy Now was covering and other articles here and there. It's because Obama was polite, composed and projected a professional image.

jordigh 9y ago

> The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" What does that have to do with Obama? Trump wasn't in the picture when Obama did any of this. This whole "what about you?" kind of rhetoric is utterly useless and pointless. All it does is reinforce football team politics. Look at each case without trying to diminish one case by saying someone else did something worse. Obama messed up or deliberately did awful things and his actions have got nothing to do with anything anyone said or did about Trump later.