You know, i feel terms like racism, misoginy, classism, etc etc are thrown about too liberally these days. But when someone literally claims women shouldn't be allowed to vote, I don't think the word is inappropriate anymore. Not by a long shot.

He also says that rape should not be punishable by law when not committed on public property.

He is also an actual rapist. Disgusting excuse for a human.

Yeah, well, there's an actual rapist running for President and he is actually getting votes, so I guess it's not that disgusting to people here.

bill clinton isn't running for office though?

I presume he means Donald Trump, who has been accused of raping his ex-wife.

Jamie: Funny isn't it. They have to use code names and sneak around in the dark, but call themselves "kings".

Indeed, trip.

@ahper ... there are a number of unknowns surrounding the case of Juanita Broddrick and I don't really know enough about it to comment. I will just say that it's strange that she endorsed Donald Trump given her accusation against Clinton.

I would suspect it was a case of her not knowing about it. How long has the Trump claim been out and around?

His ex-wife made the claim in 1993. It hasn't been very widely publicized during the election period even though it a) should be, and b) his campaign's brief defense was that she didn't mean rape in the criminal sense, only in an emotional sense, and that it's impossible to rape your spouse. At the very least, the latter is untrue. Despite such a shitty response to it, nobody seems to care.

As an aside, he also claimed in 1992 that Mike Tyson should be able to pay "millions and millions" to rape victims as opposed to serving any jail time, insinuating the idea that the richer you are, the more immune to the law you are. Between that and his whole bullshit thing about how Mexicans are rapists, it's really odd to me that someone who accused another person, particularly a politician or other celebrity-like person (not to imply her story isn't true; as I said, I have no idea) would support him. I wish she would speak on it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/donald-trump/12132320/Donald-Trump-is-the-Mussolini-of-America-with-double-the-vulgarity.html

"He sat his wife at the same table as a lady – and I must be careful here – who several of his friends present strongly believed to be his mistress. The rest of us at the table were dumbfounded and embarrassed; Trump himself obviously found it amusing as he ruined the evening for both pneumatic and almost identical women. The obscene self-regard of the man was laid bare for us all."

I had no clue until now.

Man, if I was running against him I'd be shouting his campaign's line from the rafters. That's horrible reasoning.

Yeah, his campaign would be dead if there weren't such reckless desperation and ignorance among his supporters. Really, if it were anyone else, the campaign would be dead before it even started. For some reason, he's scandal-proof and CNN loves him.

Some where out there is a quote about attracting more votes with ignorance than ideas, but I don't recall who said it.

Defines his strategy to a T.

The media didn't have to bring life to his campaign, though. They could have let his campaign rise or fall based on its own merit, but they just couldn't resist.

They have advertising to sell.

@bo_sox48 that's fair. i was referring to kathleen willey and paula jones (both of whom experienced sexual assault, not *quite* rape)

Paula Jones sued for harassment, not sexual assault.

I don't know the other one. Clinton as president was before my time.

@bo_sox48 i didn't realize there was a difference (english is my 2nd language). willey claimed she was assaulted but there is, again, a lot of unknowns regarding her actual experience

The notion of a "pro-rape activist" is completely bizarre.

Surely this is an offence in the UK: inciting violence.

They should have the freedom to preach whatever they want, so long as they don't begin to practice it.

In the US, the incitement test specifies "imminent lawless action". "Rape is good," for example, doesn't incite imminent action, while "We should work to legalize rape" doesn't incite lawless action.

However, it's still horrible, immoral, sickening behavior.