Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
@smokey, Isn't 17 the legal age in New York state? Legally, she was a minor, but it's a bit much to say she was a child. People younger than her can hold jobs and drive cars on the freeway. Is he a scumbag? Yes. But that's for the many, many factors we've already covered in the previous pages. And it's perfectly within your prerogative to not want to support that kind of douchebaggery in a candidate.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:35:48 PM by Mr.Didact
Stand Fast, Stand Strong, Stand TogetherHeck, under American law, every single thing that Donald Trump has said thus far is legal (he hasn't actually been convicted of sexual assault or fraud yet). Doesn't mean anybody should vote for him.
![]()
![]()
That's semantics at this point. You don't screw minors. Thank you.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:35:23 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
In the majority states the age of consent is 16. The laws concerning all of this are complicated and vary widely by state.
But again, beyond him being her boss, going "He's old enough to be her grandfather" and the like just comes off as wanting to impose you're personal standards of creepy on consenting individuals, and blurs the entire situation. Again, if she were just one year older this likely would have never come up.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:38:18 PM by LSBK
While the whole he-was-her-employer thing is definitely icky, I don't see why the age difference is a moral concern. To me, 16 seems like a pretty reasonable age of consent, and I don't see why someone that age having sex with a much older person means the older party is "preying on" the younger party. What, is having wrinkles and liver spots supposed to be some sort of unfair advantage in the dating game?
@nervmeister
Yeah—one of them's illegal and the other one isn't.
As for "sticking your dick where it doesn't belong"...he didn't stick it in a lightsocket. He stuck it in a teenage girl. Who worked for him. That you don't see the problem with this is frankly concerning.
...It's not a game. That you would even call it a game given the context is disturbing. Adults do not get to have sex with minors. It is against the law for a whole host of reasons. If you want to have sex with minors, move.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:38:04 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
"Sticking his dick where it didn't belong" is a very worrisomely frivolous way of referring to statutory rape.
Like, racists and rapists (and racist rapists) are pretty much in the same category of "Do Not Elect" for me. I have very unreasonably stringent moral standards, I know.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."@Armbar
The difference is, I wouldn't vote for the latter cause I know he'd likely use his newly gained office to continue his crusade against "undesirables" instead of helping ALL American citizens. Whereas with Joe, that individual transgression is less likely to be repeated, especially now that he's under continued scrutiny.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:41:59 PM by nervmeister
@Mr Didact
That's honestly not the worst idea in the world, but so long as you are a legal adult at eighteen that's pretty much where the line has to be drawn in terms of legality.
Which doesn't make a man in his fifties who likes to screw eighteen year olds a moral person mind you. Once again, breaking the law and being immoral don't have to go together.
@Raven
That false comparison was addressed earlier on. That said, should I have a problem with college age guys screwing high school girls? Yes. Yes I should. And I do.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:42:38 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
![]()
These transgressions are hardly ever "individual." I mean, somebody pointed out that he has a long history of sexual misconduct, so your argument about it being "just an individual transgression" falls apart immediately.
And the fact that he's less likely to do it again now that people are looking is still not a point in his favor. "Don't worry, he probably won't screw any more kids now that he doesn't think he can get away with it anymore?"
edited 6th Nov '16 1:43:03 PM by RBluefish
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."@smokey, I'd say it's kind of a stretch to say 18-20 year olds are that much more mature than 16-17 year olds.
@Ambar, I think that it should be uniform. The age to be old enough to vote should be the same as the age old enough to drink, consent, go to war, drive a car, own a gun, all of that. Now, I don't know what that age should be but I think if you're old enough to do one of those, you're old enough to do all of them.
And yeah legality isn't the same as morality, and you're perfectly free to condemn or condone behavior as you see fit, but regulating behavior shouldn't be based on our conception of ickiness.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:47:32 PM by Mr.Didact
Stand Fast, Stand Strong, Stand TogetherHeck, I'm nineteen, and I do find the idea of having sex with someone in their mid-twenties to be pretty unsettling. (Now, I'm not much interested in the idea of having sex with anybody, but still.)
![]()
I don't care if he stops screwing kids. I care that he has screwed a kid.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:47:00 PM by RBluefish
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
I tend to agree with this. That's not to say there's no situation in which I'd find it acceptable, but my baseline reaction would be pretty uncomfortable.
Nobody's arguing to do that. We're saying we wouldn't vote for him because of it, not that we're going to lynch him.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:49:49 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
About a blanket age of consent for multiple things: Yes-no. Drink and drugs can and do directly affect how your brain develops. Frankly, the drinking and other recreational drugging age should be set at 25. Because only about then do the vast majority of people hit the end of developmental brain plasticity.
Start abusing substances early, and you're wiring yourself brain trouble. As in psychosis, schizophrenia, dissociative conditions, increased anxiety, depressive episodes... you can hardwire any of these into your neurology.
At fourteen, two pints a day is brain-damaging abuse. Let alone reaching for the skunk. Worse, you'll also be hitting your grandkids with the epigenetic effects of the long term use of alcohol (or whatever) you allow yourself.
I don't care for the "the people who abuse won't obey the law, so it's pointless having it" argument. It's a load of bull. It's setting a standard for a reason.
edited 6th Nov '16 1:55:44 PM by Euodiachloris

I'm assuming the numbers are referring to "safe" electoral votes; even without the toss-up states, Clinton's lead is all but insurmountable.