There you go again! They're comparable but a comparison "holds no water"? Make up your mind. Originally Posted by lustyladComparing simply means pointing out the similarities. I am sure you have seen the very superficial, yet (mostly) valid, comparisons between Hitler and Trump. Does this justify calling Trump, Hitler? Of course not. Just because you can compare two things does not mean you can equate two things. In this case, you cannot even remotely equate them.
The fact that they are from "two entirely different eras" STRENGTHENS the comparison rather than weakens it. If it didn't taint Abe Lincoln back in the days when Queen Victoria was on her throne (an era known for its prim and puritanical codes of conduct) then why should it be considered a huge scandal in today's highly decadent culture? You haven't refuted this point and you can't.You've repeated this point, but have not, at all, addressed my rebuttal. I get that you think everything has gotten more loose, the reality is that I've already pointed out an obvious and valid example of that position being wrong.
Eatfido just refuses to be honest about this. If he was, he would simply admit the Clintons get a pass because in his mind libtard politics "trumps" all character flaws. Originally Posted by lustyladAs I said earlier, which you ignored and probably will again, "I tend to separate the private lives of a person from their political lives. As the statement goes 'good and great are seldom the same man.' I'm under no delusion that these candidates likely have skeletons in their closets, especially Clinton and especially Trump."
If you think I'm not voting for Trump because of this, you are sadly mistaken.