Since somebody INSISTED on bringing *politics* into the local forum here..

..I have a few marginally CoEd-relevant questions to ask you:

Which of the presidential candidates (to include the Republicans who've dropped out) do you think:

1. would have the strongest inclination towards national decriminalization of the Hobby
2. would have the best ability to push through said decriminalization

On the other hand:

3. Who would be the *worst* candidate for the ladies in this business?
4. Who'd be the worst for the 'mongers?

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts..

Trump probably. He wanted to legalize drugs, and I'm sure has enjoyed plenty of P4P ladies and might even admit it if he gets on a roll. Bernie too. He has a strong "live and let live" and make things less criminal streak.

Hillary would be a disaster because she knows what's good for women. Cruz and Rubio think it's evil and are the most likely to go on some warpath.

Nobody else has a chance.

Trump,Trump,Trump!!!

Hillary is all for the bunny ranch, but else where women should find better jobs to support themselves and their families. Okay.

Seems like a good thread to test my signature.. 1, 2.. test..

Gary Johnson, former Gov of NM, the Libertarian Party candidate. Libertarians feel that you can do whatever you want as long as it dies not interfere with the rights of another. Two adults, both consenting, share money and bodies is none of the governments business,

Now people will jump up and say libertarians have no chance to win. This election true, but if we get out and inform the population, like this post is doing, maybe one day we will win

I have to admit, I know nothing about Bernie's social views, as most of the coverage I've read on him focuses on his economic stances or his unusually lenient stance on guns. Hillary doesn't seem like one of the sex-positive feminists to me, and seems like one of the ones most likely to take a Sweden-style stance on the Hobby: criminalize being a client instead of criminalizing being a provider. (How 'bout we decriminalize and destigmatize *both*?)

In the Republican Party, the one I followed with interest was Rand Paul. He and Trump are the real dissidents in the party, the rest are just mainstream background noise..I suspect there's probably a great deal of truth to the accusations that Trump's rather socially liberal (and too much so for the social conservatives of the party).

FWR, it may be true that capital-L Libertarians don't win many elections, but libertarian publications are read by people in both of the two main parties. That influence in the main parties will probably be a bigger game-changer in the long run than capital Ls elected to government offices.

I have to admit, I know nothing about Bernie's social views, as most of the coverage I've read on him focuses on his economic stances or his unusually lenient stance on guns. You need to research his stance before opening up your opinion. They are making him pay for voting against making gun makers responsible for owners usage. Like making MB pay for me killing a family because I was doing 200MPH and crashed. Total bullshit Hillary doesn't seem like one of the sex-positive feminists to me (she's a dyke in sheep"s clothing), and seems like one of the ones most likely to take a Sweden-style stance on the Hobby: criminalize being a client instead of criminalizing being a provider. (How 'bout we decriminalize and destigmatize *both*?) She will toss the book at mongers and make the providers look like victims

In the Republican Party, the one I followed with interest was Rand Paul. He and Trump are the real dissidents in the party, the rest are just mainstream background noise..I suspect there's probably a great deal of truth to the accusations that Trump's rather socially liberal (and too much so for the social conservatives of the party.) Ya like the "true" conservatives are not major players in the hobby?

FWR, it may be true that capital-L Libertarians don't win many elections, but libertarian publications are read by people in both of the two main parties. That influence in the main parties will probably be a bigger game-changer in the long run than capital Ls elected to government offices. Originally Posted by Blue_eyed_shy_guy

If a 3rd party candidate runs then Hilary will be president and the lies will have her removed before reelection is a possibility. She is the devil in her own little way.

If a 3rd party candidate runs then Hilary will be president and the lies will have her removed before reelection is a possibility. She is the devil in her own little way. Originally Posted by Cooper Barrett

True--so it sure would be nice if the Reps could put up a sane candidate.

The only ones who can cause the Reps to lose this are the Reps.

Trump,Trump,Trump!!! Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Need to see you again just so I can argue about this after the session!


....after.

Need to see you again just so I can argue about this after the session!


....after. Originally Posted by Qziz

Oh yes sugar, we can talk about how well Super Tuesday went....but after

It's probably important to note that prostitution itself is not a federal crime, so unless the president wanted to alter the tenth amendment, which, again, isn't really under his (or her) control, the president's professional opinion in their capacity as president is not all that relevant sans a large push from somewhere to rally people together to do something (pro or con). Granted, federal law enforcement agencies may sweep up some honest folks in their quest to go after real crimes that should remain crimes (like trafficking), and I'm sure they do it on purpose and at the behest of state agencies, but, technically, the federal government is sitting it out.

That said, I'm quite certain that Bernie would have the most reasoned opinion on the matter, and the main reason I do not support Hillary is because of the way she has treated "The Other Women." Whether the woman in question was accusing Bill of assault/misconduct or she consented, Hillary has been so fucking cruel and it disgusts and saddens me at the same time.