No hypocrisy from us, it's you tying to make nothing into something. 1) it was 43 years ago. 2) he has never repeated or continued to use that language. 3) the intent of the article was not pro rape but an assertion that submissive/dominant roles are not good for society. 4) Sanders has a very strong history of supporting women's issues and equality issues. Mags, your thread title is either a lying atempt to be inflammatory or an innocent but totally misguided understanding of what Sanders said. And it's certainly not supportive in any way over the past 42 years. And by the way, I would likewise forgive any republican for any crass statement 40 years ago as long as they demonstrated a history supporting the more enlightened position.
But you said you want psychological profiling for gun owners. You are okay with not giving it to the man who will have control to launch nukes. A man fantasizing rape should be a big red flag on the leader of the free world
That's why Nate Silver (genius pollster) has predicted the fiery flameout that "The Donald" is gonna have.
You sure are a piece of work bruh. This is one of the most bullshit posts ever.. You're officially "on one" right now...
This is an all time low mags...WTF? You forgave Charles Manson? Welcome to a club with one member, Manson has lost every appeal for decades
Silver has a hunch. All the other pundits that have made similar predictions have been wrong so far. When Silver publishes a statistical analysis that shows Trump losing, it'll have some believability.
When Trump has to debate one on one with a candidate that is actually qualified and informed, it'll plummet like a meteorite
Great response. So you are for psychological profiling for gun control, but will not support that for the leader of the free world. Double standard
