Why was Hillary fashionably tardy after the break?

[hootinholler]

Gastric distress?

Tactical move?

Either ain't pretty.

[reformist2]

1. What happened? I missed it.

[bettyellen]

7. that is repulsive.

[Cha]

44. That's not the only time that poster has had these kind of remarks about Hillary and gotten

a hide. Apparently doesn't learn it's not acceptable.

[Starry Messenger]

14. Did your grandchildren take over your account?

You might want to take a look at your password security.

[Codeine]

20. Your posts suck tonight.

You're being childish, petty, and mean.

[Hepburn]

21. Oh, please grow up?

[JTFrog]

22. Yes you should. n/t

[Codeine]

24. I'm not the one making bathroom jokes

larded over with ageist nonsense.

Fail.

[Hal Bent]

92. You got it!

[Scootaloo]

34. Gotta side with the others on that. That was a needless and ignorant jibe

I suppose we all make them now and then, but damn man.

[Cha]

45. Really petty and mean spirited.. again. you don't learn

[pnwmom]

151. Hillary's bathroom break

FYI, I just posted this update.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251931800#post2

[madamesilverspurs]

3. Because

the moderators didn't take into account that there's NEVER a line for the men's room, but it's a different story for the ladies.

[pnwmom]

40. People have heard of "institutionalized racism." This was "institutionalized sexism."

The 5 minute bathroom breaks ABC built into its schedule are adequate for the average man but not the average woman.

And there are academic studies showing this, conducted by researchers with stopwatches. Even if there is no line women need more time.

They can't just whip something out over a urinal. It takes significantly longer.

[Quackers]

101. If you're really claiming this was sexism, then you have to agree that you're being ageist.

Ignorantly saying that men can just whip it out and go. Did you forget about the 74yo man up there?

Urinary hesitancy affects people of all ages and occurs in both sexes. However, it is most common in older men with an enlarged prostate gland.

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003143.htm

Also, we don't know what really held her up. You're assuming it was bathroom issues. I assume that she was checking the data on how viewers were responding to her. With that being said, this whole thing is silly. I think you're making something out of nothing.

[pnwmom]

103. I would be defending him, too, if he'd made it back a couple minutes late.

But he didn't. So I don't know how you can accuse me of ageism simply because I didn't assume he was the victim of prostate problems that needed accommodation.

(I assumed she was gone on a bathroom break because that's what I read somewhere -- that the schedule called for a 5 minute potty break.)

There were only 3 candidates in this debate, each of them important. ABC should have waited till each of them was at a podium before they began.

[treestar]

118. How long was the debate?

Why did they even need a bathroom break? Most people can go before and last 45 minutes or longer.

[George II]

127. It was than two hours, and they left during a commercial break. Clinton was about 15 seconds late.

[treestar]

154. Didn't know that. For some reason thought it was 40 minutes.

I couldn't watch it because the TV somehow only plays one channel lol. Thanks.

I could last 2 hours by going right before, but a break is a break.

[George II]

158. I have a friend, younger than me, that can only last an hour between trips....

...in fact, when we go up to Boston for a game, we have to plan around rest stops.

Also, I think someone also correctly pointed out that she has a lot more security overseeing her movements (no, not THOSE movements! ) than the other candidates.

I just don't see why people are now dwelling on her bathroom habits, just as I can't see why many of them have been dwelling on her faint southern accent. To me those are signs of desperation.

[pnwmom]

153. Most people aren't standing on a national stage talking for more than two hours,

trying to drink enough water to keep their throats from drying out and worrying about if they'll make it to the next bathroom break.

Update here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251931800#post2

[treestar]

156. OK thanks

they should have waited for her. It's hard to believe the excuses in other threads to attempt to make it her fault.

[JaneyVee]

4. Are you serious?

[madaboutharry]

5. It takes women a bit longer to get in

and out of the bathroom.

[Thinkingabout]

10. Exactly, women don't use a urinal and she washed her hands.

[840high]

56. You must know her well.

[pnwmom]

61. Bathroom studies also show almost all women wash their hands

and way too many men don't.

[840high]

71. I didn't ask you.

[pnwmom]

72. You didn't ask anybody anything. You made a comment on a public board.

If you don't want me to reply, then block me. Otherwise, I'll reply when I want to.

[Thinkingabout]

112. More of a snark, huh.

[George II]

159. I wish I could find it, a while back I read a study that found that about 80% of men...

...do NOT wash their hands. I recall years ago being in a men's room with my "classy" boss during a seminar break. He pointedly said, as I was washing my hands, "I don't have to wash, I didn't pee on my hands"! Suffice it to say, I never shook his hand again.

[Thinkingabout]

111. If you are a man then you may not know rest room habits of

Women. Washing one's is good.

[LanternWaste]

164. Your inferences seem irrational.

Your inferences seem irrational. One might even say it drips with a foul bias...

[Starry Messenger]

6. Bathroom line.

Are you serious? Why did they start without her, is a better fucking question.

[freeplessinseattle]

11. That was really disrespectful on their part, esp

after the way they seemed to let the debate kind of go it's own way

If it wasn't for having to wrestle with pantyhose! Heck, she may have gotten a run and had to change them, for all we know

[Starry Messenger]

13. I'm not liking this panel or the format.

Not my favorite debate, although the discussion is going well, it's kind of in spite of the debate moderators.

[George II]

128. The moderators were horrible, and they seemed to intentionally lock O'Malley out of most of it.

[pnwmom]

41. Extremely disrespectful. n/t

[pnwmom]

38. Exactly. That was nasty of them. n/t

[MoonRiver]

8. It takes we ladies, especially we older ones, a little longer.

Same thing happened in the last debate. Sorry it's no big deal.

[pnwmom]

43. It takes all women longer. We can't just whip it out over a urinal.

They've done time and motion studies on this and women require significantly more time -- not that we needed a study to show us this, but architects and building departments did.

All ABC was allotting was 5 minutes, including transit time.

[bigwillq]

9. I think she had to go the bathroom.

I don't see anything wrong with it.

[MADem]

12. There was a LINE.

Old building--not enough ladies' bathrooms!!




It's usually true at old venues that the lines for the women's restroom go out the door; and the men's room never has a line.


I'm only joking...but just. It's an equality issue, really, at public venues.

In any event, it WORKED for her--she's sitting pretty in this debate, thus far--she's commanding the stage.

[nc4bo]

15. Wouldn't it have been fairly easy to add a 30 second

Viagra commercial?

[Hekate]

23. You would think so

[nc4bo]

26. ABC sucks. nt

[DURHAM D]

16. She was Skyping with her granddaughter.

[Dem2]

17. I said dropped a deuce

But I was being a smart ass here at home, I don't expect this sort of silliness here.

[Dem2]

131. Indeed

This thread made me do it, I swear!

[Dem2]

134. I posted as a joke and

this is what I get? You're in a serious mood today!

[Dem2]

136. I am on your side and was last night

Carry on. Hate me now based on a misunderstanding - it's your choice.

[Dem2]

138. You missed the point

OMG, DU can have the most frustrating interactions - I still will like your posts even if you're angry and have made a snap choice based on a misreading of my intent.

[Dem2]

141. Eh, people actually do those things you know - it's a normal bodily function

I can make a joke at home (and even mention it as an ice breaker) and still object to the ridiculousness and misogynous intent that was clear in the O/P. I'm sorry you found it so offensive.

[LexVegas]

18. Fucking disgusting. Manny needs company. nt

[senz]

35. No need to threaten people.

[mwrguy]

148. He sure does.

[Hekate]

19. Seriously. The moderators were RUDE not to wait for the lady.

Men: stand up against the wall urinal. Unzip. Do business. Zip up. Job done.

Women: squeeze into undersized stall. Take off one half of garments. Put paper on seat. Hope paper doesn't fall off while turning around. Put paper on seat again. Sit. Do business. Clean up. Get dressed again. Wash hands. Job done.

And you wonder why the lines for women's restrooms are so loooong. And that's without all of us who have to bring in small children.

[Cha]

48. From what I've heard the abc mods sucked in general .. why would they be smart enough to

wait until all 3 were on stage?

They have to show what big powerful mediassholes they are.

[BlueMTexpat]

110. If men had to do their business like

women, situations like this would not arise: http://time.com/3653871/womens-bathroom-lines-sexist-potty-parity/

From the link, following a description about several physical activities/events that concern women only:

... Additionally, women tend to wear more binding and cumbersome clothes, whereas men’s clothing provides significantly speedier access. But in a classic example of the difference between surface “equality” and genuine equity, many public restrooms continue to be facilities that are equal in physical space, while favoring men’s bodies, experiences, and needs.

Legislation to address the design and provision of public restrooms in new construction often requires more space for women’s rooms. But that has hardly made a dent in many of our oldest and most used public spaces. This is especially true in powerful institutions, such as schools and government complexes, where old buildings, and their gendered legacies, dominate. In the United States, for example, women in the House of Representatives didn’t get a bathroom near the Speaker’s Lobby until 2011. Prior to that, the nearest women’s room was so far away that the time it took women to get to the bathroom and back exceeded session break times. The nearby men’s room, meanwhile, had a fireplace, a shoeshine stand, and televised floor proceedings.

Additionally, old building codes required more space for men, as women’s roles were restricted almost entirely to the private sphere. That reality has often confused the “is” with the “ought.” As scholar Judith Plaskow noted in a paper on toilets and social justice, “Not only does the absence of women’s bathrooms signify the exclusion of women from certain professions and halls of power, but it also has functioned as an explicit argument against hiring women or admitting them into previously all-male organizations.” She cites examples, including Yale Medical School and Harvard Law School, both of which claimed that a lack of public facilities made it impossible for women to be admitted as students. Schools like the Virginia Military Institute used this excuse as recently as 1996.

In 2001, I was on a work-required visit to Saudi Arabia. No government buildings - at least at the time - contained bathroom facilities for women. We coped because one (1) room was set aside for us with a guard posted outside. It is a crying shame that the US - supposedly #1 in so many areas - is still not that far ahead of Saudi Arabia in this respect.

The OP is simply stupid and ABC's moderators were discourteous, to say the least. But for anyone to deflect by referring to Hillary's using this to make a "grand entrance" is outrageous.

[pnwmom]

152. Thanks for this very informative post!

[treestar]

157. Some interesting stuff

and you can bet that if something had been a problem in the men's room and caused delay they'd have waited for Martin or Bernie.

[BlueMTexpat]

160. Absolutely. eom

[southerncrone]

27. Classic attention-seeking behavior. Making a grand entry.

Distracted audience from Sanders answer, too. Very obvious. Not attractive.

[southerncrone]

29. So, what's your point?

[senz]

36. I thought so too. She could have slipped in quietly without speaking.

This is how people normally handle late entries and it is far more respectful of others. I honestly believe that in her mind, it's all about her. There's just nobody else.

(And I'm sorry a devoted fan insulted you like that.)

[pnwmom]

47. ABC handled it poorly, not Hillary. They had no business making a spectacle

of her by aiming the camera at the empty podium and announcing that they were going on without her -- as if she weren't as important as the other two.


You've heard of "potty parity"? They've done academic studies with stopwatches proving women need significantly more time in the bathroom just to use the basic facilities. These 5 minute breaks ABC had built in -- including transit time -- were enough for the men but not most women.

This is an example of unconscious but institutionalized sexism -- where the function is built around men's needs without taking into account women's. It might seem trivial but it's not.

You can see right in this thread that it made her the object of some mockery, all because she can't just whip something out and hang it over a urinal.

P.S. Why should she slink in like she's an INTRUDER who had to be careful not to DISTURB the men? ABC was wrong to start the 3 way debate without her.

[senz]

57. No, it's not about "disturbing the men," it's about respecting the proceedings.

Haven't you been in similar situations where some group activity is ongoing and those who are late enter quietly and take their posts without drawing attention to themselves? It's the right thing to do; it shows respect for what is occurring.

It happens all the time, pnwmom. When a person tries to be cutsie about it, it comes off for what it is: attention seeking. She seems to think she's the center of the universe.

I'm beginning to wonder if she surrounds herself with sycophants. If so, it could account for this attitude.

[pnwmom]

58. They disrespected HER by starting without her and by scheduling a bathroom break

around men's needs, not men's and women's.

She was on the STAGE. To act as if she's supposed to slip in quietly is just ludicrous. They made a point of noting her absence. Saying sorry as she slipped in was perfectly fine.

The fault was ABC's entirely, not hers. This wasn't some group activity where she was a minor player. She was one of only three major players and they had no business beginning without her.

[senz]

68. No, she should have subsumed herself within the procedings.

She should have respected the gravitas of the event. She, Bernie, and Martin were expected to show themselves to the American people with the moderators facilitating. The most important element in the entire exercise were the audience and television viewers. The moderators were representing us. The candidates are asking for our votes.

We rule. She should have sensed that and humbled herself enough to take her place quietly until it was her turn to speak.

She seems lacking in the humility department.

[pnwmom]

69. She should have HUMBLED herself? What century are you living in?

Studies have shown women need twice as much time in the bathroom as men. They had no business starting without her, simply because the men were able to make it to the stage within the 5 minutes.

[senz]

73. We're talking about her entrance, not how long a break she took.

It didn't hurt her one bit that they started without her, since the question that was being answered would be asked of her, as well.

Yes, Hillary should be humble enough to appreciate that the American people -- those peons living in apartments and little houses, trying to make ends meet -- are her superiors, by dent of her having chosen public service as a profession.

Surely you can see that? Again, in a political debate among candidates for office, the voters -- not the candidates -- rule.

[pnwmom]

75. Of course it put her at a real disadvantage for them to start without her.

Last edited Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:45 AM - Edit history (1)

In the normal give and take, the candidates are supposed to be LISTENING and RESPONDING to each other. By starting without her, they denied her the opportunity to listen to and formulate responses to what the other candidates said.

It was a blatant act of disrespect to start the proceedings without her, as if her presence wasn't as important as that of the men.

[senz]

89. Okay, now I see your point, pnwmom.

Thanks!

[pnwmom]

90. Phew! In general

I've always felt you were a reasonable person, and I was getting frustrated about not being able to explain this well enough. Thanks for letting me know I'd finally found a way.

[senz]

95. Aw, communication can be a challenge

especially in a medium like this. I admire your persistence/patience and sorry about the frustration!

[Agschmid]

85. It's a lost cause with some.

[LanternWaste]

165. That's a very creative allegation lacking any objective evidence

"She seems lacking in the humility department..."

That's a very creative allegation lacking any objective evidence; i.e., a bumper sticker with all the concomitant wisdom they provide.

But no doubt, you'll certainly point towards the posts indicating you yourself are a humble person, else we're to presume you hold yourself to a lower standard than you hold others to...

[MADem]

105. She said "Sorry." You know, what people with COUTH say when they're a bit late. nt

[pnwmom]

39. Researchers have done timed studies -- with stop-watches -- to study how long

women need just to go to the bathroom compared to men. Even if there is no line.

I don't go into the details, but they need more time. And the schedule with ABC only allowed 5 minute bathroom breaks.

CNN's Anderson Cooper didn't make a big deal about it; he just began the proceedings a minute or two late. This was a bad call on ABC's part.

[Cha]

50. And yet another CT from the sanders bunch

[JDPriestly]

30. She is an older woman. Maybe there wasa long line in the ladies' room.there usually is.

[pnwmom]

51. It's called "potty parity" -- and Hillary was denied it.

Researchers have proven women simply need more time to go through all the necessary motions. (And younger women even need more time during some parts of the month.)

The 5 minute bathroom breaks, including transit time, that ABC scheduled were set up based on men's needs, not women's.

[renate]

32. I thought she handled it well

No big explanation or joke, just a genial "Sorry." Most of us (not all!) in our household prefer Bernie, but we all liked the way she owned it.

[demmiblue]

33. What I find strange is that some feel that she had to wait in a line. Really?

I do believe it was staged for effect (potty issues were a part of the first debate, as well).

[senz]

37. Yes, I doubt she was in line with members of the audience.

[pnwmom]

42. Doesn't matter. Researchers have done time/motion studies of bathrooms

to determine how many stalls need to be in public buildings.

And they discovered women need significantly more time than men, just to use the basic facilities.

ABC only gave them 5 minute bathroom breaks, and part of that time was just spent walking to wherever the bathroom was. It was rude and sexist for them to make a show of starting without her.

Institutionalized sexism at work here: making men's needs the norm.

[artislife]

74. This has been repeated so often

I am beginning to think it is a lie.

We get it. My question is why wouldn't you go before the debates started? When I think of the drive home, I visit the ladies before I leave. They really aren't that long.

[pnwmom]

76. Sometimes people have to go, even if they already went. And women on the average

need to go more often than men, if they want to avoid bladder infections, due to their short urethra. Also they take longer.

Do you think she should have to wear a diaper, like an astronaut? Why couldn't they just let their commentator blab on for another minute or two? Their schedule wasn't sacrosanct.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/sports/baseball/13potty.html

Studies show that women take about twice as long as men in the restroom.

[artislife]

78. Diaper? WTF? I just think

The debates weren't half the day. Go before they start. If she has to go again, I think she may already have some issues.



I take a woman in her mid seventies out to the store and to get her hair done. She goes before we leave and we never stop for the 3 hours we are together. Most people can plan their "evacuation".

[pnwmom]

87. Wow. Like she can't be a human being who might have to go when she wasn't planning to.

So what if your friend doesn't need to go. She's probably not advertising the pair of Depends she has on just in case.

And even if she doesn't, it doesn't matter. ABC planned for a bathroom break and it should have waited till all three participants got back. Period.

[artislife]

93. I buy the groceries...no depends

but if Hillary needs to go, she needs to go!


Really, she needs to go.

[pnwmom]

94. Why don't you criticize her for actual things? You're scraping the bottom of the sexist barrel here,

for some inexplicable reason.

[artislife]

96. How is this sexist?

This seems like a reach.

[pnwmom]

99. When the NORM is based on the needs of the male and disregards the differing needs

of the female, then the norm is sexist.

When you criticize a woman for having a female body that requires more time for hygienic elimination, that is sexist.

Researchers with stopwatches have measured the amount of time needed for men and women to physically accomplish the various tasks involved in urination, and there are many more steps for women, who can't just use a urinal. (They have to enter a stall, close the door, remove clothing, etc., etc.) Women also are more likely to wash their hands and to use soap, both adding crucial seconds to the procedure. Overall, women take about twice as long as men to do their business.

The ABC break time was only 5 minutes, including transit time. This was probably the length of time ABC has always had for debates and it never occurred to them to adjust the schedule because a woman would be one of the debaters.

This is unconscious, institutionalized sexism -- where facilities and schedules are designed around the needs of one gender over the other. It's so pervasive that most of us don't even notice it, unless we're in a line of twenty women outside of a ladies' room while men are whipping in and out of the men's room.

Building codes in the past called for more men's rooms than women's, on the theory that women weren't out in public as much. It was only when researchers started doing studies in the latter part of the past century that they realized that women needed more bathrooms than men, not fewer. But many of these old buildings are still around today, and still putting women at a disadvantage. If the ABC building was like many old buildings, Hillary might have had to go to the other end of the floor -- or even to another floor -- simply to find a bathroom.

ABC could have easily waited the one or two minutes for Hillary to return. Instead, they made the demeaning decision to start the debate without her -- as if the presence of one of their three debaters wasn't important-- so she wasn't there to hear what the other candidates were saying. She had to join in mid-question, not knowing what she had missed.

Poor form for ABC. And I'm really shocked to see how many progressives seem to be clueless about this.

Bathrooms are a feminist issue. Without adequate bathrooms, women are at a disadvantage participating in public life. This is true in the US Senate (where women often have trouble with distant and rare ladies' rooms) and it is true worldwide, where inadequate sanitary facilities affect women (who are elevated risk of bladder infections) much more than men.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/07/womens-restrooms-sexist_n_6431184.html

A winding line of women waiting for the restroom may seem like a simple inconvenience, but feminist critic and activist Soraya Chemaly calls it a prime example of "male-centeredness."

Chemaly joined HuffPost Live on Wednesday to discuss her piece for Time, which argues that long lines at the ladies' room constitutes "everyday sexism" that favors the bodies of men. Chemaly explained to host Nancy Redd:
Whose bodies are worthy of prioritization? Whose bodies need to be recognized as legitimate? Those are really fundamental issues in society, and they come together in super interesting ways in public space and in public toilets. So when you see a line, as I did last week, of 50 women standing waiting patiently and quietly while men breeze in and out of the restroom, it's really not just this minor irritation. It's reflective of much deeper issues about bodies, embodiment, ... elimination and social justice. I also think it's just one aspect on a very broad spectrum of how important bodily needs and sanitation are to people's equal rights.




http://time.com/3653871/womens-bathroom-lines-sexist-potty-parity/

[artislife]

100. This seems to be your area of interest.

7 minutes..that's a long time. But whatever.

[pnwmom]

102. I do have a special interest in the needs of girls worldwide who stay home for school

because they don't have sanitary supplies, or just drop out at the age of menstruation.

But this is a related issue.

P.S. The 7 minutes includes transit time and no one has any idea where the bathroom Hillary was assigned to was located.

[artislife]

123. Roll eyes

Hillary = African girls


You win.



And it isn't what you hoped it would be.

[artislife]

142. Tsk Tsk, says the hall monitor

Pfft


Your shaming has no effect. It is a pathetic tactic in itself.

[artislife]

145. I don't defend Hillary. nt

[artislife]

147. Oh, no...she isn't offensive at all...wink wink.

[MADem]

107. That is a snarky joke, intended to illustrate the "potty parity" issue - it's not a literal argument

at all. That IS a real issue, though-- and it is something that really needs addressing, even today. Architects do incorporate bathroom equality into new construction, if they're good, and smart. But not everything is "new construction."

Clinton's level of security ensures that she's got a room cleared just for her--it might be a little ways away, though, down a corridor that has been secured for her use alone, but she's not sharing with anyone.

As a complete aside, the ONLY reason that the Pentagon has sufficient bathroom facilities for both genders is because they used to have segregated bathrooms back in the Bad Old Days. After the desegregation of the Armed Services, when more women started joining the forces, they were able to convert a lot of the segregated bathrooms for use by women.

[JVS]

120. Agreed.

Each candidate probably has a dressing room backstage.

[NobodyHere]

46. She needed to show her disdain for the debate process

[pnwmom]

63. I need to show my distain for anyone who is judging her because she is a woman

and women need more time in the bathroom than men. This was established by researchers with stopwatches decades ago.

ABC only gave them 5 minutes, including transit time. Not enough. Focusing on the empty podium and going on without her was inexcusably rude.

[NobodyHere]

66. She couldn't go before the debates?

I hope she isn't in the bathroom when she gets that 3am phone call she touted last election.

[pnwmom]

70. Women need to go more often than men and they take longer, due to physiology,

clothing, and the facilities themselves.

Your sexism and or ignorance is noted.

[NobodyHere]

97. Do you ever listen to yourself

[pnwmom]

98. Do you?

[NuclearDem]

49. This entire thread is absolutely fucking disgusting.

I don't even have the words for this.

[Cha]

52. You described it awfully well. Thank you.

[pnwmom]

55. There is a lot of disagreement on this thread. So which side are you taking?

Those who think she should have just quietly slipped in and not said "sorry"?

Those who think she was grandstanding?

Those, like me, who think ABC was remiss not to delay the start for a minute or two since one or their 3 participants was still in the bathroom?

Women need more time in the bathroom to get their basic business done. This is not disgusting; it's just a simple fact backed up by time and motion studies conducted with stopwatches.

ABC's 5 minute breaks were not enough. They should have just let their commentators blab on for a little longer -- it's what they love to do -- instead of making a point of starting without her.

[NuclearDem]

59. I'm on your side.

I just can't properly articulate what I just read for fear of my brain shutting off and dying.

People actually sinking so low as to turn a slightly longer bathroom break into a fucking Clinton campaign dirty trick.

Absolutely no shame at all.

[JaneyVee]

67. Yup. Awful.

[Agschmid]

86. Yup.

[Codeine]

119. This. A thousand times this.

We see what the bros are reduced to in the face of a strong woman; puerile children.

[Yupster]

53. Does anyone know if the candidates are allowed to talk to their aides during breaks?

Until this year I never noticed candidates going offstage during breaks. It's probably always happened but I've never noticed it.

[pnwmom]

60. This was a scheduled 5 minute bathroom break, including transit time. n/t

[Yupster]

143. But my question is

are the candidates met by their aides who walk with them to the bathroom telling them what's going right and wrong and remember to say this about him, or are they supposed to be isolated during these breaks.

[pnwmom]

149. What a joke. As if Hillary isn't in total command of the facts.

What would an aide know more about than she does? No one knows what questions will be asked in the second part of the debate.

[Yupster]

150. I wasn't talking about Hillary

I'm talking about all of them.

During debates, I'm sure the campaigns are constantly saying that something someone said wasn't true or could be easily countered. I'm sure each campaign would love to grab their candidate during the debate and say, "he said he was against this, but on Oct 23 at the Davenport Foreign Legion he said he was for it."

I was just wondering if that was allowed during the commercial breaks.

[Drunken Irishman]

54. Some replies to this thread are disgustingly low.

Ripped right out of FreeRepublic.

[Kalidurga]

62. Trashing thread

This is terrible. I am with Hillary supporters on this. I invite them to do a thread on bathroom parity I will visit and rec.

[pnwmom]

64. Good idea, Kalidurga. Maybe tomorrow.

[Kalidurga]

65. Thank you

I found your posts to be good on the subject.

[pnwmom]

77. I can't believe I'm having to explain this to otherwise intelligent people. n/t

[Kalidurga]

83. I can't believe it takes a line to the bathroom to create any kind of solidarity but there it is.

[pnwmom]

84. LOL

[PatrickforO]

79. I'm thinking the break was too short, and the moderators were

assholes for starting before she got back.

But ABC really sucks anyway. You guys remember their hatchet job on Obama back in 08? I mean, that was pathetic, in a ridiculous and light weight way. I don't watch ABC much.

[pnwmom]

91. It was only 5 minutes, including transit time. And what do you want to bet

the ladies was farther away?

[akbacchus_BC]

80. Please cut her some slack. She said sorry!

[akbacchus_BC]

82. If this is your only issue with Mrs. Clinton,

I feel very sorry for you.

The moderator repeated the question for Mrs. Clinton to respond. Who are you on this fecking totem pole? Are you making a difference in the debates?

Get lost!

[akbacchus_BC]

88. Amazing that this piece of shit is still going!

The Mods need to delete it. Whether you like Mrs. Clinton or not, this post is fecking disgusting. Delete it please Mods and you will be doing yourselves a favour. More people will be willing to pay to be on here if DU is fair!

[NanceGreggs]

104. As a non-Bernista ...

... I thought he did very well in tonight's debate.

I find it curious that his supporters are more interested in HRC's hairdo, outfit, and bathroom breaks than their own candidate's performance.

[TDale313]

109. I am a Bernie supporter,

and find it classless and yes, sexist. Rather see us stay on the issues.

[Purveyor]

106. Oh she pulled that 'stunt' last time too. Getting old Hillary. eom

[TDale313]

108. Stay Klassy. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

113. The irony is there are those...

The irony is there are those that argue misogyny and sexism are not part of the opposition to Secretary Clinton.


Thank you for reading.


Happy Holidays

DSB

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

114. My guess: it was a tactical move. Debate theater.

It seems to have gotten everyone's attention. So it's a successful ploy.

[Vinca]

115. This is a ridiculous post.

Sometimes things just take longer. Get a grip.

[randome]

116. She was eating the brains of a Sanders supporter. Obviously.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[Le Taz Hot]

117. It could have been several things

but I don't think it was planned. She might have had a wardrobe malfunction, might have been a restroom issue, either way I thought she handled it well and I can't stand the woman.

No biggie.

[mythology]

121. People make my head hurt

Why did you think this post was a good idea? All it does is make you look really small and petty.

[MineralMan]

122. Why on Earth do you care?

It provided a bit of comic relief. That's all.

[wyldwolf]

125. to distract certain types of people

[ronnykmarshall]

139. Another new low

for GD-B

[Arkana]

155. You're fucking kidding right?

[Douglas Carpenter]

161. This is NOT cool and I have supported Bernie before hardly anyone ever heard of him

And I am not big fan of the Clinton's. But nasty, petty remarks like this serve no meaningful purpose and I am sure Bernie would be personally embarrassed. Shame on you and everyone who supports such nasty and personal sniping.

[awoke_in_2003]

162. And so the fuck what?

Have you never had gastric distress? And if so, so the fuck what? We need the unrec feature back

[LanternWaste]

163. The grade-school petulance with which a post like this is created

The grade-school petulance with which a post like this is created more often than not illustrates that character of poster much more than anything they may be righteously railing against. Which itself isn't pretty, either... but I'm sure you'll rationalize holding yourself to a much lower standard one way or another, regardless of how pretty, or distressful or even tactical.