[mst]

Do you also believe anybody who was in favour of the Clinton campaign needs to provide evidence they disagree with silencing sexual assault victims? Because that's definitely a disturbing thing "associated" with her.

Otherwise I feel like you're more interested in partisan political posturing than actually holding people accountable.

(for the record, I despise both Clinton and Trump, but had I been a US voter rather than a UK bystander, I'd've held my nose and voted Clinton on the expectation of that being the lesser of the available evils)

[marricks]

I think directly speaking about sexual assault coupled with many accusations is more damning, and supporters just not caring.

Same with racism against people form Mexico / middle east. Sadly comes down to a matter of scale, at least for me.

This sort of stuff should ruin someone running for president, somehow it didn't matter here.

[peteretep]

Hillary wasn't campaigning on a platform of silencing sexual assault victims, but Trump was campaigning on a platform of xenophobia and dog whistles.

[michaelbuddy]

All these "phobia" labels get applied to people who just want others to obey the laws. Even intelligent tech minded people just don't seem to understand this.

[marricks]

You do you realize sometimes these people getting elected actually write or enforce the laws? Perhaps even change them, by lets say reducing the number of refugees being taken in.

But to get to the heart of your point "enforcing laws" Legality is in no way equivalent Morality. People use terms like "enforcing laws" as a sort of dog whistle to imply we should not and are not going to be listening to minority voices.