The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
humanbeingincroydon said:
So there's this...

You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
Understandably lost in Trump’s enthusiasm for stirring up a war of white males against all other races and the one other sex is the fact that he is the symbol of the Republican party: a fat old white guy threatened by change.

In an attempt to get support in my area, he repeatedly says he’ll bring the steel industry back. The steel industry died 40 years ago in these parts. Those steelworkers still around are on social security. Very few people in the Pittsburgh area now want it and its poisonous byproducts back, and of those few, hardly a one, I would guess, believes Trump will make any progress in doing so. Much like the Islamic fundamentalists, his strategy for dealing with a rapidly changing world filled with uncertainty is a furious attempt to turn back the clock. What else is he going to bring back? The horse and

And yet he might win, mostly because Hillary is such an awful candidate. She sold the family cow of her liberal beliefs for the magic beans of W’s Afghanistan and Iraq idiocy--"Hey, let’s figure out what the terrorists want us to do--overreact--and do exactly that!"--and now bills herself as the candidate with experience and good judgment. Her experience has taught her nothing useful and her judgment (as demonstrated by email-gate) is terrible.

I’ve been harsh on Obama and Bill Clinton for being Republican lite, but I have to admit, now, how infinitely less awful they are than the run of candidates running for national office.
 
Last edited:
remembercolinlee said:
I am not saying he is the right leader just that those (or the majority of those) conspiring against him are two faced self serving ****wits who have more interested in themselves than in helping working people...like I said I am very naive and old fashioned
Click to expand...
I think I'm the naïve one, cause I actually think that many people who go into Parliament do it for decent reasons. There are a few who go after power for the sake of it, but many more who just want to be of service. Most of these people could earn more money elsewhere, so I don't think that is a motivating factor (not that they earn a fortune).
 
redwhiteandermblue said:
Understandably lost in Trump’s enthusiasm for stirring up a war of white males against all other races and the one other sex is the fact that he is the symbol of the Republican party: a fat old white guy threatened by change.

In an attempt to get support in my area, he repeatedly says he’ll bring the steel industry back. The steel industry died 40 years ago in these parts. Those steelworkers still around are on social security. Very few people in the Pittsburgh area now want it and its poisonous byproducts back, and of those few, hardly a one, I would guess, believes Trump will make any progress in doing so. Much like the Islamic fundamentalists, his strategy for dealing with a rapidly changing world filled with uncertainty is a furious attempt to turn back the clock. What else is he going to bring back? The horse and

And yet he might win, mostly because Hillary is such an awful candidate. She sold the family cow of her liberal beliefs for the magic beans of W’s Afghanistan and Iraq idiocy--"Hey, let’s figure out what the terrorists want us to do--overreact--and do exactly that!"--and now bills herself as the candidate with experience and good judgment. Her experience has taught her nothing useful and her judgment (as demonstrated by email-gate) is terrible.

I’ve been harsh on Obama and Bill Clinton for being Republican lite, but I have to admit, now, how infinitely less awful they are than the run of candidates running for national office.
Click to expand...


Trump is utterly shameless, isn't he? He'll promise anything, say anything that he thinks will get him elected. It's all about his planet sized ego, of course. If and when he's elected he'll have got what he wants and will quickly renege or backtrack on many 'promises' he's made. And then set about destroying America's foreign relationships.

There was a programme on TV here last night from Bakersfield ( California's redneck central, for those who don't know it) This old redneck blathering on one minute about how he wasn't racist - 'No sir' - because he had a Mexican friend. Five minutes later he's blaming the blacks and the Mexicans for all the problems in America. Needless to say he and all his friends are fervent Trump supporters!

He's going to make America great again!....<doh>
 
I was in the States for two months in 1999 driving round. Spent almost all day driving so there was a lot of time to listen to the radio and much of that time was hearing talk radio. I'm not easily shocked but the viewpoints expressed on those phone ins were beyond anything I've even heard from Trump - and I'm not only talking about the callers but the hosts. We're talking hosts like Oliver North (remember him) and a person hailed by other hosts as a great patriot J Gordon Liddy - who organised the Watergate burglary. And that was more than 15 years ago. It's not going to be any better now. I don't think people over here generally realise how polarised America is and how right wing the right wing is! This is the society that hails its war heroes, yet ran one of the most vicious political campaigns ever against John Kerry, Vietnam War hero (the democrat) - see the Swift Boat Campaign - who was up against Vietnam draft dodger George Bush (the republican). They also hailed Bush as a great "war leader", when as far as I'm concerned he's not got one single attribute of a leader (might it have been different if he'd actually gone to Vietnam?)
 
I think that America suffers from a biased journalism issue even worse than we do.
Some of their supposed news outlets are just shambolic and mental, frankly.

Studies have shown that people that watch Fox News or MSNBC actually know less about current events than those that watch no news at all.
How can you have a negative impact upon somebody's knowledge?
http://www.businessinsider.com/stud...rmed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5?IR=T

Having lots of news sources available sounds like a great thing, in theory.
The unfortunate side effect is that lots of people end up following those that tell them what they want to hear, rather than what's true.
There are endless echo-chambers forming and the divisions that they create are more obvious by the day.
 
Have any of you tried watching a Trump interview with subtitles and no sound? I was in a bar the other night and that was the situation i was faced with. It really highlights that actually he says very little. A LOT of words come out, but there is very little meaning and almost no answers to any questions. It's amazing that people are falling for it, i don't think he actually has a clue.
 
Spurm said:
Have any of you tried watching a Trump interview with subtitles and no sound? I was in a bar the other night and that was the situation i was faced with. It really highlights that actually he says very little. A LOT of words come out, but there is very little meaning and almost no answers to any questions. It's amazing that people are falling for it, i don't think he actually has a clue.
Click to expand...
You're right, he uses a few stock phrases and just repeats them. Looking forward to the debates. I think Hillary will tear him a new one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurm
Spurm said:
Have any of you tried watching a Trump interview with subtitles and no sound? I was in a bar the other night and that was the situation i was faced with. It really highlights that actually he says very little. A LOT of words come out, but there is very little meaning and almost no answers to any questions. It's amazing that people are falling for it, i don't think he actually has a clue.
Click to expand...
It's depressing how often that's worked in this country. Blair and Cameron are the obvious examples, and from there it balloons into so many of their underlings, and after that you can throw in the likes of Boris, Farage, Clegg and a worrying number of other people - which is apparently a trait that makes them"electable."

Look at the Labour leadership election from last year: Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall held all manner of stage-managed events to talk themselves up as leader, yet between the two of them they said precisely nothing (while Andy Burnham wasn't much better) Same goes for the members of the CHicken Coup: what has Angela Eagle said, other than outright lies about being bullied?
 
From the few Americans i've spoken to about it so far none of them actually thought that Trump could or would win, until we voted for Brexit. Then they all started saying "well if Britain can do that them i'm worried we might actually vote Trump in"
 
Angela Eagle has read the writing on the wall and dropped out of the Labour leadership race.
This leaves Comrade Corbyn and Owen "Pfizer lobbyist" Smith to fight it out for the title.
Looks like the bloke that can't win elections is going to win another election, doesn't it?

What now for his fellow MPs that don't want to be in a party lead by Ol' Beardy?
Time for SDP II? A bizarre SNP for Britain party? More pointless disruption and backstabbing?
 
The Eagle has not landed.
Who more credible then her did she actually think would rise to the occasion if
she got the ball rolling ??
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
I get the feeling we won't be reading the headline "Certifiable Liar Quits Labour Leadership Race" anytime soon...
Click to expand...

Do you think it was a double bluff? In other words showing the public what the alternatives to Corbyn were, so they would realise that there isn't much of an alternative?

One for the future: Wonder why we haven't heard from Dan Jarvis much? As a former army officer he carries a hell of a lot more gravitas and has significantly more leadership ability than most. Surely he would make a more credible alternative?
 
vimhawk said:
Do you think it was a double bluff? In other words showing the public what the alternatives to Corbyn were, so they would realise that there isn't much of an alternative?

One for the future: Wonder why we haven't heard from Dan Jarvis much? As a former army officer he carries a hell of a lot more gravitas and has significantly more leadership ability than most. Surely he would make a more credible alternative?
Click to expand...
Because he is too right wing. Wouldn't stand an earthly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back