Trump (Part 2)(1000 Posts)
More on the meaning of Trump, the Trumpsters and Trumpism
From the previous thread:
Orwell was writing about relativism. Is this your "truth"?
In order to avoid the infinite regress of "My truth trumps yours", "No, my interpretation is correct", we will need to impose a singular set of rules which we both agree on if we are to continue interacting peacefully
Squashy if your only critique is to compare something to dystopian bastardry then you really need to be self aware enough to wonder whether said critique is itself smug dystopian bastardry.
Frankly anyone comparing a US president to a dictator really really doesn't understand US politics.
As for Russia the spin is taken direct from the the democratic party. It was Russia what done for us! Well if it was then so what? I saw lots of people posting on US forums during the election who I doubt were from America. With the mainstream media refusing to report on wikileaks someone had to inform them, if the Russians helped then good on em.
Its that illiberal and authoritarian bent I mentioned. Free speech when it suits me, if free speech is used against my aims then I'll conjure up Mccarthyist hate.
Carrying over from the other thread:
I remember posting a few months ago that Trump could win if the election day fell on a blip where polls showed he was ahead. It seems to have happened that way.
We don't know if the election was today, or if an overall majority of over 50% was required (as in many countries), if the result would be the same.
There is a truth, though, even if we don't know all of it (no one will) or can't be sure of what it is because some people lie.
However, the problem with conspiracy theories and cover ups is that evidence is scarce and may not be uncovered for a long time, if ever.
In this case, I think history will tell.
I do suspect Trump will disappoint his followers. Either because he'll become trapped in the system he got into willingly (via his appointments), or because the outcome will be quite bad.
But, overall, remember that those who vehemently disagree with you and Trump here and elsewhere are also the People. And neither you nor him speak for such non-existent entity. Only for a subset.
And, BTW, it's too soon to dismiss Trump as dictator in the making. Hopefully, democracy can prevail, but you never know...
fourmummy: "In order to avoid the infinite regress of "My truth trumps yours", "No, my interpretation is correct"" : Well that would appear to be the nub of our problem, wouldn't it
"we will need to impose a singular set of rules which we both agree on if we are to continue interacting peacefully*" How about if we agree that, for all intents and purposes, *facts do exist and opinions also exist and they are not interchangeable?
I mean, I am not an expert in
pseudophilosophy, and I do understand that you could argue the whole "how can we be sure of anything?" "Maybe reality is but a dream!" (not saying in any way this is what you said btw) thing if you really wanted to, but while that stuff may seem really deep and insightful if you're stoned at 3 in the morning, it's not terribly helpful to a meaningful discussion, is it?
Like the point I made on the other thread:
If I jump out of the window, the "truth" that I will fly is not as valid as the truth that I will fall. If I am unwell, the opinion of my doctor is worth a hell of a lot more than the opinion of my cat. The informed opinion of an evolutionary scientist who has spent many years studying is worth more than a hunch of Pence's. - yes, you could argue that in an infinite universe you could jump out of a high window and fly, but you would never want to test that would you?
Or like Claig admitting that he has never read anything by Orwell, but knows exactly what he would think about Trump because it's "common sense" - do you really think that sounds like common sense?
William Binney, former NSA employee, says that the NSA has all of Hillary's emails, including the 33000 that she had deleted, and that the Russians did not hack the DNC emails, but it is more likely that it is someone from within the NSA
She claimed that the ones she deleted were mainly from Bill.
Bill meanwhile happily tells people quite proudly that he has only ever sent two emails in his life...
'Bill meanwhile happily tells people quite proudly that he has only ever sent two emails in his life...'
It looks like some people probably know exactly what has been going on with the Clinton Foundationa and the emails and all the rest. Whether it will ever all come out is probably doubtful because it would probably risk embarrassing the entire system and the shocks would be so huge that they would rock lots of places. Trump will probably let it lie because there are still huge forces ranged against him as can be seen just by watching the endless propaganda against him on Channel 4 News etc and probably most of the other news channels.
Quite a lot of the media are beginning to write negatively against General Mike Flynn, Trump's National Security Advisor. Flynn seems like a great guy with real guts which is probably why some of the media are against him
"Exclusive — Gen. Mike Flynn: Hillary Clinton’s Email Setup Was ‘Unbelievable Active Criminal Behavior’
“It was a violation of the law. It’s not just violation of State Department guidelines,” Flynn told SiriusXM host Matthew Boyle. “Let’s forget about the pedophilia, let’s forget about the Clinton Foundation for a second and let’s focus on Hillary Clinton’s grave risk that she’s placed our country at by using a private server to do business at the most sensitive levels of our government.”
“That’s beyond [just against] State Department policy. That’s a criminal act,” he added. “I have been part of investigations where people have spied on our country or done espionage been used to extort information for purposes of damaging our country. That’s what Hillary Clinton has done. This is beyond violating State Department policy. If that’s all it was, I wouldn’t be sitting here today. This is an unbelievable active criminal behavior.”
Flynn said that the media is covering up Clinton’s alleged crimes:
People need to know what this is and so the mainstream media—all of the media, basically 99 percent of the media—doesn’t even bother with it anymore. Nobody even covers it anymore. This is dangerous for our country and then you throw in all this stuff from this past week—you have this case against Anthony Weiner and he’s directly tied to Hillary Clinton. He’s under multiple investigations. Then you have the Clinton Foundation, which is under multiple investigations by the FBI, and not just one but multiple. You have the reopening of the national security investigation by the FBI directly against Hillary Clinton, that’s another one that’s open. So I mean we are stupid people, we are stupid people in this country is we elect Hillary Clinton to be our next president because we’re going to have nothing but scandal and dark cloud scandal over our country for the next four years and we cannot afford it with all the problems we face in this country and all the problems we face around the world. What we need is we need to drain the damn swamp. We need to get new leadership in our country, we need to get fresh blood in our country, and we need to stop the madness we are facing with this era of corruption in our country that has been going on for decades. We have got to stop it."
Trump still has to be confirmed in December and then get in on Jan 20.
There are some reports that some electors may choose Hillary instead of Trump and then there is the whole Jill Stein recount thing. Let's hope Trump makes it and takes on the elites.
General Flynn of the "Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL" tweet.
It's just possible that it's his aggressive islamophobia that people don't like, rather than that "he's a great guy with guts".
Dark times ahead.
It is strange that Trump is still considering Romney as Secretary of State. Both Newt Gingrich and teh excellent Mike Huckabee have openly come out against Romney. Maybe Trump has to consider Romney to plactae the forces in the Establishment.
Trump has one helluva job and there are lots of elites who don't like him. We can only hope he beats the lot of them.
There are lots of people who don't like him. Not elites. People. At least 2 million more than actually voted for him.
'General Flynn of the "Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL" tweet.'
It is a tweet taken out of context. Flynn had business links with Turkey. He is not anti Muslim.
There's only ever been one rogue electoral college voter to my knowledge, and I think there were exceptional circumstances where the nominee died and the vice took over or something like that.
Don't see what anyone has to fear from a recount. It will just give the same result.
'There are lots of people who don't like him. Not elites.'
Yes but those people have no power. Channel 4 News can endlessly give them a voice but they have no power to change anything. Only the elites have the power and the scheming to challenge Trump. Let's hope he defeats the lot of them.
'What was the context, Claig.'
The context was after terrorist attacks in the US where people were killed. General Flynn was not referring to all Muslims, just terrorists.
We're all doomed! Jack boots on the match.
Do you have any other argument?
If he used the word "Muslims" and was referring only to terrorists, that's about as islamophobic as it gets.
'Don't see what anyone has to fear from a recount. It will just give the same result.'
There is all sorts of possible jiggery pokery according to the US conspiracy theorists. In Michigan, fortunately, they don't use the electronic votng machines and Trump won by about 10000 votes, but who knows what ballots they may find. But in the electronic voting districts, who has access to the machines counts etc and there needs to be independent verification of what happens there.
Bev Harris is probably one of the foremost experts on voter fraud etc. She is a Democrat and was part of the documentary "Hacking Democracy", and she has been on the US conspiracy shows recently explaining the kind of things that can be involved.
But hopefully it will all be resolved fairly.
Just seen your post about "those people have no power", Claig.
What makes you think they have less power than the Trumpers (and for that matter Brexiters), assuming you believe in the continuation of democracy? After all they are on average younger and better educated, and in the case of anti-Trumpists, more numerous.
Or maybe Jill Stein is merely getting to increase her exposure.
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Please login first.