Trump (Part 2)

[claig]

More on the meaning of Trump, the Trumpsters and Trumpism

Yes Informal.
"right wing and anti-Muslim" would appear to be the main criteria for "credibility" according to some on here.

Oh good greif. Only you lot can take this

"It has insight into newsheadlines around europe re Trump. Certainly the UK are not unique with our MSM. What the author misses though, is how widely acknowledged by the common people, what a load of croc the MSM are. Hes fallen down the same trap, in using it as evidence of anti-americanism, that MSM reflects the views of the people. Theyve not done that for years!!"

And turned it into your last batch of drivel.

PS One Interesting obs though, France isnt mentioned...

He never answers any of my questions either, kitten.

Why do you post articles if you don't want us to read them Chris?
When I quote from them you accuse me of being "disrespectful to the author". When I comment on the article itself, you take personal offence and accuse me of twisting your words.

Because, Chris et al, you all seem convinced that "the people" think the MSM is worthless. Funny how it sells in its millions every day.

It has insight into newsheadlines around europe re Trump.

It doesn't have "insight" - it puts right wing and Islamophobic spin on what it cherry picks.

All I see on here are links to right wing sites (some of which have been described as "bat shit crazy") or The Daily Mail, which support your bias, and constant drivel about Channel 4, the BBC, The Guardian, The Independent, NY Times etc being nothing but spin / elites / Oxbridge because they don't support your views.

It really is very tedious.

Brilliantly put, InformalRoman.

'All I see on here are links to right wing sites (some of which have been described as "bat shit crazy") or The Daily Mail, which support your bias,'

Informal, that is not true, I post lots of links to the Guardian, the BBC and Channel 4 News to point out the errors in their analysis. The links to the Daily Mail are to provide informed content.

I think we need to listen to what the next President of the United States has been saying about the media, because as far as I can see he knows what he is talking about.

Last Monday, he called the media in, in what was desscribed by some inside sources as "a f...ing firing squad" where he said "we are in a room full of liars", mentioned "a network of liars" and "deceitful" with regards to all the top media organisations, apart from the Daily Mail.

If the President of the United States says that, I think it should be listened to

"I think we need to listen to what the next President of the United States has been saying about the media...."
Yes, we do. We need to pay very, very close attention. It says far more about him and his attitudes to a free press than it does about the media though.

'It says far more about him and his attitudes to a free press than it does about the media though.'

The next President of the United States has got nothing against "a free press" in the "land of the free and the home of the brave", what he does not like is what he calls "a network of liars".

According to gobsmacked inside sources, who fell off their chairs, spilled their coffee and picked their jaws up off the floor and who quickly realised they were not dealing with a "career politician", but someone who told the truth rather than being "politically correct", Trump started with Jeff Zucker [CNN President] and said

"I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed"

This was clealy not "career politics" as usual. This was a people's revolution, this was Donald J Trump.

Informal, that is not true, I post lots of links to the Guardian, the BBC and Channel 4 News to point out the errors in their analysis. The links to the Daily Mail are to provide informed content.

Enough said .

Wake me up when the 2016 reset button works properly.

Farage says 2017 may make 2016 look like a tea party

Amazing times. A people's revolution.

" ...fell off their chairs, spilled their coffee and picked their jaws up off the floor and who quickly realised they were not dealing with a "career politician"

I'd love to have been there to see the stunned look on the faces of the smug journalists. At the moment they feel solidarity & strength with each other but come the next election or similar, who is going to listen to these over-paid and over-confident journalists who report from their own bubble?

If this was China, Mao would hv got rid of them for the crime of superiority without substance.

"I think we need to listen to what the next President of the United States has been saying about the media...."

Yes quite.

"I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed"

This was clealy not "career politics" as usual. This was a people's revolution, this was Donald J Trump."

Strange and sad times that this even needs saying, but this is not a people's revolution. This is an unstable megalomaniac intimidating the press.

"If this was China, Mao would hv got rid of them for the crime of superiority without substance"

Thank fuck it's not then, right Southallgirl? Or are you actually expressing admiration for the cultural revolution?

'This is an unstable megalomaniac intimidating the press.'

Tony Blair was not involved at all on this occasion.

And Blair's sidekick Alastair Bumble was not threatening the press down the phone either.

Or are you actually expressing admiration for the cultural revolution?

Get a grip. I was pointing out how easily and painlessly sloppy political journalists and analysts get away with not doing their jobs, drawing damn fine salaries and giving their newspaper employers misleading information - and there are no consequences. If I did something akin to this in my work, I would be out. But they have been retained, because the pool of journalism is small and anyway contains much of the same crap.

Why mention Mao?

And what misleading information are you referring to?

I think you may have been given some misleading information about the regulation, salaries, and competition within mainstream journalism.

My last comment was to Southall, obviously!

http://www.wsj.com/articles/oecd-says-trumps-policies-could-lift-global-growth-1480327202

Yet more positive noises.......

I can't see the whole article as it's behind a paywall, but even by the end of the first paragraph it's not all that rosy - looks more like a warning against his proposed trade policies concerning tariffs:

"U.S. and global economic growth would be boosted by increases in spending and tax cuts promised by President-elect Donald Trump, but those gains would be lost if he pressed ahead with threatened tariff increases that triggered retaliation,"

What does the rest of the article say?

Strange and sad times that this even needs saying, but this is not a people's revolution. This is an unstable megalomaniac intimidating the press.

Yes. Accountability as a public servant is clearly not going to come easy for him. He will do everything he can to avoid accountability and bully anyone who tries to impose it. 'But I'm Donald J Trump and I answer to no-one' will be his default attitude. If that is what 'the people' want from a public servant then yes, worrying times indeed.

It is very telling that he has chosen Twitter (and pro-Trump rallies) as his main communication tools - both are one-way propaganda with no awkward questions to answer.

I agree that Twitter and FB are one-way propaganda tools. I have a Facebook friend who today just wrote 'sick' next a report about Trump's cabinet being made up of rich billionaires. My friend doesn't want a reply or a debate and I would prefer a discussion about these things, but I expect Trump will chose men and women who are business people - people he knows. I guess we see how it goes.