Trump (Part 6)

[claig]

More on Trump

It is a Trump world and as the Modi saying goes

“Aab Ki Baar Trump Sarkar”

and as the Stump for Trump Sisters say

"Get on the Trump Train or get the hell out of the way"

Rock'n'roll

Perhaps her hopes are 'out there' but thus far what she predicted has come to pass - Brexit and Trump

Bearing in mind there was only a choice of in/out and DT/HC it's not exactly mind blowing is it?

Just wondering why the non Trumpers - the ones that have hung around for about 7 threads - can't see 'the truth' as you put it claig....

And again. Why is The Guardian and BBC 100% fact but the Daily Mail and Breitbart are 100% false?

There was a poster, on Trump 5 I think. I cannot remember the issue, but she posted that she had gone to Snopes, checked what I had said and posted again saying it was not true, it had not happened. She sounded very young, and I do fear for this generation coming up because they are so desperate to believe that something cannot be because (i) they havent heard of it before, or (ii) it's just too fantastical. Maybe lack of critical thinking, maybe a party political view getting in the way.

I remember years ago mentioning to someone that my elderly next-door neighbours were the sole family survivors of a famine and I was jumped on immediately with a "No they weren't, famine was in the middle ages, dont make it up."

It's this desperation to aggressively discount a piece of information instead of thinking about it and filing it away.

Usually the regressive SJW's, the lily liberals, and screeching Radfems love to shout 'omg you liar send me a link'

You link them a Daily Mail article and it's dismissed

'Just wondering why the non Trumpers - the ones that have hung around for about 7 threads - can't see 'the truth' as you put it claig....'

Because they don't want to, they are too invested in their worldview, a change of such magnitude is too great a shock, which is why it led to so many tears of Clinton supporters as Missswatch has said and of which there are hundreds of videos on youtube of crying and wailing at Hillary's loss. Their entire undertanding and worldview collapsed. It was North Korean in scale, the scales fell from their eyes as they realised the BBC had lied.

It was the same for the BBC, Jonathan Freeedland, the Oxford PPE at the Guardian, Blair and the Financial Times. They can't adapt to the enormous change because it has rocked their world and shaken all their certainties.

Merkel, Hollande looked sick with fear and pale as ghosts when they heard that the elites' worst nightmare, Trump, had beaten the Establishment's last hope, Hillary.

I don't know how Sir Bob took the news but I am guessing that the air turned blue.

Bearing in mind there was only a choice of in/out and DT/HC it's not exactly mind blowing is it?

But it is. She is not a professional journo, she was not close to the action in USA, she did not interview anyone or overhear snippets of useful info. All the professional journalists to a man got it wrong. The gambler who put £1k to win had an intuition and got it right.

The anti-Trump lot are not open to right wing media. They hate the truth. They prevent the truth. The Donald subreddit is always being brigaded. Why the censorship? What are you afraid of?

Because they don't want to, they are too invested in their worldview, a change of such magnitude is too great a shock, which is why it led to so many tears of Clinton supporters as Missswatch has said and of which there are hundreds of videos on youtube of crying and wailing at Hillary's loss. Their entire undertanding and worldview collapsed. It was North Korean in scale, the scales fell from their eyes as they realised the BBC had lied

Nope. That's not me. Next!

Why is The Guardian and BBC 100% fact but the Daily Mail and Breitbart are 100% false?

I don't know, you tell me. As strangely the only person who has claimed that is you, Missswatch. It's a classic deflection technique, accusing one's interlocuter of saying something they didn't.

All news sources have biases of one kind or another. All demonstrate spin and slant. No one has suggested that everything that is reported in any news source is true or false.

I think I should leave this thread because all claig's nonsense about wailing and fainting and not believing the scale of the lie is so preposterous. There is no one big lie. There are lots of little lies and lots of big and little truths. Trump is not some all seeing Messiah. He is a self-interested self-promoter who tells people what they want to hear. He's interested in deals, not building successful enterprises. The election is a deal. The presidency is an enterprise.

Oh don't be silly missss. 2 choices that's all. It's hardly 40 runners in the Grand National !

Missswatch Yes, this link business - it's very odd. Sometimes of course you post a link, but some demand a link for everything.

Hear hear ontop! Especially your last para (but don't want you to leave obv)

Come on sunset open your eyes. It's over mumsnet. People have linked Breitbart and the DM and had it dismissed. No one ever challenges The Guardian

The intolerant liberals are at it again

mobile.twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/810814543203041280

"Russian ambassador to Turkey dead after being shot in 'assassination attempt in revenge for Aleppo'

The gunman reportedly said 'We die in Aleppo, you die here' before opening fire and injuring Ambassador Andrei Karlov"

www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russian-ambassador-turkey-seriously-injured-9485836

Clinton's popular vote was entirely from California

www.investors.com/politics/commentary/its-official-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/

Even worse, ranting spinning liars become the holders of truth, just because they shout more or rant the most, or speak of things that are generally considered bollocks (not through an all encompassing conspiracy, but because they are unfounded bollocks)

Perhaps Lweji, you simply dont understand how things work. There is no conspiracy, it is a matter of record how the principles of the EU were established, who authored them, and the main players from the 1940s until the present day. If you ever visit Strasbourg, Bruxelles or Luxembourg I suggest you consult Information Center and they will direct you to library services.

Talking of the media being a room full of liars, nice to see that Katie Hopkins has been pulled on her lies and landed the DM with a £150k bill for said lies. No doubt she hoped her 2am apology tweet would slip under the radar.

Something struck me earlier when catching up with this thread about Claig's Orwell reference.

Trump is the ultimate expression of Orwellian use of language and doublethink.

He is the man of the people, fighting the elite. Yet is the scion of inherited wealth who has used his elite position to stay there at all costs and in many cases has done so to the detriment of the working man.

He claims to be "draining the swamp" yet appoints people with party connections, or connections to the same global finance networks or global multinationals he so derided. He appoints a labour minister who doesn't believe in sick pay and many other workers statutory rights (some way to help the people). He also has appointed people who have donated to his campaign, is buying the right to sit in the cabinet not the sine qua non of being elite?

He has also claimed that his victory is the people over the elite, yet he didn't win the popular vote, and no I don't think that you can claim he won it by excluding California, it is the highest populated and that's just changing the rules as you go along.

He claims to be against big buisness but will slash corporation tax and taxes for the very richest who will benefit greatly.

The boot that will stamp on your face forever will of Trump's doing, yet you are so devoid of any critical thought and so indoctrinated that you will say: " Please Sir, may I have another."

Of course because most people won't understand what the elites are and what bad things they do

So Trump should make a smidgen of effort to explain what he means by the term. After all, he's had months to do it in.

I have said that most of them were supporters of anyone but Trump.... Now they work for Trump and therefore they work for the people because Trump works for the people.

Don't you think that makes them a bunch of hypocrites? Their eager acceptance of the jobs offered rather suggests that they can't believe their luck that the idiot Trump is prepared to put them in a position where they can manipulate US laws and the government to benefit themselves, their business interests and their friends.

And your response is irrelevant to the primary issue, namely that they are, very very plainly, members of the elite and thus their appointment demonstrates that there is absolutely nothing that Trump is going to do to rock the boat in terms of keeping them happy.

I did wonder why the extreme lefties on the Trump threads kept referencing snopes.

The thing is that what is posted on snopes is linked to sources, so you don't have to take their word for it. Trump however rarely links what he says to verifiable sources or even anything vaguely resembling the truth.

Just for the record, I've never referenced snopes.

thus far what she predicted has come to pass - Brexit and Trump.

Austria?

What I can not get over, leaving aside how much damage can be caused to the world in 4 years, is the fact that you have a man with the apparent impulse control of a 3 year old in charge of pressing the Big Button.

Which brings us to the truly serious question in all of these threads. Which whisky shall you choose to go down with? I always thought of myself as an Island Malt gal but at the moment, I've got a very fine Speyside. Is that wrong of me?

Anyway (having not left yet) who are these extreme lefties? All there seem to be on these bizarre threads are some quite reasonable posters pointing out the flaws in claig's hysterical and repetitive Trumporama posts. None of them seems to have espoused any particular political views apart from a dislike of spin, lies and con men, and a desire to see a more balanced discussion about the likely pros and cons of a Trump precedency. (See what I did there? I can be as smart as him and misspell stuff.)

No-one claims the Daily Mail are always wrong, but they do have an appalling history of posting outright lies. Have a look at only their most recent apology, for instance. Then there was the time they had to apologise to J K Rowling for printing lies about her; the time they had to retract a ridiculous story about a hotel restaurant in Nigeria that they said served human flesh; when they had to grovel to Amal Alamuddin for printing outright lies about her family and their response to her marriage; when they had to admit they'd printed scare stories about Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants flocking to the UK when work restrictions were lifted in 2013, when in fact immigration from those countries dropped; the lies they printed about Israel allegedly intentionally opening dams to flood the Gaza strip - but the dams didn't actually exist; Juliet Shaw's exposé of direct lies and fraudulent quotes after they interviewed her for what was ostensibly a straight story about people who move from towns to the country, and the threatening phone calls they made when she sued successfully for defamation; the damages they had to pay to Brian Paddick for defaming him; and the printing of a totally fictional report about the dismissal of Amanda Knox's appeal when in fact it had been upheld.

So yes, no-one should trust the Mail if they're looking for the truth, particularly if it's a story relating to their eternal right-wing, racist, homophobic and misogynist agenda.