Trump (Part 7)

[claig]

Even more Trump.

There may be 4 years of this.
Try to keep it lighthearted and not snide, please.
It's Christmas.

if it was it would have been a different strategy

Perhaps, but things only really changed for Trump with the FBI announcement and how it was spun.
I really don't think it was due to his particular strategy, but more due to circumstances (let's assume that Comey's announcement wasn't politically motivated...), and Trump was able to capitalise on it in key states.

Not forgetting that Hillary would also have used a more national strategy, with greater efforts on Republican states too, so the two would have cancelled each other.

But Claig, if the majority of the people didn't vote for something you can claim it was a win for the "people", thats the point. I'm well aware of how the system works, I don't need the electoral college ( or why this is part of the system) explained to me.

What you seem to need explained repeatedly is that if a majority of people didn't vote for something, you can't claim it as a victory for the people.

Its an example of the inconsistency of your arguments.

Yes, but I am having a laugh and not trying to score points off you or any other poster unless they try to score points off me. I repeat stuff about the people, the elites, Blair, Trump, the BBC, the Establishment teams etc because it is not personal saying that your posts are "meaningless", it is integral to why Trump won and why none of the Establishment saw it coming and it is also a laugh

What?

You are having a laugh? Trump is having a laugh? Trump voters are having a laugh?
The Presidency is a matter of laughing away? Just two fingers to it and let's all have a laugh?

I think you've hit the nail on the head there Lweji. The whole thing's a laugh and if ever DT says or does the wrong thing he is just joking and having a laugh. That's been a common theme since thread no. 1.

'So I'll repeat my point on political correctness. I think its actually a way of making it sound like you are being silenced, when you actually aren't, but when you debate things like race, climate change, gender etc, the prejudices of those on one side are exposed and they can't argue with the factual basis and rational arguments given to them, so then you claim you are being silenced. '

OK, that is your theory.

It is wrong. It is Guardian stuff.

I am not going to repeat it all because I already posted it all above, that political correctness is an Overton window control mechanism to set and control the agenda and narrative that the elite use to marginalise views that challenge their orthodoxy and they do it via social reproval etc in order to silence voices that disagree with them and marginalise them as "fruitcakes and loons" as Cameron tried about UKIP while the elite media, the Oxbridge teams at the Guardian, the BBC and the New Statesman slapped him on the back and laughed, all teh while totally unaware that the people's revolution had already therefore started in 2014, which ultimately led to Brexit and then Trump and the entire coming populist electoral success wave that is set to sweep Europe and end the elite's rule over the European people.

The Establishment and Oxbridge teams are scratching their heads trying to work out what happened to them and why they lost control with all their spin propaganda politically correct media unable to save them, their Oxbridge teams clueless, and I said it is all down to political correctness, which was their control mechanism.

The elite lost everything they had, Trump beat them and now they are finished and climate change could crumble next and the tears on election night will be as nothing to the "cry me a river" tears they will soon be crying. They lost everything they had worked for for decades because they overreached themselves, they flew too near the Sun, just like Icarus, they thought they could control and spin the people, they thought Blair's learned hand gestures would fool us, they thought they could take our freedoms with their DNA databases and their biometric Blair cards and they thought they could take our free speech with their "political correctness" Overton window and they never heard the people sing Les Miserables and Les Deplorables. We held a silent revolution, we called them idiots, we agreed with Trump that they were "very, very stupid people" and arrogant too because they despised and underestimated the people, the "fruitcakes" as the Oxbridge teams called us. We beat their teams and we are laughing, we "the fruitcakes", and they the spinners are crying.

Political correctness ended all the elite's dream and schemes. They thought they could chain us and stop us disagreeing with them and we broke free and won and Trump is the man who slayed their fire breathing dragon and fnally freed the people across the whole planet

But that is all just "meaningless" to the Oxbridge teams. They still don't get how we beat them and why.

Has anyone a view on how the downgrading of the Office of Congressional Ethics will help with the swamp draining?

'I think most people just took it as a Christmas truce. '

But some of us don't see it as a war and a truce and crossfire and sniping and snideyness and saying posts are "meaningless", some of us are interested in what Robert Peston, Oxbridge, former BBC favourite, calls an "earthquake" bigger than Thatcher's and Reagan's privatization and the collapse of communism and what it will mean for the whole world and our liberties and our freedom from political correctness and how the elites have lost and what stunts they will try to pull to regain control of the people and stop the people's revolutions all across Europe that are set to throw the buggers out of office all across Europe and end their wars and "divide and rule" and austerity and Big Brother political correctness.

And of course there is also the plight of the 172 and Owen Banter, their candidate, and how they will react now that Trump has pulled the rug out from under the spinners.

Why is it a bad thing to challenge people who use racist, sexist or dergotory remarks about any kind of minority? Why is it bad to encourage people not to use language that makes this commonplace?

It isn't a control method, more a method of challenging behaviours which are used to oppress and discriminate against people due to factors which are beyond their control, its a choice how you behave, not how you are born.

To say that its a leftist "conspiracy" is incorrect, it is rational that we challenge prejudice when we find it, and the language that allows these prejudices to continue. Even if they are used out of context it is perfectly rational and reasonable to tell people that you shouldn't use language that is derogatory, even if the person using it doesn't understand that it is so, because if the use of language is not challenged then the prejudices can remain also.

When you rail against political correctness its not that people stop you saying things, its that you are not able to articulate your argument well enough to justify the use of language or views that you want to do so. Its why you mistake political correctness for challenging climate change with facts for one.

The overton window btw has shifted so far to the right wing politically that Richard Nixon or any of the Tory governments of the 50s would be considered to be left wing these days, far more left wing than Obama and Blair.

The rest of your post demonstrates your hyperbolic yet counter factual posting style.

The elite have not lost, they are in the Oval Office and in the Cabinet. The elite will do just fine.

*'So I'll repeat my point on political correctness. I think its actually a way of making it sound like you are being silenced, when you actually aren't, but when you debate things like race, climate change, gender etc, the prejudices of those on one side are exposed and they can't argue with the factual basis and rational arguments given to them, so then you claim you are being silenced. '

It is actually quite accurate. :)

So what, in practical terms, will be different about the world this time next year? What recognizable changes wil have happened?

'But Claig, if the majority of the people didn't vote for something you can claim it was a win for the "people", thats the point.'

I have explained it several times (see above) that it was a defeat for the elites, the BBC, the teams, the Oxbridge set, the world's political elites, the spinners, the OECD, Davos and all the rest just like Brexit was a defeat for the same lot, so de facto it was therefore a win for the people because it is just the people (us) against the tiny elite (them). And yet you keep bringing up the same point as if I haven't already answered it several times and then say that what I write is "meaningless".

Take a farm as an analogy. Suppose the farmers held a vote and asked the turkeys to vote for Christmas. Suppose the majority of turkeys voted for Christmas because they thought the farmers were "very, very clever" people as the farmers all got a PPE from Oxford, but suppose there was an electoral college and that a turkey called Trump arose and explained to the turkeys in key states that the farmers from Oxbridge were "very, very stupid people", and obviously any turkey with their head screwed on the right way would agree, and suppose those turkeys won the election and Christmas dinner was cancelled and no turkeys were on the plate and the farmers who had the Farmers Broadcasting Corporation (FBC), funded on threat of imprisonment by taxes on the poor turkeys, on their side (staffed by mates form Oxbridge with PPEs and several Fellows at the Guardian) had failed in calling the turkey called Trump a "racist turkey" because he dared to call the Oxbridge farmers "very, very stupid people". Then Trump's victory would have been a victory for all the turkeys, even the ones who fell for the siren voices of the Oxbridge teams at the FBC, because no turkeys would have been served up for dinner.

That is what happened with the people's revolutions of 2016

That's why the people and the turkeys all had a very Merry Christmas and the elites were crying in their soup.

I have explained it several times (see above) that it was a defeat for the elites, the BBC, the teams, the Oxbridge set, the world's political elites, the spinners, the OECD, Davos and all the rest just like Brexit was a defeat for the same lot, so de facto it was therefore a win for the people because it is just the people (us) against the tiny elite (them).

You have said it several times. Explaining, not so much.

(poor Davos people)

is just the people (us) against the tiny elite (them)
And there's no "us". Because quite a few of "us", aka, the majority (or at least almost half of all voters for the UK referendum), disagree with you.

I'm looking forward to The Donald bringing manufacturing back to the USA.

Here's a company he could start with:

But it isn't what happened in the "peoples" revolutions of 2016.

In one 52% of those who voted, did so alongside the right wing of the Tory party and their elitist funders (billionaires, non dom tax exiles, the davos attending Murdoch etc).

In the other more than 50% of those who voted, voted against Trump and still lost.

You aren't explaining it at all, you are creating some consipiracy theory and saying the people won over it.

In both cases the elite won, in one case the majority of the people voted for the winning side, in the other the majority of the people didn't.

There is no revolution.

'Just two fingers to it and let's all have a laugh?'

Absolutely right. that is the people's revolution. All across the Western world, the majority of people now (don't believe the Oxbridge teams at the BBC who pretend it is a minority) have had enough of the "very, very stupid people" who have taken their sovereignty, who have tried to take their freedom with political correctness, who lie constantly about the wars and invasions they engage in, who con the public over everything, who serve the bankers and who impose austerity and on top of that say that there is nothing they can do to stop immigration, that's globalisation apparently.

If you aren't celebrating Trump's victory and laughing, then you have good company, neither are the elites.

They didn't call Trump a racist because he called them very stupid people, they called him racists because he made racist statements, has a history of doing so. They called him sexist cause he says things about grabbing women by the pussy, he has a string of sexual assualt allegations against him. They think he isn't a good candidate for office because of his conduct over decades not because he is going to shake things up.

So, how will the world be different this time next year?

"Absolutely right. that is the people's revolution."

Ah so you would actually agree with the Hunter S Thompson theory?

Sadly you can't back up anything you say with anything other than hyperbole.

'There is no revolution.'

Oh well, we'll have to disagree on that. You seem to have missed the enormity of what has happened, you think the elite won and that there is no people's revolution and populist wave about to destroy the elite's EU. Do you watch the PPEs on BBC Newsnight. Even they admit (through gritted teeth) that it was a revolution.

Even Rchard Wolff, Guardian contributor, Oxbridge which goes without saying, said

Trump's victory "is nothing short of a revolution"

If you don't think that the finest teams are holding crisis meetings to discuss the World of Trump, then you must be reading the New Statesman

'So, how will the world be different this time next year?'

Haven't you already asked this question and I answered it ages ago. I will search for my previous answer and repost it

The finest teams are holding meetings to discuss Trump because he is a loose cannon, prone to outbursts and uncontrolled behaviour.

Not because he is a risk.

In terms of the disenfranchised, left behind vote, yes both Brexit and Trump appealed to these people, but it isn't the "revolution".

In a revolution the elite are running for the hills grateful to keep their heads, they aren't sitting in control in the Oval Office and the cabinet, they aren't celebrating winning at the Ritz.

You've been conned.

Where to start?

'Just two fingers to it and let's all have a laugh?'

Absolutely right. that is the people's revolution.
Except it isn't. Revolutions are not jokes. And jokes are not revolutions.

All across the Western world, the majority of people now (don't believe the Oxbridge teams at the BBC who pretend it is a minority)
It's not the BBC, it's reality and voters.

have had enough of the "very, very stupid people" who have taken their sovereignty,
People have always had the vote. There have always been sufficient alternative parties. The people haven't voted for them.

who have tried to take their freedom with political correctness,
And yet, everyone has always been free to say what they want

who lie constantly about the wars and invasions they engage in
And so does Trump about many things. As do the people he has appointed. So, hardly any difference at best.

who con the public over everything
Again, Trump's expertise.

who serve the bankers and who impose austerity
Because the bankers and the lack of regulation by GOP (and equivalent) have led to real estate and banking crashes? Which Trump used to make more money.

and on top of that say that there is nothing they can do to stop immigration, that's globalisation apparently.
They don't say there's nothing they can do. Regardless of what you call the elites, there have always been two sides, for and against immigration. It's not a new Trump thing.

If you aren't celebrating Trump's victory and laughing, then you have good company, neither are the elites.

Yes, I am in good company. Of a majority of US voters. :) and not only.
But, I'd rather be alone than in bad company.

I can't find my answer on this thread, I think it was on thread 6 or 5 when you asked the same question then. But my answer will be similar

We don't know what will happen yet, but we do know that Trump has killed political correctness which liberates all of us - Germaine Greer, Julie Bindel and anyone with common sense -that the elites are terrified and have been defeated so they are back in their box frightened of what Trump might do to them, Trump will bring jobs back to the US and begin a similar wave of common sense across Europe which will end up bringing jobs back for us too (despite the numerous articles from Oxbridge teams at the Guardian saying Trump is wrong to do that and Theresa May should lecture Trump about how wrong it is as well as explaining to him what horrible men Farage and Putin are, all written by a Fellow with Honours from Oxbridge or some such), the populist insurgencies will continue throughout Europe driven by the will of the people to end the stupidity of political correctness and rule by the "intellectuals yet idiots" who served as interns in banks, and the EU will already totter on the verge of collapse.

The Jihadi backed war against Assad in Syria will end, Trump will smash Isis, refugees will be able to return to Syria and peace will reign (despite the best efforts of the elites and their teams). Trump will be the most popular President ever, elites wil be on the run, holed up in hideouts in far off places and Trump fans will dance to Boogie Wonderland

And that is only the half of what will happen. There is also the 172 and the crisis they will undergo as all their spin fails to impress the people etc etc

Some top Oxbridge Establishment journalists are already saying that 2017 will be "Europe's year of rage", elites are bracing themselves, teenage whizzkids and Oxbridge teams have been warned that all leave is cancelled as the Trump Tsunami sweeps across Europe and the elite have to batten down the hatches and hope they make it through to 2018

And as for the people. Of course, they will be laughing

Yes, but Wolffe also wrote, in November:

"... if Trump pursues a fraction of what he so clearly promised through this extraordinary election."

That is the key. Will he?
Even a fraction?

Because apart from seeming factious over Twitter, his promises look empty now.

But this is also what he said about the outcome of that "revolution"

"But, over time, the Trump revolution will be felt in every corner, as the tax base is decimated by a tax-avoiding president, and the deficit balloons out of control. There is no escape from an economic policy that will bankrupt the world’s largest economy, in the hands of a businessman with plenty of experience of bankruptcy."

And his latest commentary:
American democracy is being derailed. Can faith be restored?
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/20/american-democracy-derailed-donald-trump

"But the truth is that Trump’s win differs from the Brexit referendum in one rather important regard: he does not represent the will of the people. The critics of the Brexit result are constantly hectored into silence by those who brandish the voting tallies: anyone who opposes Brexit is surely an undemocratic elitist."

"Trump can make no such claim to represent the majority of Americans. That may not stop him from doing so. But the facts are stubborn things: he only represents the majority of the electoral college."

Picking over that, the two actual predictions are

1 Trump will smash ISIS
2 The war in Syria will end and refugees will be able to return.

Is that right?