President Trump & the USA

[Carl the Llama]

Further suggestions that Trump's worldview could be ironically guided by 'fake news':

Wheels within wheels..

Edited 4 March 2017 by Carl the Llama
Disclaimer:  This is CNN so it's biased and the video is hosted by a biased clickbaity youtube channel. A critical eye is required when approaching this material.

[Rincewind]

I suspected him of being paranoid. When he looks in the mirror he thinks his reflection is out to get him.

[Strokes]

19 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

I suspected him of being paranoid. When he looks in the mirror he thinks his reflection is out to get him.

If my reflection looked like that, I'd probably feel pretty vexed.

[Thracian]

6 hours ago, Webbo said:

Would you? If anyone puts a link to the Mail on here it's laughed at before anyone's read it ( maybe not you). If a media outlet has a different view to people it's dismissed automatically.

Sadly that's entirely true. As is the concept of anyone actually reading the Mail or Express. I'm amazed so many people seem to literally hate the idea of others rejecting their view of things. Their reaction amounts to a form of bullying really.

 

They're not democratic at all though they might pay lip service to the concept of democracy.

 

They're the sort of people who'd control your every waking moment if they could by one excuse or another be it political, religious, philosophical or simply a desire to dominate and control. There should be a cure for it but there's no signs that I can see.  

 

     

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

There was an interesting guy on "100 days" the other night that suggested a way to counteract Trump would be to just ignore him and I can see that could ring true. i get the sense Trump enjoy's both the adulation and condemnation in equal messaures.

 

He also suggested people could become quite bored with the whole circus eventually - another decent prediction.

 

They also showed his speech at a Naval base as he launched the Gerald Ford Aircraft Carrier, flaunting his navy jacket and cap - where he had the crowd eating out of the palm of his hand as he talked about increasing Amercia's military capability, making it world leading... and as impressive as it was, a creating thought came into my mind... what country is he planning on invading! 

 

 

[Carl the Llama]

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

More food for thought.  No surprises that his disapproval rating is higher than his approval rating but it's certainly closer than I previously believed.  Also a little bit surprising is that his disapproval rating was the lower one until early Feb.  Proof if ever that you should always take news with a pinch of salt (though maybe don't go so far as screaming fake news, after all the polls showing lower approval use a more reliable methodology according to that sites rating system not that I fully understand it, going to bookmark this site to go over some time when I'm not trying to get to sleep )

[SpacedX]

On 27/02/2017 at 12:03, Thracian said:

 

The BBC is not in that position. They are declaredly supposed to be unbiased. Not the manipulators they're increasingly becoming.    

 

UKIP on the Andrew Marr show for the second consecutive time in the space of a week - Paul Nuttall this time. Damn those BBC fifth columnists. 

[Facecloth]

8 minutes ago, Line-X said:

UKIP on the Andrew Marr show for the second consecutive time in the space of a week - Paul Nuttall this time. Damn those BBC fifth columnists. 

Ah, but allowing the likes of UKIP on shows on a regular basis means their stupidity gets shown up more regularly. Damn bias BBC giving idiotic bigoted racists airtime to show how much of an idiotic bigoted racist they are.

[Nick]

16 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Ah, but allowing the likes of UKIP on shows on a regular basis means their stupidity gets shown up more regularly. Damn bias BBC giving idiotic bigoted racists airtime to show how much of an idiotic bigoted racist they are.

 

That must be why we keep the Daily Mail readers around on here.

 

[Thracian]

23 hours ago, Rincewind said:

It appears that I own a multi million corporation earning 150 million profit last year and paid no corporation tax.

 

After 50 years working and paying into the system it seems that I have turned into a lazy bastard robbing others of the £170pw that I receive. I'm sorry for not working still for £120 on ZHC or part time then dropping dead before reaching 70.

I am not offended by the personal attacks. I find them amusing.

 

With Trump and the USA I would imagine there are a few backhanders going about and you have to be naive not to realise this. 

Money talks as they say/

 

 

Corruption's not exclusive to the rich and privileged. It's absolutely everywhere. Need? Greed? Adrenalin? Whatever the reason people are forever working some fiddle or flanker to gain advantage.

 

In the corporate boardrooms or on the streets. In the political corridors of power and in the freemasonry. On the run down council estates and in the leafy lanes of Surrey. It's all a matter of size and organisation really...or lack of it. 

 

I might have hope in abundance but I don't have faith or trust in anyone or anything outside the famlly.

 

It's a lot easier that way. With no exceptions and no expectations, every success or positive experience can be enjoyed and celebrated for the moment and every setback disregarded as inevitable over time.

   

Like Ranieri for example. I was thrilled by our title win yet couldn't give a toss about his sacking or his £3m payoff.

 

You always seem to envy the "have's" but don't really have the nerve (or vigour now) to be one. And, sadly, chances evaporate over time. 

 

But if that equates to depression forget it because really, it's a lack of realism.

 

Concern yourself with what's possible given who you are, not what's not. And make the £170-a-week work for you. Cos that's your budget, the same as everyone else has a budget, large or small.

 

How you make it work - honourably or otherwise - is down to you. But don't judge others just because they might have more nerve or flannel than you or less of a conscience.

 

When Tony Blair sent our soldiers to war in Iraq to get killed and injured in a place he didn't belong, he didn't fight on the frontline with them yet he's been feted, honoured and rewarded in abundance, As a supposed "Good Christian" he became the perfect excuse for anyone to do what the hell they like. 

 

Not for me, mind.

 

I didn't vote for or believe in the bloke to begin with. That emphasises the strength and value of the "faithless" point I made earlier and just means I have to battle ith my own conscience. 

 

Make your own rules for your own happiness. Believe in you and yours and to hell with judging what others chose to do. It's the perfect antidote to the burden of bitterness. 

  

 

.     

     

 

 

[Nick]

2 minutes ago, Thracian said:

 

 

Corruption's not exclusive to the rich and privileged. It's absolutely everywhere. Need? Greed? Adrenalin? Whatever the reason people are forever working some fiddle or flanker to gain advantage.

 

In the corporate boardrooms or on the streets. In the political corridors of power and in the freemasonry. On the run down council estates and in the leafy lanes of Surrey. It's all a matter of size and organisation really...or lack of it. 

 

I might have hope in abundance but I don't have faith or trust in anyone or anything outside the famlly.

 

It's a lot easier that way. With no exceptions and no expectations, every success or positive experience can be enjoyed and celebrated for the moment and every setback disregarded as inevitable over time.

   

Like Ranieri for example. I was thrilled by our title win yet couldn't give a toss about his sacking or his £3m payoff.

 

You always seem to envy the "have's" but don't really have the nerve (or vigour now) to be one. And, sadly, chances evaporate over time. 

 

But if that equates to depression forget it because really, it's a lack of realism.

 

Concern yourself with what's possible given who you are, not what's not. And make the £170-a-week work for you. Cos that's your budget, the same as everyone else has a budget, large or small.

 

How you make it work - honourably or otherwise - is down to you. But don't judge others just because they might have more nerve or flannel than you or less of a conscience.

 

When Tony Blair sent our soldiers to war in Iraq to get killed and injured in a place he didn't belong, he didn't fight on the frontline with them yet he's been feted, honoured and rewarded in abundance, As a supposed "Good Christian" he became the perfect excuse for anyone to do what the hell they like. 

 

Not for me, mind.

 

I didn't vote for or believe in the bloke to begin with. That emphasises the strength and value of the "faithless" point I made earlier and just means I have to battle ith my own conscience. 

 

Make your own rules for your own happiness. Believe in you and yours and to hell with judging what others chose to do. It's the perfect antidote to the burden of bitterness. 

  

 

.     

     

 

 

So this is still the Trump thread, right?

[Thracian]

45 minutes ago, Line-X said:

UKIP on the Andrew Marr show for the second consecutive time in the space of a week - Paul Nuttall this time. Damn those BBC fifth columnists. 

 

Marr's actually a good interviewer. But doesn't the reason for his being there escape you. He's there to be caught napping, ridiculed and trapped. The same as Farage when he's used.

 

Some they use to promote an agenda, some they use to destroy one...or try to.

 

What they don't do is try to destroy the arguments of those they wish to support and promote. I'd happily do the job for them if they asked but they don't and never would, for all that I've worked or even done shifts for many arms of our national media over the years.

 

I'm not one they'd naturally chose...and that's my point in a way because they do chose their staff and it's reflected in their ideals and editorial slant.          

[Thracian]

4 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

So this is still the Trump thread, right?

I as replying to Rincey. You don't have to read it for all that the subject might as easily apply to Trump as anyone else. 

[Nick]

1 minute ago, Thracian said:

 

I'd happily do the job for them if they asked but they don't and never would, for all that I've worked or even done shifts for many arms of our national media over the years.

 

I'm not one they'd naturally chose...and that's my point in a way because they do chose their staff and it's reflected in their ideals and editorial slant.          

 

[SpacedX]

Just now, Thracian said:

 

Marr's actually a good interviewer. But doesn't the reason for his being there escape you. He's there to be caught napping, ridiculed and trapped. The same as Farage when he's used.

         

As I've pointed out to you before, the likes of Farage and Nuttall need absolutely no assistance in terms of being "caught napping, ridiculed and trapped" As Facecloth observes, they succeed in indicting themselves by virtue of their neanderthal rhetoric and innate bigotry. If the BBC do indeed choose to dangle these clowns in front of the public for their own ridicule then you can hardly be hold them responsible if their guests, of their own accord, subsequently hang themselves in the process.

[Nick]

8 minutes ago, Line-X said:

As I've pointed out to you before, the likes of Farage and Nuttall need absolutely no assistance in terms of being "caught napping, ridiculed and trapped" As Facecloth observes, they succeed in indicting themselves by virtue of their neanderthal rhetoric and innate bigotry. If the BBC do indeed choose to dangle these clowns in front of the public for their own ridicule then you can hardly be hold them responsible if their guests, of their own accord, subsequently hang themselves in the process.

You don't get it - these people have a right to express their innate bigotry but what we can't do is laugh at their opinions and call them racist neanderthals because that's PC gone mad.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

You don't get it - these people have a right to express their innate bigotry but what we can't do is laugh at their opinions and call them racist neanderthals because that's PC gone mad.

This is the Trump thread, right?

[Guest]

Just now, Swan Lesta said:

You don't get it - these people have a right to express their innate bigotry but what we can't do is laugh at their opinions and call them racist neanderthals because that's PC gone mad.

Yet it's the left who are 'snowflakes' apparently.

[Nick]

Just now, Webbo said:

This is the Trump thread, right?

 

I'm not sure it matters anymore when Tony is in here writing essays on Blair and Raneiri, offering his qualified services as the new Anchorman of politics and despite labelling all lecturers, scientists and the legal professions as arrogant suggesting that people who find abhorrence in some of his views require curing.....

 

Let the healing begin.

 

Unbelievable Jeff.

[Rincewind]

My posts were related to Trump as well as most countries where the elite rule the masses and use the media to influence. I still do not get this agenda thing. People in America have protested about the removal of Obamacare. A scheme that helps people that cannot pay the huge medical bills and insurance premiums that are in place. Yet it seems that they have an 'agenda' according to those that will benefit the most from the bills and insurance. That is the ones that own and run the companies. No doubt many fund the Trump administration. Yet the people that care about the underdog are deemed in the wrong.

There are always scapegoats and people fall for the 'shirkers and workers' type headline, which incidently was first used by the Blair Government who was supposed to be Labour. 

 

As for me being envious and jealous of people with money that is bollox. I have a brother that ran a B&B and went on to own an Hotel. I also have a sister who is the MD of a furniture building business in Workington. Neither are right wing Tories and teat employees fairly. I do not agree with fraud of any kind be it benefit or tax evasion. But the truth is,the amount of benefit fraud is very small, and if it was not for certain groups telling us all we would hear would be the figures issued by the government. If it was not for people writing for housing or medical journals that have knowledge of the sector the public would just have the Murdoch run tabloids to rely on. If it was not for DNO and organisations like it people would still think all homeless people are drug addicts  and alcoholics.

There was a demonstration in London yesterday re the NHS. How much coverage did the BBC give it?

 

Apologies for the long post. I will retire now from posting.

[leicsmac]

In an attempt to get this back on topic...

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39170985

 

In a way, this is smart - Trump has got as far as he has by conceiving and going after imaginary boogeymen (supporters lap that up), so when the heat is on...come up with another!

[SMX11]

I think it is clear that he is facing a lot of resistance from within the civil service and the intelligence agencies. Targeting Flynn who was an outspoken critic of a lot of their activities does seem rather convenient.

He should concentrate on his economic and health policies as he is spending far too much political capital on the immigration and beating off the 'Russia did it' claims.

 

[Thracian]

56 minutes ago, Line-X said:

As I've pointed out to you before, the likes of Farage and Nuttall need absolutely no assistance in terms of being "caught napping, ridiculed and trapped" As Facecloth observes, they succeed in indicting themselves by virtue of their neanderthal rhetoric and innate bigotry. If the BBC do indeed choose to dangle these clowns in front of the public for their own ridicule then you can hardly be hold them responsible if their guests, of their own accord, subsequently hang themselves in the process.

That's your opinion and their problem if they fall victim but this debate is about bias and you've highlighted it still further rather than anything else though I doubt you'll want to see it that way or concede as much.

 

As for the "neanderthal rhetoric" you mention the UKIP top table speakers I've listened to - for instance at their conference two years ago - talked sound common sense in the main.

 

My problem with them was their petty, seemingly self-centred organisation which was beset with loose or supposedly strategic (but actually loose and badly researched) cannons who should never have been selected as representatives in any role and the constant and totally out-of-order own goals that resulted and delighted a pack-hunting media which really didn't want anyone knocking their own standpoints.

 

Now, for all that the British electorate has voted for so much of what those conference speakers spoke about so sensibly and so moderately, UKIP as a party is badly in need of renewed purpose and direction and it won't get that without sound leadership (Farage is a compelling speaker but not necessarily such a natural leader), a far more careful, yet inspired, candidate selection process and the kind of media savvy they can only dream about.

 

I really doubt they even understand the mindset and determination of their enemies or how to counter deceitful, yet calculatedly impressionist public antagonism and the scandalous willingness of  the press to paint unambiguously moderate people as raging racists.

 

But then the people "painting" had and have their own aims and agendas to promote, some of which have already resulted in so much negative change in our society.

 

 

 

         

 

  

[Thracian]

1 hour ago, Rincewind said:

 

 

I do not agree with fraud of any kind be it benefit or tax evasion. But the truth is,the amount of benefit fraud is very small, and if it was not for certain groups telling us all we would hear would be the figures issued by the government. If it was not for people writing for housing or medical journals that have knowledge of the sector the public would just have the Murdoch run tabloids to rely on. If it was not for DNO and organisations like it people would still think all homeless people are drug addicts  and alcoholics.

There was a demonstration in London yesterday re the NHS. How much coverage did the BBC give it?

Apologies for the long post. I will retire now from posting.

 

 

What figures do you actually have on benefit fraud?  

 

And do they include all the income enhancement scams which would make a nonsense of such figures?.

 

Or the countless other ploys that help pay the bills and a good many other expenses besides - like up to date phones, baccy, booze, cars, decent colour tv's.

parties, presents and bouncy castle for the kids in some cases.

 

I did detail them in an earlier post but crossed them out because I only wished to highlight my point rather than launch an attack on people who usually have enough problems as it is.

 

The reality is that benefit fraud is incalculable because it, and other fiddles, will never be nearly or accurately represented on any list of social deprivation or benefit statistics. 

 

You continue to see things through such selective eyes. 

.

But it's just not the full or even accurate story in the real world, though I can't and won't go into detail.

 

The real shame to me is that the cost of fraud probably stops more money going to people who genuinely need it but there's other money could be saved for the same purpose too.  

 

    

 

  

       

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

That's your opinion and their problem if they fall victim but this debate is about bias and you've highlighted it still further rather than anything else though I doubt you'll want to see it that way or concede as much.

How?

 

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

the UKIP top table speakers I've listened to - for instance at their conference two years ago - talked sound common sense in the main.

  

Who? Examples?

 

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

Now, for all that the British electorate has voted for so much of what those conference speakers spoke about so sensibly and so moderately, 

 

We're still talking UKIP right?

 

The British electorate were woefully ill informed on both sides of the referendum vote. The Brexit vote was ultimately championed by a narrow margin predicated largely by social media meme and the bias in the r/w tabloid press which you strangely and rather hypocritically remain impervious to. I found the rhetoric from the Brexit camp to be as disingenuous as it was shameful. Pointedly, I thought the most compelling argument to leave came from the left and the most persuasive argument behind Remain emanated from voices on the right. 

 

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

I really doubt they even understand the mindset and determination of their enemies or how to counter deceitful, yet calculatedly impressionist public antagonism and the scandalous willingness of  the press to paint unambiguously moderate people as raging racists.

 

Breaking News - UKIP in deceitful public antagonism victimisation shock.

 

irony¹

ˈʌɪrəni/

noun

 

1. the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

   "‘Don't go overboard with the gratitude,’ he rejoined with heavy irony"

   synonyms:

   sarcasm, sardonicism, dryness, causticity, sharpness, acerbity, acid, bitterness, trenchancy, mordancy, cynicism; More

   • a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often wryly amusing as a result.

     plural noun: ironies

     "the irony is that I thought he could help me"

     synonyms:

     paradox, paradoxical nature, incongruity, incongruousness, peculiarity "the irony of the situation hit her"
   • a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a character's words or actions is clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character.

     noun: dramatic irony; plural noun: tragic irony

 

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

But then the people "painting" had and have their own aims and agendas to promote, some of which have already resulted in so much negative change in our society.

If you had said 'some of the people' we may have actually agreed on something. Press aside I do agree that the paint by numbers social engineering of the 80s and 90s was somewhat of an idealised 'hackney'-ed pastiche coming from a rather limited palette. 

 

However, in respect of the press, let's remind ourselves of what you said again...

 

1 hour ago, Thracian said:

But then the people "painting" had and have their own aims and agendas to promote, some of which have already resulted in so much negative change in our society.

 

Yeah, that Rothermere guy or Murdoch bloke and their incessant egalitarian values, always banging on about tolerance and the push for progressive social reform. Bloody commies.