Re: Donald Trump Sack Watch

by sportsczy Sun 17 May - 15:47:08

elitedam wrote:Sorry, but I disagree completely. We can sit here all day and argue about why conservatives did what they did, but they're the ones who voted for this clown, and they're the ones responsible for him.

I honestly don't know why these people decided to vote for him. All of the reasons that I see being given are kind of weak. They may have played a part, sure, but I don't think any of them are the main reason.

Very good reasons honestly. Any of the Republican candidates would have beat Hillary Clinton. Tbh, Trump getting the nod was considered good news by dems as he was the least likely to beat her. The reasons were as follows:
- Establishment politics are abhorred. Doesn't get more establishment than Clinton.
- The disparity in wealth... the rich got extremely rich while wages in the US have not increased in 15 years (inflation-adjusted). So the wealth created in the last 2 decades has entirely gone to the top 1% of the population. A lot of angry people.
- Iran deal. Extremely unpopular with conservatives and most moderates.
- Many felt that leadership was compromising its national interests to the benefit of China, Europe, etc. The blue-collar business owners and workers were not happy at all.
- Hillary is as unlikeable a person as you can get... although i think she is very capable. Most US voters barely know how to read... she couldn't come down to their level.

Democrats have gone completely tone-deaf once Obama got elected.

by elitedam Sun 17 May - 16:05:33

sportsczy wrote:
elitedam wrote:Sorry, but I disagree completely. We can sit here all day and argue about why conservatives did what they did, but they're the ones who voted for this clown, and they're the ones responsible for him.

I honestly don't know why these people decided to vote for him. All of the reasons that I see being given are kind of weak. They may have played a part, sure, but I don't think any of them are the main reason.

Very good reasons honestly. Any of the Republican candidates would have beat Hillary Clinton. Tbh, Trump getting the nod was considered good news by dems as he was the least likely to beat her. The reasons were as follows:
- Establishment politics are abhorred. Doesn't get more establishment than Clinton.
- The disparity in wealth... the rich got extremely rich while wages in the US have not increased in 15 years (inflation-adjusted). So the wealth created in the last 2 decades has entirely gone to the top 1% of the population. A lot of angry people.
- Iran deal. Extremely unpopular with conservatives and most moderates.
- Many felt that leadership was compromising its national interests to the benefit of China, Europe, etc. The blue-collar business owners and workers were not happy at all.
- Hillary is as unlikeable a person as you can get... although i think she is very capable. Most US voters barely know how to read... she couldn't come down to their level.

Democrats have gone completely tone-deaf once Obama got elected.

My point wasn't that there weren't reasons people voted for him. You gave a bunch of them and there are plenty more. My point is that I don't know the main reason or even if there is a main reason. A lot of people like to simplify things like Trump was elected just because of this or just because of that, and I don't buy that.

by elitedam Sun 17 May - 16:10:24

The Demon of Carthage wrote:I'm curious, if you don't think the extremism of the radical left is not the main reason he got elected, then what can it be in your opinion?

What do you mean by extremism of the radical left? Are you talking about overly sensitive twitter clowns or are you referring to progressive democratic politicians?

by McLewis Sun 17 May - 16:45:11

sportsczy wrote:
Democrats have gone completely tone-deaf once Obama got elected.

Would it be fair to say Republicans have not learned from this mistake and have, in fact, repeated it?

by sportsczy Sun 17 May - 17:04:56

McLewis wrote:
sportsczy wrote:
Democrats have gone completely tone-deaf once Obama got elected.

Would it be fair to say Republicans have not learned from this mistake and have, in fact, repeated it?

Republicans are actually insanely populist. There's a happy medium.

by M99 Sun 17 May - 17:29:00

Myesyats wrote:Well, he wasnt elected based on his experience or merit certainly

It was mainly his "drain the swamp" thing and the firm stance against sjw

People were getting tired of the social justice movement and tbh it has died out a bit since he been elected. If you make an action, expect a reaction. I think Trump was that reaction

Sigh this again. I'll just copy paste my previous response.

Nope, sorry, making the country less political correct had a miniscule if any significant effect on Trump being elected.

I feel the main reason why Trump got elected is because there's a large segment of people that felt marginalized in Obama's era. The US economy kept on improving from The Great Recession but their situation was not getting better. Trump came on and promised MAGA, which meant for all the temporarily embarrassed millionaires that they will finally become great. Trump was laying the blame on everyone that was easiest to blame for these people. They were not unemployed because of lack of skill but because of Mexicans taking their jobs. The man got their vote. Hilary was a continuation of the status quo and Trump was their golden ticket in their minds. Thats why all the people in rural Florida that never bothered to vote before showed up in droves in the last election and turned it into a red state.

I also feel that dehumanization and shaming fuelled anger and resentment a lot and drove voters to him. "White trash" is something that is okay to disparage and make fun of in America, and from the start everyone who showed a shred of support for Trump was ridiculed and belittled. This intolerance triggered even more animosity and got him more voters.

Also the insane amount of media coverage he got had a lot to do with it. I guarantee you a lot of his voters did not even know the existence of Jeb Bush and probably only knew of Ted Cruz as the guy opposing Trump. From 2015 he was just all over news, media, TV, internet 100x more than any other candidates.

So yeah, I don't think being sick of "libtards" was why people voted for Trump. I have no idea whats gonna happen in this election. Do these voters now see Trump as a liar and charlatan? Are they still deluded in the hope of him making America great? Or have their lives actually improved and they are vindicated? Or maybe they are not all that great but think Biden and the return of Obama era democrats will be worse than keeping Trump.

by El Gunner Sun 17 May - 18:37:09

Myesyats wrote:Well, he wasnt elected based on his experience or merit certainly

It was mainly his "drain the swamp" thing and the firm stance against sjw

People were getting tired of the social justice movement and tbh it has died out a bit since he been elected. If you make an action, expect a reaction. I think Trump was that reaction

i can't recall Trump ever being outspoken against SJWs? perhaps he was, or are you just deducting that his "racist" stances indirectly campaigned against that?

and i don't think SJWs have stopped tbh, intersectional issues have only gotten more apparent in the last few years

by M99 Tue 26 May - 20:17:26

His official page

by Nishankly Tue 26 May - 21:40:21

M99 wrote:His official page

Hilarious

The politics in the west and east is literally the same Laughing

by CBarca Thu 28 May - 15:04:14

Trump has gotten fact checked by Twitter and now him and the GOP are throwing an absolute hissy fit. My brief thoughts:

1) Despite what people will say, this is evidence Twitter is clearly not a liberal/Democratic party institution politics wise, because politically this is a stupid thing to do if you're a Dem.

2) On one hand, I would love fact checks on all politicians. Hold them accountable for the things they say on a platform that reaches a lot of people. On the other hand, I have reservations about it, in the same way that I have reservations about other social media "censorship". That's an extreme amount of power to give to a private company.

3) with that being said, it could certainly be argued that fact checks are a superior alternative to just removing material.

Either way, it's being reported that Trump is ready to take action against social media, because, you know, he was held accountable for once

by Art Morte Thu 28 May - 18:16:21

What's this executive order going to do to twitter and facebook?

by Freeza Thu 28 May - 19:13:32

Art Morte wrote:What's this executive order going to do to twitter and facebook?

Nothing lol

by Freeza Thu 28 May - 20:15:15

Freeza wrote:
Art Morte wrote:What's this executive order going to do to twitter and facebook?

Nothing lol

Twitter will just move operations and continue as scheduled. Only difference is loss of american jobs.

by sportsczy Thu 28 May - 20:45:43

Freeza wrote:
Freeza wrote:
Art Morte wrote:What's this executive order going to do to twitter and facebook?

Nothing lol

Twitter will just move operations and continue as scheduled. Only difference is loss of american jobs.

Won't even get to that. Based in California. The State Supreme Court will issue an immediate restraining order just like they did with his stupid Immigration Executive Order.

by Freeza Thu 28 May - 21:05:06

sportsczy wrote:
Freeza wrote:
Freeza wrote:

Nothing lol

Twitter will just move operations and continue as scheduled. Only difference is loss of american jobs.

Won't even get to that. Based in California. The State Supreme Court will issue an immediate restraining order just like they did with his stupid Immigration Executive Order.

Yeah, it won't become an actuality.

Trump trying to make that happen is an actual first amendment violation as it's intended. Government censoring.

Twitter notifying that something is a not factual, and easily proven as that, is not.

It's about time. Twitter and Facebook have been a huge, unchecked political propaganda machine for far too long.

by Hapless_Hans Thu 28 May - 22:02:48

Trump doesn't need an ACTUAL, real executive order with action against Twitter

all he needs to do is boast to his followers about how he did some 'big action' against Twitter who 'silence conservatives' even if nothing actual transpired at all

and he will do so

on Twitter

I mean it really is that dumb

Trump could tweet that he shut down Twitter, and his followers would cheer on

by Myesyats Thu 28 May - 23:22:33

Best alternative title to this story i seen on reddit: "Kid throws tantrum, breaks favorite toy" rofl

Also:
Trump Tweets Video Declaring That ‘The Only Good Democrat Is A Dead Democrat’

Also: If U.S. President Donald Trump goes ahead with his threat to close Twitter, the site can always relocate to Germany, a senior German official suggests Trump

lol

by sportsczy Thu 28 May - 23:28:39

As a side note, other than inciting violence, showing lewd acts and/or calling for lawlessness, social media platforms shouldn't get involved in censoring anything, false news, or not. That's just my opinion.

How about Biden actually doing his job and correcting Trump. That would be far better.

by Myesyats Thu 28 May - 23:40:16

Fact-checking isn't censoring though

by El Gunner Thu 28 May - 23:55:04

What's a fact these days lol

Totally agree with Sports

by Freeza Fri 29 May - 8:40:28

He’s really threatening to murder people now. Not surprised in the least.

A week ago he wanted white people to riot because they couldn’t get haircuts. Now black people and their allies are rioting to be heard because they keep getting killed unjustly.