|
Post by mark687 on Jan 22, 2017 22:53:22 GMT
is all I can I say to that!
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by icecreamdf on Jan 22, 2017 23:08:34 GMT
Well, the Doctor probably already knew all about the Trump presidency at that point.
|
|
|
Post by coffeeaddict on Jan 22, 2017 23:10:45 GMT
If we're honest, I don't think anyone really does know. It could be that everyone was compacted together or something. Perhaps the media were faking, unlikely though that is. We just don't know. The experts on crowd analysis have said that Trump's crowd was smaller, but that's not really the important thing. We've had 44 white presidents before, and Trump is not popular in the DC area. There isn't really any shame in not having a big innaguration crowd. What is important is that Trump is making such a big deal about it, and is just flat out lying (or being alternatively truthful) and attacking the media for reporting honestly. What he is doing by harping on this, is getting the media to focus on his comments and give less attention to the protests against him which have been taking place all over this weekend. Sadly it works because look what people are focusing on.
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jan 22, 2017 23:12:22 GMT
I do not expect to survive the next four years by actually listening to things that he says, it's going to be whatever happens to pop into his fuzzy little mind and it will cause my eyes to roll back into my head so violently every time as to make it likely they will get stuck that way and require costly medical assistance. (Sadly, it will be his supporters who are least flattered of all by this since just pulling facts out of your arse like that may also serve as a way of saying, "I don't think the people who voted for me actually have enough brain cells to remember all of eight hours ago let alone eight years ago, so I can basically just say whatever I want" and curiously even I give conservative voters way more credit than that). I'll probably have to have the media predigest it all for me and sugar-coat it by acting like he'd actually said something that made any sense (like they already seem to be doing) rather than risk personal injury by hearing his factual atrocities proceed from his own mouth directly. I probably sound like a sore loser, but for what it's worth I was never the least bit rabidly devoted to Hillary (I haven't forgotten some offensive mangling and obscuring of truth that happened in regard to military action during the Clinton administration) and I've been doing some ruminating over the role of the Electoral College in this since it finally occurs to me that electorates might have a duty to country that should ultimately take precedence over duty to district. I take some small reassurance after having thought of that to read up a bit and observe that I may not be the only one thinking along those lines thankfully. I still don't really know the electoral process very well, and it's only really become a concern more recently since I believe the current and previous conservative Presidential candidates have been elected by an electoral vote that's inconsistent with the popular vote, which otherwise hasn't happened since the late 1800s. I'm actually surprised to be reading that many states retain the liberty to impose fines on electorates should they become "faithless electors" (sounds like a dirty word almost) and vote their conscience rather than their commitment, or revise their vote in accordance with a national majority, as this sounds to my reckoning to be essentially coercive. I had always just assumed the process had been much better designed to be insulated from coercion. Silly me... It's a bit awkward in its way. Especially after how much we had it drummed into ours head as school children learning American history that if there's anything worth a rebellion it's that most egregious of all sinister things, taxation without representation, to then consider a situation where the majority of voters as a whole end up lacking the representation they are entitled at the highest office (do I have that correctly?), somehow naturally wants to seems very wrong to me. I honestly think I'd be much less incensed or worried if Trump had won the popular vote, and I'm wondering if it isn't honestly time for America to reconsider the electoral process. It of course might be my candidate that loses next time as a result of revision, but it might just be more important whether a nation as a whole is genuinely afforded representation. Other than that, I do already know the drill for when the President puts reality into the paper shredder with his every utterance. Having all of twenty brain cells left myself, I can still dimly remember that the last conservative to occupy the Oval Office was also an endless fountain of arsefacts (Sorry, what were they? Alternative facts. Right...) as was his cabinet. I'm even starting to dimly remember the most effective remedy for that terrible headache I've been getting from banging my head on the TV lately... :-)
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jan 22, 2017 23:27:09 GMT
If you are not interested in it, muckypup , you are free to not read this thread. People were interested in discussing it, so a thread was created for that purpose. For the record, it seems a lot of people outside the US do care on it, based on reactions and demonstrations around the world. Just as a lot of people outside the UK and Europe care about Brexit. My personal intake of news media includes world news, not only local news. Please don't get me wrong, it was not a comment on people here, or people's opinions, nor the fact I am not interested. just a comment on the media whirlwind around it, outside of the US & every twobit celeb condemning trump often for their colum inches & profile. also the fact that at present nothing has really happened, only ceremony. just please stop trying to stir everything up, to create more stories. its a news article at present, not wall to wall to coverage and debate. There really was no need to cancel regular programming and show it on the 2 main channels as well as all the news channels. i know the marches have been well attended, but much like the ones we saw in the uk over the Iraq war, benefit cuts, brexit, nhs. They are quickly forgotten and the political steam train rolls on. i fully understand its importance to our US friends but just saying that from my point of view the coverage & speculation is as ridiculous as trump is. and let me just stress this is only my view you don't have a great track record of picking your presidents......I doubt many were much better than trump, we just have better means to catch them out.
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jan 22, 2017 23:44:42 GMT
This quote is especially relevant “You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common,” the Doctor said. “They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.”
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jan 22, 2017 23:46:21 GMT
and let me just stress this is only my view you don't have a great track record of picking your presidents......I doubt many were much better than trump, we just have better means to catch them out. I will venture to say that all of them will turn out to be better than Trump. And many have been MUCH better than Trump could be.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jan 22, 2017 23:48:09 GMT
The experts on crowd analysis have said that Trump's crowd was smaller, but that's not really the important thing. We've had 44 white presidents before, and Trump is not popular in the DC area. There isn't really any shame in not having a big innaguration crowd. What is important is that Trump is making such a big deal about it, and is just flat out lying (or being alternatively truthful) and attacking the media for reporting honestly. What he is doing by harping on this, is getting the media to focus on his comments and give less attention to the protests against him which have been taking place all over this weekend. Sadly it works because look what people are focusing on. Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin information to get his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 22, 2017 23:48:31 GMT
I do not expect to survive the next four years by actually listening to things that he says, it's going to be whatever happens to pop into his fuzzy little mind and it will cause my eyes to roll back into my head so violently every time as to make it likely they will get stuck that way and require costly medical assistance. (Sadly, it will be his supporters who are least flattered of all by this since just pulling facts out of your arse like that may also serve as a way of saying, "I don't think the people who voted for me actually have enough brain cells to remember all of eight hours ago let alone eight years ago, so I can basically just say whatever I want" and curiously even I give conservative voters way more credit than that). I'll probably have to have the media predigest it all for me and sugar-coat it by acting like he'd actually said something that made any sense (like they already seem to be doing) rather than risk personal injury by hearing his factual atrocities proceed from his own mouth directly. I probably sound like a sore loser, but for what it's worth I was never the least bit rabidly devoted to Hillary (I haven't forgotten some offensive mangling and obscuring of truth that happened in regard to military action during the Clinton administration) and I've been doing some ruminating over the role of the Electoral College in this since it finally occurs to me that electorates might have a duty to country that should ultimately take precedence over duty to district. I take some small reassurance after having thought of that to read up a bit and observe that I may not be the only one thinking along those lines thankfully. I still don't really know the electoral process very well, and it's only really become a concern more recently since I believe the current and previous conservative Presidential candidates have been elected by an electoral vote that's inconsistent with the popular vote, which otherwise hasn't happened since the late 1800s. I'm actually surprised to be reading that many states retain the liberty to impose fines on electorates should they become "faithless electors" (sounds like a dirty word almost) and vote their conscience rather than their commitment, or revise their vote in accordance with a national majority, as this sounds to my reckoning to be essentially coercive. I had always just assumed the process had been much better designed to be insulated from coercion. Silly me... It's a bit awkward in its way. Especially after how much we had it drummed into ours head as school children learning American history that if there's anything worth a rebellion it's that most egregious of all sinister things, taxation without representation, to then consider a situation where the majority of voters as a whole end up lacking the representation they are entitled at the highest office (do I have that correctly?), somehow naturally wants to seems very wrong to me. I honestly think I'd be much less incensed or worried if Trump had won the popular vote, and I'm wondering if it isn't honestly time for America to reconsider the electoral process. It of course might be my candidate that loses next time as a result of revision, but it might just be more important whether a nation as a whole is genuinely afforded representation. Other than that, I do already know the drill for when the President puts reality into the paper shredder with his every utterance. Having all of twenty brain cells left myself, I can still dimly remember that the last conservative to occupy the Oval Office was also an endless fountain of arsefacts (Sorry, what were they? Alternative facts. Right...) as was his cabinet. I'm even starting to dimly remember the most effective remedy for that terrible headache I've been getting from banging my head on the TV lately... :-) To be honest it took me a long time to come around to Clinton. In the end, she was the clearly the only competent choice. That said, if the GOP would have nominated John Kasich I might well have voted for him. Yeah I disagree with at least 50% of what he believes but he is also a conservative who understands the nature of politics and a lot of things could have gotten done. Instead we have the con man and the radical Pence. It's going to be a long two years.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 22, 2017 23:52:00 GMT
What he is doing by harping on this, is getting the media to focus on his comments and give less attention to the protests against him which have been taking place all over this weekend. Sadly it works because look what people are focusing on. Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly. You can't blame Trump for that. 20 plus years of conservative media got people ready. Trump is just the first one to really cash in on it. Alternative facts really is the summation of a long process.
|
|
|
Post by coffeeaddict on Jan 22, 2017 23:54:16 GMT
What he is doing by harping on this, is getting the media to focus on his comments and give less attention to the protests against him which have been taking place all over this weekend. Sadly it works because look what people are focusing on. Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin information to get his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly. Well I'm forced to pay a reasonable amount of attention to what happens in the States for work. Anything that happens to the U.S. Economy is felt ten times worse in Canada - I'm hoping that his bluster settles and he enters reality, I'm just not holding my breath.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 23, 2017 0:02:21 GMT
Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin information to get his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly. Well I'm forced to pay a reasonable amount of attention to what happens in the States for work. Anything that happens to the U.S. Economy is felt ten times worse in Canada - I'm hoping that his bluster settles and he enters reality, I'm just not holding my breath. Oh Canada. You lucky people.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jan 23, 2017 0:06:21 GMT
Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly. You can't blame Trump for that. 20 plus years of conservative media got people ready. Trump is just the first one to really cash in on it. Alternative facts really is the summation of a long process. Very true. As was pointed out in this podcast that was broadcast during the election season, in which the podcaster interviewed a right wing talk show host, Charlie Sykes: Media as Referee? Not AnymoreMr. Sykes says, in part:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 0:08:03 GMT
If I'm honest the problem is that there isn't much sexism in the UK or the US, so they're just victimising themselves, in my opinion. What they should be protesting is the terrible evils that people commit towards women in Saudi Arabia and certain other eastern countries. That's what I mean when I say that it stopped being about America and became about our world. It's solidarity, a union of interests across everywhere. They're protesting all inequality, that which is inflicted against themselves and especially against those elsewhere who suffer a great deal worse elsewhere. The United Kingdom and the United States are in a position where they can rally against that sort of thing without getting shot down in the street and that's not something to be squandered. Because if you can make your voice heard at home, then maybe, just maybe others will see that it is possible for them to do the same. All great change begins where you live. Exactly. Change is built on dissent. And if that was day two of a Trump administration, well, that was as impressive a display of dissent as I have ever seen. The key, as you allude to, is maintaining that passion & energy. Of focusing that passion & energy into change. I'm fond as saying we get the government we vote for. If those people who marched take that energy & passion and turn it into votes. Change can come pretty quickly. Be the change, as the last man said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 0:14:17 GMT
All this talk of "alternative facts" reminds me of the Babylon 5 episode "The Deconstruction of Falling Stars", in which the state espoused "good facts" over actual truth. Ah, the Orwellean goodfact, yes I know it well. They were fortunate to still have Delenn -- Bingo! And this is part of the reason he is so scary. He can spin his supporters to believe whatever he wants them to believe. We live in a post-fact era. Sadly. You can't blame Trump for that. 20 plus years of conservative media got people ready. Trump is just the first one to really cash in on it. Alternative facts really is the summation of a long process. Well... As a Bond villain once put it -- "There's no news, like bad news." Hell, Tomorrow Never Dies is proving eerily prescient in the face of trouble brewing in the South China Sea.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jan 23, 2017 0:25:01 GMT
and let me just stress this is only my view you don't have a great track record of picking your presidents......I doubt many were much better than trump, we just have better means to catch them out. I will venture to say that all of them will turn out to be better than Trump. And many have been MUCH better than Trump could be. Probally very true but much like our so called great leaders Churchill, thatcher and the like, their schemes & mistormenas, were covered up in the guise of "public interest", they were little more than bullies that used and abused their power mostly to benefit their own or supported interests. they just had the benefit of the masses learning of it later when the passing of time calms things down & I am sure the same is true for many of your presidents. thats trumps problem we all know he is a shit beforehand. At the moment he is still being a showman with the smoke & mirrors you watch all the promises & policies will fall apart once the lights are turned on & we see him clearly & is accountable. Well at least I hope that's the case
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jan 23, 2017 0:31:00 GMT
It's kind of weird to see Churchill and Thatcher compared. Not saying Churchill was perfect but from what I've seen views on him are generally positive unlike Thatcher.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 0:35:11 GMT
It's kind of weird to see Churchill and Thatcher compared. Not saying Churchill was perfect but from what I've seen views on him are generally positive unlike Thatcher. Are you sure? Myself and many others rate her as even better than Churchill
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jan 23, 2017 0:46:10 GMT
It's kind of weird to see Churchill and Thatcher compared. Not saying Churchill was perfect but from what I've seen views on him are generally positive unlike Thatcher. Are you sure? Myself and many others rate her as even better than Churchill Well looking at your posts on here I don't think you and I have very close political leanings so maybe I shouldn't be surprised. That's not to say I think Churchill Was a Saint and today he would not be someone I would vote for. But many of the great politicians of the past I wouldn't vote for today as their world views were of their time. I'd want better today but sadly I think we got worse.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jan 23, 2017 0:51:43 GMT
It's kind of weird to see Churchill and Thatcher compared. Not saying Churchill was perfect but from what I've seen views on him are generally positive unlike Thatcher. That's my point, the facts that he was a racist with little regard for non white, non English with his policies both in and out of war, a womaniser, his family & friends never endured any of the rationing or austerity he inflicted on the people, blackmailed the party into re-electing him as leader, suffered chronic illness which meant that for many years he was unfit of office and much much more it all just shows my point, if anyone of them came out during office would have been the end of him, but drip feed it 30 years later & no one is that outraged
|
|