This morning...

[verrymerry]

1 minute ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

Pablo Honey is widely (and correctly) regarded as the worst of Radiohead's nine albums. And over on the Radiohead thread we love a list and Pablo Honey always comes last. Now when there's any kind of list, ol' Pablo brings up the rear. 

It sounds like fucking rubbish patter when you lay it out like that. 

Thanks Captain

[Teddington]

1 hour ago, arcade fireman said:

You seem to have a very poor grasp of comprehension. Is English your first language?

It's just that you keep getting meanings out of my sentences that aren't there. I'm not saying you can't come to Glastonbury. 

I'm saying that I can't imagine enjoying going to Glastonbury as much as I do, with its overriding ethos if it stood so diametrically opposed to my own. And I just can't imagine someone so far to the right getting so much enjoyment out of it. 

I think you are wrong.  One of the great things about  Glasto is that it gives a very different experience to each and every person who attends.

It is perfectly possible to attend and enjoy, whilst fundamentally disagreeing with a lot of the left wing aspects of it.

Indeed I can't help but have a quiet smirk to myself when I listen to some of the left wing/environmental arguments of some attendees/stall holders.

I mean, who do you think provides the sound equipment for the festival, without which there would BE nothing?  Do they think it's all knitted, on some kind of commune, rather than being the end result of competition driven by capitalism?

Back on topic I find it really sad that a country as great (and it IS great to anyone with an ounce of common sense) comes up with 2 candidates as they have done.

That said I was really worried about a Clinton victory.  I honestly believe she would have caused conflict with Russia.  We will never know.

As for Trump, well I don't think he has the intellect for office.  Then again neither did Reagan and he didn't do too badly I suppose.

One thing is for certain.  The US like the UK have decided that the status quo wasn't working for them.

 

 

[Spindles]

11 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Then again neither did Reagan and he didn't do too badly I suppose.

 

[Cornelius_Fudge]

1 hour ago, arcade fireman said:

You seem to have a very poor grasp of comprehension. Is English your first language?

It's just that you keep getting meanings out of my sentences that aren't there. I'm not saying you can't come to Glastonbury. 

I'm saying that I can't imagine enjoying going to Glastonbury as much as I do, with its overriding ethos if it stood so diametrically opposed to my own. And I just can't imagine someone so far to the right getting so much enjoyment out of it. 

Insults. Classy.

I'm not right wing actually, I'm a moderate centre leftist. But it's nice that you continue to assume whatever you want

[russycarps]

54 minutes ago, Teddington said:

 

Indeed I can't help but have a quiet smirk to myself when I listen to some of the left wing/environmental arguments of some attendees/stall holders.

 

 

They think you're a c**t.

[arcade fireman]

1 hour ago, Teddington said:

I think you are wrong.  One of the great things about  Glasto is that it gives a very different experience to each and every person who attends.

It is perfectly possible to attend and enjoy, whilst fundamentally disagreeing with a lot of the left wing aspects of it.

Indeed I can't help but have a quiet smirk to myself when I listen to some of the left wing/environmental arguments of some attendees/stall holders.

I mean, who do you think provides the sound equipment for the festival, without which there would BE nothing?  Do they think it's all knitted, on some kind of commune, rather than being the end result of competition driven by capitalism?

Back on topic I find it really sad that a country as great (and it IS great to anyone with an ounce of common sense) comes up with 2 candidates as they have done.

That said I was really worried about a Clinton victory.  I honestly believe she would have caused conflict with Russia.  We will never know.

As for Trump, well I don't think he has the intellect for office.  Then again neither did Reagan and he didn't do too badly I suppose.

One thing is for certain.  The US like the UK have decided that the status quo wasn't working for them.

 

 

Don't be daft. Just because someone is on the left (and I've argued on here at length against Jeremy Corbyn on here so I'm hardly that far left) it doesn't mean they're against any form of capitalism.

And Clinton wouldn't have started a war with Russia. Russia wouldn't have wanted a genuine war with the US any more than America would have done. There's many good reasons they were toe to toe for so long during the Cold War and never entered direct conflict with each other. 

The US isn't a great country. Some of the most vast resources on the planet, yet infant mortality 50% more than any comparable countries, double the health spending for worse outcomes, largest % incarcerated population in the Western world, murder rate several times European countries driven by a gun crime rate dozens of times as high. A historic legacy of invading and ruining other countries. I really could go on. And yet none of this stuff was brought up as vaguely relevant during the election. They get the candidates they deserve. 

Edited November 10, 2016 by arcade fireman

[Keithy]

People suggesting that Trump will be the worst president in history might do well to reflect on his predecessors. A global financial crash, 2 gulf wars, 9/11, Oklahoma,  Impeachment, Watergate, Iran-Contra affair, PATRIOT Act, Abu Ghraib, Waterboarding, Guantanamo, Rendition, Mogadishu, the re-emergence of fundamentalist terrorism and abandoning an entire city to hurricane Katrina.

He's got quite a record to live up to.

[arcade fireman]

7 minutes ago, Keithy said:

People suggesting that Trump will be the worst president in history might do well to reflect on his predecessors. A global financial crash, 2 gulf wars, 9/11, Oklahoma,  Impeachment, Watergate, Iran-Contra affair, PATRIOT Act, Abu Ghraib, Waterboarding, Guantanamo, Rendition, Mogadishu, the re-emergence of fundamentalist terrorism and abandoning an entire city to hurricane Katrina.

He's got quite a record to live up to.

There are wider issues here than just the Presidency. On one hand I don't think he will do half the terrible stuff he claimed in his campaign. On the other hand, there are rumours he will give the likes of Sarah Palin and Ben Carson big jobs, with Carson - a man who called evolution something encouraged by Satan - in charge of education. Whether these specific rumours are true or not, what's for sure is Trump will reward those most loyal to him and these are people who don't just have abhorrent views - they have views incompatible with modern scientific thought in many cases. 

Your point is valid though - but what it shows that America has never been great. Certainly for as long as I've known it's been an outlier in Western civilisation, claiming to lead the way but in all sorts of areas lagging way behind, or leading other countries down the path of war and destruction. 

But the wider issues are bigger than his Presidency. The big potential for the far right to rise after this election not just in the US but worldwide, the massive potential for racial divisions to get worse, certainly in terms of domestic policy things like abortion rights being rolled back with the complete complicity of both Houses and the Supreme Court...these are all far more realistic prospects than either the wall or indeed the entry ban on Muslims. 

 

[Keithy]

The interesting thing about the Trump win is it's very inconvenient for the left who insist the media controls the agenda and media moguls like Murdoch controls who wins the election.

Trump had just 9 newspapers in the whole of America who endorsed him. Clinton had hundreds. He won in the face of a huge media opposition.

People seriously claim that if it wasn't for the mainstream media, Corbyn would be popular and have huge support. Those bloody journalists just print bad stories about him, they ignore his message, he doesn't stand a chance.

One of the left's default 'excuse' for electoral defeat is to blame the mainstream media for distorting or not reporting their message. If your message is strong enough and resonates enough, as Trump as shown, you don't need the mainstream media. Your message will break through.

 

[Keithy]

31 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

certainly in terms of domestic policy things like abortion rights being rolled back with the complete complicity of both Houses and the Supreme Court

Roe vs Wade was passed 7-2.

5 of those 7 were Republican nominated Supreme Court judges. 1 of the 2 was a Democrat nominated judge.

A Supreme Court dominated by Republican-nominated justices produced Roe vs. Wade

That battle has been won, it won't be repealed.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

4 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The interesting thing about the Trump win is it's very inconvenient for the left who insist the media controls the agenda and media moguls like Murdoch controls who wins the election.

Trump had just 9 newspapers in the whole of America who endorsed him. Clinton had hundreds. He won in the face of a huge media opposition.

People seriously claim that if it wasn't for the mainstream media, Corbyn would be popular and have huge support. Those bloody journalists just print bad stories about him, they ignore his message, he doesn't stand a chance.

One of the left's default 'excuse' for electoral defeat is to blame the mainstream media for distorting or not reporting their message. If your message is strong enough and resonates enough, as Trump as shown, you don't need the mainstream media. Your message will break through.

 

To some extent this is true. The email thing wouldn't have got anywhere if their media had been as resolutely pro-Clinton as ours is anti-Corbyn, tho I do agree the Corbyn fans use it as an excuse for their own failings.

[arcade fireman]

8 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The interesting thing about the Trump win is it's very inconvenient for the left who insist the media controls the agenda and media moguls like Murdoch controls who wins the election.

Trump had just 9 newspapers in the whole of America who endorsed him. Clinton had hundreds. He won in the face of a huge media opposition.

People seriously claim that if it wasn't for the mainstream media, Corbyn would be popular and have huge support. Those bloody journalists just print bad stories about him, they ignore his message, he doesn't stand a chance.

One of the left's default 'excuse' for electoral defeat is to blame the mainstream media for distorting or not reporting their message. If your message is strong enough and resonates enough, as Trump as shown, you don't need the mainstream media. Your message will break through.

 

I wouldn't call myself a Corbynite at all, but Murdoch has a much bigger influence in the UK than the US. Obama was hardly Murdoch's choice either in '08 or '12 so this doesn't really disprove the Murdoch thing here at all. 

 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

2 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

I wouldn't call myself a Corbynite at all, but Murdoch has a much bigger influence in the UK than the US. Obama was hardly Murdoch's choice either in '08 or '12 so this doesn't really disprove the Murdoch thing here at all. 

 

Fox News is so much worse than any of his outlets over here, goodness knows what kind of a mess we'd be in if Sky News started banging on like this  

 

[arcade fireman]

1 minute ago, Zac Quinn said:

Fox News is so much worse than any of his outlets over here, goodness knows what kind of a mess we'd be in if Sky News started banging on like this  

 

Yeah Fox news is ridiculous. But Murdoch's grip on the media there isn't nearly as tight and his agenda here with the Sun at least pushes a very similar agenda to the Mail and the Express, which while controlled by different people might as well be speaking with one voice. 

[Alex DeLarge]

2 hours ago, Teddington said:

It is perfectly possible to attend and enjoy, whilst fundamentally disagreeing with a lot of the left wing aspects of it.

Indeed I can't help but have a quiet smirk to myself when I listen to some of the left wing/environmental arguments of some attendees/stall holders.

Why? Honestly, is there any reason to smirk at people genuinely thinking about our planet long term?

Sure, a lot of the protest aspect of Glastonbury does nothing, but if it influences just a couple of young people to start thinking and fighting for progressive causes, it's all worth it.

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, Keithy said:

People suggesting that Trump will be the worst president in history might do well to reflect on his predecessors. A global financial crash, 2 gulf wars, 9/11, Oklahoma,  Impeachment, Watergate, Iran-Contra affair, PATRIOT Act, Abu Ghraib, Waterboarding, Guantanamo, Rendition, Mogadishu, the re-emergence of fundamentalist terrorism and abandoning an entire city to hurricane Katrina.

He's got quite a record to live up to.

He'll probably get bored and quit or impeached before he can do most of those.

51 minutes ago, Keithy said:

The interesting thing about the Trump win is it's very inconvenient for the left who insist the media controls the agenda and media moguls like Murdoch controls who wins the election.

Yeah the mainstream media did nothing for Trump except give him his own prime-time TV show on a major network for 11 years.

[Madyaker]

I think people are getting too hung up on Trump himself and are missing the bigger picture here. I'm not so worried about what he's going to do once in office, and I don't know if he meant all the things he said about women or muslims or mexicans. But what I do know is that when he said those things there was a very nasty and hate filled section of American society who agreed with him and now that he has won those people feel vindicated. Where they had previously felt that they were a dieing breed who had to keep their racism/sexism/mysoginy to themselves they now feel that it's acceptible to have these views. His victory has in a way legitimised these views in the eyes of the people who hold them and I think that is far more dangerous than Trump himself will be. One has only to look at the twitter feed of David Duke to see examples of this. Neo nazis and white supremacists across the US and the world see this as their victory and that's worrying.

 

Apart from that with the GOP in control of the house, the senate, the presidency and the supreme court anyone who was hoping for progress on social issues at a federal level, things like abortion, gay marriage, the war on drugs etc they can forget about that for the next 50 years or so.

[eastynh]

Not sure if this has been posted so I apologise if it has. This sums up my feeling exactly.

 

[waterfalls212434]

is there really some cock above trying to claim trump isnt racist? yeah and I bet you think ukip are just out to protect our interests as well theyve nothing against immigrants personally!..........lol 

The guy wanted to bar muslims from coming to his country, the guy wanted to build a fucking wall to keep mexicans out of his country, the guy has people at his rallys abusing and attacking non whites, throwing nazi salutes etc....why do you think the fucking kkk support him? do you think david duke just likes his haircut? get real!

Its this kind of denial of the painfully obvious that has allowed such right wing thinking to creep back into society and be almost deemed acceptable. No excuse for that kind of bullshit and certainly noone should be allowed to spout it without being challenged. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by waterfalls212434

[Cornelius_Fudge]

6 hours ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Why? Honestly, is there any reason to smirk at people genuinely thinking about our planet long term?

Sure, a lot of the protest aspect of Glastonbury does nothing, but if it influences just a couple of young people to start thinking and fighting for progressive causes, it's all worth it.

Well, I think he means to smirk at their suggestions - which we don't know exactly the ones he means - but not laughing at their intent.

I can laugh at a child because they fall over, but not because they fell over wishing to help someone cross the road. There's a difference.

But yeah, I agree, Glastonbury is wonderful for being a tolerant environment for everyone to have these ideas, but we should still be allowed to be critical - and yes, laugh about it if necessary/if the idea is really honestly funny.

[Teddington]

10 hours ago, russycarps said:

They think you're a c**t.

 

*yawns*

Untermensch

[Teddington]

2 hours ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

Well, I think he means to smirk at their suggestions - which we don't know exactly the ones he means - but not laughing at their intent.

I can laugh at a child because they fall over, but not because they fell over wishing to help someone cross the road. There's a difference.

But yeah, I agree, Glastonbury is wonderful for being a tolerant environment for everyone to have these ideas, but we should still be allowed to be critical - and yes, laugh about it if necessary/if the idea is really honestly funny.

I laugh about the hypocracy.

Banging on about how we should "save the world" and "end capitalism" at a festival that owes it's very existence to people willing to use up more resources (isn't that what a festival does?) with it's infrastructure fundamentally reliant upon Capitalism.

 

Back to the thread if people are genuinely looking for reasons to be happy (or at least less sad) about the Trump victory, I would urge them to Google "Clinton lies" and follow the links.  The alternative wouldn't have been great either.

 

 

[Teddington]

10 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

There are wider issues here than just the Presidency. On one hand I don't think he will do half the terrible stuff he claimed in his campaign. On the other hand, there are rumours he will give the likes of Sarah Palin and Ben Carson big jobs, with Carson - a man who called evolution something encouraged by Satan - in charge of education. Whether these specific rumours are true or not, what's for sure is Trump will reward those most loyal to him and these are people who don't just have abhorrent views - they have views incompatible with modern scientific thought in many cases. 

Your point is valid though - but what it shows that America has never been great. Certainly for as long as I've known it's been an outlier in Western civilisation, claiming to lead the way but in all sorts of areas lagging way behind, or leading other countries down the path of war and destruction. 

But the wider issues are bigger than his Presidency. The big potential for the far right to rise after this election not just in the US but worldwide, the massive potential for racial divisions to get worse, certainly in terms of domestic policy things like abortion rights being rolled back with the complete complicity of both Houses and the Supreme Court...these are all far more realistic prospects than either the wall or indeed the entry ban on Muslims. 

 

 

Not great? 

 

What has Americal done for us? 

 

"Well there's the production line".  "Granted the production line........"

Oh and the CPU

Saved us from Totalitarianism........

I'm not going to go on with the Python esque diatribe but I'm sure you get the picture.

[The Nal]

3 hours ago, waterfalls212434 said:

is there really some cock above trying to claim trump isnt racist? yeah and I bet you think ukip are just out to protect our interests as well theyve nothing against immigrants personally!..........lol 

The guy wanted to bar muslims from coming to his country, the guy wanted to build a fucking wall to keep mexicans out of his country, the guy has people at his rallys abusing and attacking non whites, throwing nazi salutes etc....why do you think the fucking kkk support him? do you think david duke just likes his haircut? get real!

Its this kind of denial of the painfully obvious that has allowed such right wing thinking to creep back into society and be almost deemed acceptable. No excuse for that kind of bullshit and certainly noone should be allowed to spout it without being challenged. 

Having a conservative immigration policy doesn't make someone racist. 

[Keithy]

3 hours ago, waterfalls212434 said:

, the guy wanted to build a fucking wall to keep mexicans out of his country,

For all this bluster and outrage, there is already a wall in place that it nearly 1000km long....

http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1814377,00.html

It started in 2005 and was continued and supported by the Obama administration. Infact Obama has deported 2.5m people, more than any president in history.