This morning...

[waterfalls212434]

Just now, Scruffylovemonster said:

Which is kinda the point. If the left hadn't nominated Clinton, would Trump have won? If you think "no" then you think it's the left's fault that trump is in. 

the left didnt nominate clinton the dnc did. the democracts are not left wing, the true left in the us would be the greens who I belive were headed up by jill stein during the election. There are aspects of the party which verge to the left, bernie sanders being an example but as seen by his treatment the majority of the party are opposed to that as much as republicans are.....shame they dont have a leg to stand on now their candidate absoutly fucking failed.....maybe we`ll see a more left wing democractic party with sanders at the helm next time around, shame by then itll be to late for many.

I just hope labour take a lesson from that before anymore of the morons try to kick corbyn out.....thats what happens when you choose an establishment candidate over one the actual `people` can get behind.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

'Bill Kristol renegade jew'

So, you think that isnt anti-semitic.

Without condoning it, it's as relevant a comment as anything which says "Islamic terrorism", which I suspect is a phrase all of us have used.

What it isn't is anything remotely similar to the inference you wish it to have. You know, like when you also talk about "literal nazis".

 

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Again, a number of Jewish organisation and Historians have said that bannon and Trumps campaign was anti-semitic. But we shoild ignore them.

Who's said ignore it? Not me.

My problem is the hyperbole that comes with it, designed to pretend - you know, just like Trump - that a particular thing is something else entirely.

 

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Technically, i was saying (as a joke) that they should realise how evil they are and do the decent thing. Suicide would be proportionate. Maybe give up all their money and become monks would be a reasonable alternative .

But ok, he may not be wearing a nazi uniform and heiling in the street. If that is your bar for facism, guess we shoild wait until its too late.

FFS.

There's a lot that's wrong about Trump, but the things which are wrong about him are not the many and varied things you keep on claiming.

When you talk about "literal nazis" and everyone knows you're a liar, you ensure that the people who you need on your side to stop any Trump excesses will never be on your side, and any of Trump's excesses will not be stopped,.

 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

oh ffs, the left is NOT clinton, the left want nothing to do with clinton, this was one thing I found funny in Johnathon pies video, clinton is seen by the majority on the left as evil like trump just for different reasons, the left view is that the us was utterly fucked the moment they kicked bernie sanders out of the race! Sanders was the left! 

How the fuck could anyone describe clinton as left wing? yeah left wing in the way tony blair was eh? lol

In the context of the USA, 'the left' is very definitely Clinton.

And yes, she's seen as evil as Trump by many.

Which is why people didn't vote for Clinton and allowed Trump to win with fewer votes than losers got in previous elections.

She failed, 'the left' failed. 

If you want to say Bernie and not Clinton is 'the left', Bernie failed by more than Clinton did.

 

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

yeah how dare we criticise people who totally deserve such criticism.....no lets make friends with people who fucking hate us instead thatll work!` `slow clap`

I'#m happy with the deserved criticisms. FFS. :rolleyes:

But when people like you (not necessarily you, in this specific example) say that the next step is internment camps when referencing the guy who made clear internment camps is nothing of the plans, it only proves that person has nothing of worth to say to the people who supported Trump but who might not support everything Trump might do.

People have been dropping this sort of bollocks about Trump while Trump came from behind to win. Don't you think there might be a relationship between them?

Cos if not, it does truly mean that every single Trumper voted for every word of Trump - which means you've already lost everything anything anyway, because hardcore racists won't ever be turned.

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

the left didnt nominate clinton the dnc did. the democracts are not left wing, the true left in the us would be the greens who I belive were headed up by jill stein during the election. There are aspects of the party which verge to the left, bernie sanders being an example but as seen by his treatment the majority of the party are opposed to that as much as republicans are.....shame they dont have a leg to stand on now their candidate absoutly fucking failed.....maybe we`ll see a more left wing democractic party with sanders at the helm next time around, shame by then itll be to late for many.

I just hope labour take a lesson from that before anymore of the morons try to kick corbyn out.....thats what happens when you choose an establishment candidate over one the actual `people` can get behind.

PMSL

Look at the polls and tell me again the people can get behind Corbyn.

Corbyn is more like Clinton than he is Trump. Hated by the people he needs to elect him.

[zahidf]

14 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

PMSL

Look at the polls and tell me again the people can get behind Corbyn.

Corbyn is more like Clinton than he is Trump. Hated by the people he needs to elect him.

Clinton won the popular vote. She just lost in places she needed to win. Corbyn probably wont win the popular vote

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Clinton won the popular vote. She just lost in places she needed to win. Corbyn probably wont win the popular vote

Corbyn probably won't win any democratic vote

(selectorates are not a demos, for anyone that's missed that)

Meanwhile Trump has won a democratic vote, and to protest about that is to protest against democracy itself. He has to be permitted to govern.

That doesn't mean a willing acceptance of everything he does, but it does mean that some of what he might do has to be accepted. Otherwise, just like with the Corbynistas, Trump will be able to claim he never got a fair chance and can claim his failings as the fault of others.

The protests should be reserved for when he steps beyond the normal political arena into the extreme.

Edited November 17, 2016 by eFestivals

[waterfalls212434]

32 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'#m happy with the deserved criticisms. FFS.

But when people like you (not necessarily you, in this specific example) say that the next step is internment camps when referencing the guy who made clear internment camps is nothing of the plans, it only proves that person has nothing of worth to say to the people who supported Trump but who might not support everything Trump might do.

People have been dropping this sort of bollocks about Trump while Trump came from behind to win. Don't you think there might be a relationship between them?

Cos if not, it does truly mean that every single Trumper voted for every word of Trump - which means you've already lost everything anything anyway, because hardcore racists won't ever be turned.

look its very simple, if someone backs trump then they either believe what he believes or at the very least they are willing to overlook it like it doesnt matter.....when that includes racism, misogyny, homophobia and downright asshole stupidity then these same people shouldnt seem suprised when people call them out on those things. Its about time these `im not racist but` people took some damn responsability for what they are voting for they know damn well what these people are like and im sick to death of hearing bullshit apologist reasons as to why they were willing to overlook such evils and why we shouldnt attack them for it.....same excuses we hear from ukip voters etc over here..either ignorant or bigoted...PICK ONE!
if your a racist twonk or you enabled racist twonks with your vote despite being fully aware of them being a racist twonk then dont be suprised when people call you a racist twonk....simple as!

oh and for your last comment I think youll find clinton won the democractic vote....ie the popular vote...by quite a large way, to call the electoral college system democratic is a very big stretch of the imagination! there system is even more fucked then ours is.

Edited November 17, 2016 by waterfalls212434

[The Nal]

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Clinton won the popular vote. She just lost in places she needed to win. 

oh and for your last comment I think youll find clinton won the democractic vote....ie the popular vote...by quite a large way, to call the electoral college system democratic is a very big stretch of the imagination! there system is even more fucked then ours is.

I've seen this rolled out everywhere since she lost. Winning the popular vote means absolutely fuck all.

Edited November 17, 2016 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

look its very simple, if someone backs trump then they either believe what he believes or at the very least they are willing to overlook it like it doesnt matter

Nope, the simple is you.

By the logic you've used, a vote for Hillary HAS TO BE a vote for Goldman Sachs and Saudi and Qatar.

It was a choice between two flawed candidates, where one offered *only* more of the same, while the other promised the world to every segment of society (including Mexicans, blacks and Jews).

I'm not trying to suggest that those who voted Trump are all perfect, no racists, etc, but I am trying to get you to wise up that it wasn't a contest between good and evil.

That some chose to concentrate on the bits they liked more than the bits they didn't merely makes them the same as voters in all other elections in all of history.

Edited November 17, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, waterfalls212434 said:

oh and for your last comment I think youll find clinton won the democractic vote....ie the popular vote

So only the popular vote counts? 

In which case you're 100% for telling Scotland to get to fuck over their EU whining, and you're 100% for the death penalty.

What-is-democracy in any place is the version that demos have chosen to use in that place. The USA have chosen to use an electoral college, just as the UK has chosen to stick to FPTP rather than change to AV, just as some other places have gone with nationwide PR and other places have versions of voting with regional vetos.

They each have their plus and minus points, and a country picks the one that suits it. That then becomes what-is-democracy until such time as 'the people' might choose to change it.

If a version doesn't suit feel free to campaign to change it, but to claim a victory under the currently-agreed rules is a fix is just being a bad loser.

[zahidf]

Im not saying Trump didnt win. Im saying that, in his own words btw in 2014, a president who doesnt win the popular vote doesnt really have as much of a mandate to make MASSIVE changes.

[The Nal]

12 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Im not saying Trump didnt win. Im saying that, in his own words btw in 2014, a president who doesnt win the popular vote doesnt really have as much of a mandate to make MASSIVE changes.

Yes, he was wrong. If it was based on a popular vote they would've campaigned completely differently. You wouldn't have seen Hillary and Obama in Michigan in the last few days for example. 

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Im not saying Trump didnt win. Im saying that, in his own words btw in 2014, a president who doesnt win the popular vote doesnt really have as much of a mandate to make MASSIVE changes.

Labour 2007: Brown doesn't have to stand for election when taking over as PM.
Tories 2007: oh yes he does.

Tories 2016: May doesn't have to stand for election when taking over as PM.
Labour 2016: oh yes she does.

Honourable politics requires a person to be honourable when on both of the winning or losing sides. 

How does your criticism there hold up, btw?

[russycarps]

1 hour ago, waterfalls212434 said:

I just hope labour take a lesson from that before anymore of the morons try to kick corbyn out.....thats what happens when you choose an establishment candidate over one the actual `people` can get behind.

The lesson labour should take from this is that careerist politicians who live in elite metropolitan areas far removed from the rest of the country are utterly despised and reviled. The actual people hate him.

What labour should do is replace corbyn with alan sugar.

 

[Comfy Bean]

9 minutes ago, russycarps said:

The lesson labour should take from this is that careerist politicians who live in elite metropolitan areas far removed from the rest of the country are utterly despised and reviled. The actual people hate him.

What labour should do is replace corbyn with alan sugar.

 

Have The Simpsons predicted Simon Cowell for PM yet ? When not if......

[Comfy Bean]

51 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So only the popular vote counts? 

In which case you're 100% for telling Scotland to get to fuck.....

Can I 2nd this, please 

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Can I 2nd this, please 

It's the 2nd time recently i've used that (and the death sentence) to demonstrate that going with the popular vote might cause problems elsewhere where you might want to argue against the use of the popular vote. It's a good demonstration of the good and bad within every system of deciding-by-voting.

It's a recognition by me that some people might be sympathetic to Scotland's plight.

Hell, even I'm sympathetic towards it, even tho I end up concluding that Sturgeon should GTF with her veto arguments around this one, as it was always clearly about a whole-UK vote. If she doesn't like it the remedy should be for her to pursue what she has a mandate for, but for some reason she seems a little shy and moves the goal posts and things - which pretty much proves my conclusion is in the right place for the majority of Scotland.

Edited November 17, 2016 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

44 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Labour 2007: Brown doesn't have to stand for election when taking over as PM.
Tories 2007: oh yes he does.

Tories 2016: May doesn't have to stand for election when taking over as PM.
Labour 2016: oh yes she does.

Honourable politics requires a person to be honourable when on both of the winning or losing sides. 

How does your criticism there hold up, btw?

In both cases, i think they should have an election asap.

Also in both cases, i think they are allowed some slack: Brown because he was elected as the second most important govt figure previoisly, and May because fixed parliament act means its not 100% in her power. Less sympathetic to Brown in that case.

Anyway, a lot of it is hypothetical on Trump anyway. Lets see what level of disaster it is first and then i can so i told you so. Its close to that point on Brexit!

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Lets see what level of disaster it is first and then i can so i told you so.

if it turns out you're right you're right, I'll stick my hands up and say i got it wrong.

But given that you've so very wrong so far, and unable to prove anything of the outrageous slurs you're making onto tens of millions of people, I don't think that's going to happen. 

Edited November 17, 2016 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

if it turns out you're right you're right, I'll stick my hands up and say i got it wrong.

But given that you've so very wrong so far, and unable to prove anything of the outrageous slurs you're making onto tens of millions of people, I don't think that's going to happen. 

Well, Brexit being an utter disaster seems to be coming true...

[eFestivals]

Just now, zahidf said:

Well, Brexit being an utter disaster seems to be coming true...

Do you think you were unique in spotting that, or something...?

I don't doubt Trump will be a disaster too, but for none of the reasons you've given away from the purely economic.

[eFestivals]

that bastard Trump, he's reported to have it in for lobbyists now. Where will the discrimination end?

That's one, i hope, people aren't going to protest.

[zahidf]

Just now, eFestivals said:

that bastard Trump, he's reported to have it in for lobbyists now. Where will the discrimination end?

That's one, i hope, people aren't going to protest.

Link?

 

His cahinet team have links with Russia and other lobbying organisations. Rudy was paid by the same companys as Clinton, hightlighting the hypocrisy!

 

Also, Cameron said the same and did nothing...

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Link?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/nov/17/donald-trump-transition-cabinet-news-politics-live

 

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

His cahinet team have links with Russia and other lobbying organisations. Rudy was paid by the same companys as Clinton, hightlighting the hypocrisy!

Russia is a lobbying organisation...?

Clinton has links with Saudi and Qatar - so much so that 25% of hee election funds came from them. Do you think Clinton might also be playing someone else's tune?

We could argue that without reaching a sound conclusion, but it's pretty clear a chunk of the US population reached a firm conclusion about it, one of the many reasons why plenty of people found they could vote for Trump, the guy saying he wasn't in hock to others (ha) but who was definitely a ppolitical outsider, not one of the normal bunch who people felt served them badly.

Did Rudy also get a $1M birthday pressie from the Saudis, then? Or was it just Bill?

And how's Rudy's wealth collection going (I have no idea)? I do know that Bill wasn't rich when elected, but now he and his missus are dripping in money (same thing happened with Blair too).

 

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Also, Cameron said the same and did nothing...

Let's see what happens with Trump on that one. It seems (from that report) that he's serious, tho whether he's able to bring it off is another thing. I'm not sure the many establishment figures he's already appointed will want to chuck away huge amounts of easy money.