PDA

View Full Version : Trump



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Leo
08-12-2015, 06:20 PM
Hitler? Or merely Berlusconi?

trza
09-12-2015, 01:31 AM
He is moving the goalposts, he is a one man Overton Window, he is playing games with the other guys in the race, he is breaking through the political news and taking over the daily social media chit chat beyond the partisan media, he is making world leaders react to him......

sufi
09-12-2015, 01:11 PM
I have made myself very rich,’ Trump says (over and over again). ‘I would make this country very rich.’ That’s why he should be president. He insists that he’s the ‘most successful man ever to run’, never mind the drafters of the constitution or the supreme commander of the allied forces. Bloomberg puts Trump’s current net worth at $2.9 billion, Forbes at $4.1 billion. The National Journal has worked out that if Trump had just put his father’s money in a mutual fund that tracked the S&P 500 and spent his career finger-painting, he’d have $8 billion.
Thought that was interesting, not that it would make the slightest difference as Trumpism seems all about pop, not stats

Mr. Tea
09-12-2015, 01:40 PM
Ahaha, that reminds me of a similar story about some ghastly Australian woman who inherited a multi-billion-dollar mining corporation and loves banging on about how poor people are only poor because they're lazy. The article gave the estimated value of the company when she'd inherited it and the slightly greater value it has now - I worked out that it had actually depreciated in value while she'd owned it, taking inflation into account. I'll post it here if I can find it...

luka
09-12-2015, 01:42 PM
That's Gina Rinehart

luka
09-12-2015, 01:44 PM
She keeps plotting to take over fairfax media, the rival to Murdoch's Australian newspapers

Mr. Tea
09-12-2015, 01:45 PM
Excellent, thanks Luke.

Mr. Tea
10-12-2015, 11:47 AM
Netanyahu tells Trump to give Muslims a break. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/benjamin-netanyahu-rejects-donald-trumps-comments-on-muslims-and-says-israel-respects-all-citizens-a6767026.html)

baboon2004
10-12-2015, 05:34 PM
getting properly surreal today

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2015/12/world-ends-donald-trump-discovers-respected-columnist-katie-hopkins-supports

Corpsey
10-12-2015, 05:50 PM
As awful as Trump is (and he is), its sort of fascinating being alive at a time like this, if you're lucky enough to (at least feel like) an observer alone. The distortions of reality wrought by the media and latterly the internet are extraordinary. America seems like the hub of the madness, perhaps because it dove headfirst into the media machine first?

Leo
10-12-2015, 06:22 PM
As awful as Trump is (and he is), its sort of fascinating being alive at a time like this, if you're lucky enough to (at least feel like) an observer alone. The distortions of reality wrought by the media and latterly the internet are extraordinary. America seems like the hub of the madness, perhaps because it dove headfirst into the media machine first?

that, and we also have a lot of stupid people here who are easily led by a demagogue.

Corpsey
16-12-2015, 12:05 PM
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/09/24/trump/

This is an interesting article from September. The bit I remember now is the irony of Fox news laying the groundwork for Trump for years and now being terrified of him because he openly defies them.

trza
16-12-2015, 07:48 PM
is the host of the uk version of the apprentice the same as trump? do people in scotland like trump? is this boris guy from uk politics like trump? is this like berlusconi?

Mr. Tea
16-12-2015, 07:58 PM
is the host of the uk version of the apprentice the same as trump? do people in scotland like trump? is this boris guy from uk politics like trump? is this like berlusconi?

I can't imagine anyone I know or would even spend 5 seconds in the company of would think of him as anything other than an absolute fucking embarrassment. Sure, the Right in this country has 'characters' like Boris, Farage and so on but Trump is like the next level of the next level. Perhaps some EDL/Brittun Ferst lunkheads agree with him about teh Muslams, but even then, they'd probably be put off by his notable Anglophobia.

And Scotland is generally to the left of England politically so I think you'd had to go a very long way to find a Scot with anything good to say about him.

Alan Sugar is (I believe) actually a self-made man, in distinct contrast to Trump. He's kind of a dick but is obviously not stupid and doesn't come out with wilfully outrageous claptrap, that I'm aware of anyway.

Edit: Bozza on Trumpy-poos. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson/12039931/Boris-Johnson-The-only-reason-I-wouldnt-visit-some-parts-of-New-York-is-the-real-risk-of-meeting-Donald-Trump.html)

Leo
16-12-2015, 10:14 PM
http://soundcloud.com/nasty-mcquaid/donald-trump-wants-a-shutdown/s-ktgXW

edit: what's up with the soundcloud embed? do they not allow it now?

Corpsey
17-12-2015, 09:23 AM
There's something outrageously vulgar even about Trump's appearance that I don't think would 'play' in the UK. The doctored hair. He looks like a Harry Enfield/Paul Whitehouse version of a politician or investment banker from the 80's.

Obviously you can't generalise about an entire culture, especially one as huge as the U.S.'s, but I think there's more of a taste for brashness ''over there''. Our nearest equivalent to Trump (in terms of a political 'personality') is probably Boris Johnson, who is also brash but in a very British way: self-effacing, ostensibly bumbling and clumsy, liable to drop a baby before he can kiss it on the campaign trail.

To carry on with the stereotypes - as a culture I think the British rather despise self-aggrandisement. We're eager to knock anybody who gets big for their boots off their perch. Also, there's this lingering respect for ''class'' - not in the sense of social standing, necessarily, but in terms of ''civil'' behaviour. Whereas in the U.S. I get the impression that there's a lot more value placed on success (/money).

Saying all this, it's not as if British people aren't fascinated by Trump (and by American culture in general, obv.). He makes good TV, because he's despicable. I just don't think he'd have any credibility as a politician here. He hasn't really in the U.S., though, has he? He's like a sideshow to the main event of the election, and unfortunately has helped make Jeb Bush, e.g., look like the sensible option.

luka
17-12-2015, 09:53 AM
That's why our patron Saint is Beckham and not Robbie Savage

luka
17-12-2015, 09:55 AM
He's well ahead in the polls though so he's making credibility look academic, completely superfluous. He can't be president but maybe he can win the nomination

luka
17-12-2015, 09:56 AM
And someone less divisive can use this model and win down the line

luka
17-12-2015, 10:15 AM
It's been on the cards for a long time. Reagan was seen as a symptom of the same trend. A presidential system is more vulnerable to a cult of celebrity but we're not immune to it either

luka
17-12-2015, 10:21 AM
It's also to do with a rejection of democratic responsibilities on the part of citizens and institutions most notably media. A feedback loop of infantilisation

Corpsey
17-12-2015, 10:47 AM
http://nyti.ms/1P7fqgG

Interesting article about how the Republican party has been shaken up by Trump, and the right-shift that societies undergo in times of economic hardship.

Perhaps another comparable figure to Trump from over here is Jeremy Clarkson. He "tells it like it is". He's "un-PC". He thrives on hatred. He's a rich tory but he's the average bllokes hero. Etc. And there are probably a lot of people who (though hopefully jokingly) would like to see him as Prime Minister.

Leo
17-12-2015, 02:36 PM
trump has certainly had a large impact, but some of the polls can be potentially misleading. like the ones that on quick-look seem to say trump is on top at 35%....but on closer examination it's not 35% of americans, or even registered american voters. it's 35% of republicans in iowa, which amounts to a tiny sliver of the country in a rural conservative state.

it's been said elsewhere but much of the rise of trump and fellow "outsiders" is due to demographics: older white males feeling threatened by societal and economic change, with their diminished employment prospects brought on by globalization and a growing technology-based economy for which they are not trained. they feel betrayed, left behind, frustrated by their declining stature and blame "the other" (immigrants, minorities, non-christians, gays, the PC police, weak liberals/democrats, etc.). they also tend to love the tough guy act, hence the macho "take our country back/make america great again" posturing. they are the perfect audience for a demagogue.

in fairness, though, washington is definitely corrupt and broken by any measure, so the rage again establishment politicians is shared by many democrats and independents as well.

trza
17-12-2015, 03:47 PM
i watched his speech announcing his run one afternoon several months ago and i thought it was a joke. then i go tot he coffeeshop the next day and some guy won't shut up about how trump was going to put tariffs on goods from mexico and it was going to save our economy........

Mr. Tea
18-12-2015, 02:31 PM
Perhaps another comparable figure to Trump from over here is Jeremy Clarkson. He "tells it like it is". He's "un-PC". He thrives on hatred. He's a rich tory but he's the average bllokes hero. Etc. And there are probably a lot of people who (though hopefully jokingly) would like to see him as Prime Minister.

That's not a bad comparison but a huge difference is that Clarkson is wealthy* as a result of having come up with a highly marketable brand (I mean, I don't think he was born into any great wealth, was he?) whereas Trump is a hereditary billionaire.

*in the sense of being worth however many million, but obviously still Little People from the POV of someone like Trump

Leo
18-12-2015, 05:10 PM
http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/17/17-vladimir-putin-donald-trump.w529.h352.2x.jpg

droid
18-12-2015, 08:26 PM
So, Trump was apparently ordered to pay 1.3 million for the death of an endangered brown spider monkey whose hair is mixed with the pubic hair of a water buffalo to make his toupee by a company (Bel-hair emporium) which is under investigation for paying off columbian drug cartels to catch the monkey in question.

Even the man's wig is bizarre and despicable.

Leo
15-01-2016, 01:42 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKowBLf44qRIlIc1SNgg_ac1jU2S7LOJzdIj PLN7vLmOGX6QnNuTXIJKLssqee8dP05KBGUyJOzoDUWVWCoc5z YKF6m2CQ&v=vPRfP_TEQ-g&app=desktop

EDIT: the friend who emailed this to me included this note: "Ever wonder what it would be like if the cheerleaders at a middle school for simplistic uber-nationalist authoritarian jingoists did a self-parody choreographed by Evel Knievel and filtered through George Orwell's fever dreams? Well, wonder no more."

Leo
20-01-2016, 05:01 PM
Sarah Palin endorses Trump, word salad ensues:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/kyleblaine/so-uh-heres-the-full-text-of-sarah-palins-bizarre-trump-spee#.gdAYRB22w

This is tough to read in one sitting -- or at all -- but needed to be shared in case you might be under the mistaken impression that Americans have become any smarter.

trza
20-01-2016, 05:19 PM
i thought about going to a trump event nearby for the freak show and spectacle of it all there are videos of his followers outside the events and the counterprotestors that come with all these events and its like those people in new mexico or nevada putting on sunglasses to watch a nuclear bomb test out in the desert.

Leo
20-01-2016, 05:55 PM
i thought about going to a trump event nearby for the freak show and spectacle of it all there are videos of his followers outside the events and the counterprotestors that come with all these events and its like those people in new mexico or nevada putting on sunglasses to watch a nuclear bomb test out in the desert.

same here, i'd go to a trump rally for the same reasons if one was close by. although i'd probably find it to be initially amusing and then really depressing.

PiLhead
20-01-2016, 07:53 PM
My daughter likes him. Thinks he's funny. She's 9.

Woebot
13-02-2016, 03:07 PM
http://davidbyrne.com/the-echo-chamber

trza
13-02-2016, 06:00 PM
byrne is a fossil from the eighties

craner
16-02-2016, 10:55 AM
I reckon Trump's got the nomination.

droid
16-02-2016, 11:15 AM
Trump vs Sanders. Who gets your vote Craner?

droid
16-02-2016, 11:16 AM
Had a chuckle at this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn4tP7ogWIA

craner
16-02-2016, 11:31 AM
Trump vs Sanders. Who gets your vote Craner?

Rubio.

droid
18-02-2016, 11:37 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbiIaG6W4AIlcib.jpg:large

trza
22-02-2016, 02:39 PM
Trump is bringing out people who had been skipping previous elections and rarely participated in the Republican Primary. He has mastered social media and its becoming clear that ruthlessly attacking unpopular things is not hurting him in this contest. His different profile of voters is turning the map upside down, and many are supporting him after thinking hard about the other Republican candidates before deciding on Trump.

luka
23-02-2016, 11:19 AM
I can't see him becoming president but he's rewritten tje rulebook for everyone else. A cannier operator could learn a lot

Leo
23-02-2016, 02:33 PM
trump's mastery of twitter enables him to bypass the traditional media filter, and he gets tons of free press coverage on almost every tweet. not sure anyone else who's not a major celebrity would be able to run a campaign like that.

it really is incredible, he not only says outlandish things (he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th avenue and not lose voters, he wants to punch a protester in the face, etc.) but also some that are the opposite from republican orthodoxy. he's running as a republican, but he and his followers have transcended the party, much to the horror of the establishment GOP.

a lot of people are just sick of corrupt politicians in both parties, special interest groups who donate to and control the pols and a broken political system (also the reason bernie sanders has done so well). many of them feel we don't have anything to lose by electing someone like trump and potentially blowing things up, since the situation is so shit now.

i suppose a trump nomination would result a clinton presidency, but man would that be a dirty fight until the november election.

craner
24-02-2016, 03:27 PM
I think I probably would vote for Ivanka Trump.

Mr. Tea
24-02-2016, 04:08 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/25/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-supporters-for-intolerance.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1


Nationally, the YouGov data show a similar trend: Nearly 20 percent of Mr. Trump’s voters disagreed with the freeing of slaves in Southern states after the Civil War. Only 5 percent of Mr. Rubio’s voters share this view.

:eek:

trza
24-02-2016, 05:12 PM
A gotcha question at the end of a telephone poll where respondents are asked if they agree with "emancipation". Its like asking kids if women's suffrage needs to be abolished, they always say yes.

But back to Trump, the stuff he is tapping into has always been there. Its just nobody has gone after it on a nationwide scale since maybe Reagan in 80 or Nixon earlier. Cruz thought he was replicating Reagan with is far right positioning and playing games with the party and the media. But all the "conservative principles" he spent months arguing about with Rubio and Bush turned out to be not so popular in the end.

Leo
24-02-2016, 07:55 PM
Here's something that at first sounded odd but maybe not: a Trump/Rubio ticket.

Rubio compensates for areas where Trump needs help: young/"future of the party", appeals to Hispanic voters (potentially), knowledgeable on foreign policy (supposedly), legitimately more religious, and placates the Republican establishment, who would then hold their noses and get behind Trump for president.

Also, both Trump and Rubio have unloaded strong attacks on Cruz but not each other. Why else would Rubio not be attacking Trump, the guy he needs to beat, and instead be content to celebrate his various second-, third- and fifth-place finishes? Maybe they've already made their backroom deal.

craner
24-02-2016, 08:07 PM
I don't know, it seems implausible, but anything is possible once the nomination is done. I know that neocon Max Boot is on my FB and Twitter feed saying that he would vote Clinton rather than Trump (which is particularly telling seeing as he is one of Rubio's most influential foreign policy advisors), as is the libertarian star writer Virginia Postrel, so there is obvious deep-seated hostility to Trump across the GOP spectrum. It's an existential crisis for the party.

vimothy
24-02-2016, 08:22 PM
Tucker Carston wrote a good article about Trump and the crisis of the GOP: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572

trza
24-02-2016, 08:55 PM
Rubio's biggest asset is that he is personally popular in Florida, he could have been a lifelong senator or run for governor or make another presidential run in the future. He had a press conference with Nikki Haley and Tim Scott and some other minority Republicans that looked about as much as the opposite of Trump as his party can look. Haley was one of the loudest critics of Trump even if it was mostly indirect and timid and ineffective.

In a normal year a regular Republican would consider Rubio, Haley, or another minority as a running mate. Republicans with longer time horizons in politics, ones who have to make a living somehow after everything gets sorted out are staying away from Trump, they fear the toxic elements of his campaign will stick to them for decades.

craner
24-02-2016, 09:21 PM
And they are correct.

craner
24-02-2016, 09:37 PM
The thing with Rubio is that he got minor traction for a few weeks, but then was immediately shown up as a flimsy persona on a national level. That left Cruz, who is as dangerous as Trump but has better (or even some) advisors (in particular, the impressive Victoria Coates). Now both seem utterly irrelevant, even if the remaining 1% scorers drop out. I was driving around the Deep South in September with my father, when the first GOP debates were being shown and Trump was way on top. We were both like, yeah, this will level out, he'll be gone by January. Wrong again! Then again, we were also in America during Corbyn's victory, constantly getting updates on Dad's iPad. We thought Sanders was the relevant comparison, but it was obviously Trump.

Leo
24-02-2016, 09:47 PM
yeah, trump's probably more likely to pick a military general or businessperson instead of a career politician. florida governor rick scott has been mentioned, he was an early supporter of trump's and comes from a business background (pharma) as opposed to government. or maybe sarah palin. ;)

craner
24-02-2016, 10:41 PM
Palin's a shoe-in, but also a tragedy. I think it ought to be remembered that she was an impressive bipartisan governer of Alaska, took on the corrupt Alaskan oil cartel. The 2008 election destroyed her as a serious person.

Leo
24-02-2016, 11:12 PM
shows you how much i know: just heard trump say he'd probably pick a politician who knows how washington works and can help get things through congress.

also, it could be argued that palin destroyed herself in that election.

craner
24-02-2016, 11:58 PM
That IS the argument, she destroyed herself.

Leo
25-02-2016, 02:42 PM
i don't normally read rich lowry but this was interesting: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/anti-donald-trump-ads-opinion-213675

craner
25-02-2016, 07:38 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-the-gops-frankenstein-monster-now-hes-strong-enough-to-destroy-the-party/2016/02/25/3e443f28-dbc1-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html

Robert Kagan articulates the neocon critique of Trumpism.

luka
25-02-2016, 08:49 PM
When the plague descended on Thebes, Oedipus sent his brother-in-law to the Delphic oracle to discover the cause. Little did he realize that the crime for which Thebes was being punished was his own. Today’s Republican Party is our Oedipus.

Lol fucking clown

craner
25-02-2016, 09:01 PM
High erudition, in other words.

luka
25-02-2016, 09:16 PM
Who's he think that is gunna impress? Loser..

vimothy
25-02-2016, 09:18 PM
Michael Brenden Dougherty's article on Trump, Buchanan and Samuel Francis is worth reading as as an alternative perspective to Kagan's: http://theweek.com/articles/599577/how-obscure-adviser-pat-buchanan-predicted-wild-trump-campaign-1996


Samuel Francis was a paleo-conservative intellectual who died in 2005. Earlier in his career he helped Senator East of North Carolina oppose the Martin Luther King holiday. He wrote a white paper recommending the Reagan White House use its law enforcement powers to break up and harass left-wing groups. He was an intellectual disciple of James Burnham's political realism...

To simplify Francis' theory [which he proposed Patrick Buchanan take advantage of in much the same way that Trump has]: There are a number of Americans who are losers from a process of economic globalization that enriches a transnational global elite. These Middle Americans see jobs disappearing to Asia and increased competition from immigrants. Most of them feel threatened by cultural liberalism, at least the type that sees Middle Americans as loathsome white bigots. But they are also threatened by conservatives who would take away their Medicare, hand their Social Security earnings to fund-managers in Connecticut, and cut off their unemployment too.

(...)

For decades, people have been warning that a set of policies that really has enriched Americans on the top, and likely has improved the overall quality of life (through cheap consumables) on the bottom, has hollowed out the middle.

Chinese competition really did hammer the Rust Belt and parts of the great Appalachian ghetto. It made the life prospects for men — in marriage and in their careers — much dimmer than those of their fathers. Libertarian economists, standing giddily behind Republican politicians, celebrate this as creative destruction even as the collateral damage claims millions of formerly-secure livelihoods, and — almost as crucially — overall trust and respect in the nation's governing class. Immigration really does change the calculus for native-born workers too...

The political left treats this as a made-up problem, a scapegoating by Applebee's-eating, megachurch rubes who think they are losing their "jerbs." Remember, Republicans and Democrats have still been getting elected all this time.

But the response of the predominantly-white class that Francis was writing about has mostly been one of personal despair. And thus we see them dying in middle age of drug overdose, alcoholism, or obesity at rates that now outpace those of even poorer blacks and Hispanics. Their rate of suicide is sky high too. Living in Washington D.C., however, with an endless two decade real-estate boom, and a free-lunch economy paid for by special interests, most of the people in the conservative movement hardly know that some Americans think America needs to be made great again.

In speeches, Trump mostly implies that the ruling class conducts trade deals or the business of government stupidly and weakly, not villainously or out of personal pecuniary motives. But the message of his campaign is that America's interests have been betrayed by fools.

craner
25-02-2016, 09:51 PM
Who's he think that is gunna impress? Loser..

He was actively trying to impress me. I should probably stop encouraging him.

luka
25-02-2016, 10:02 PM
You should he's no Hugh kenner

Leo
25-02-2016, 10:03 PM
safe to say if my father was still alive (and a bit younger), i can imagine him being one of the disgruntled unemployed white male trump supporters. he didn't go to college, spent time in the navy, worked blue-collar jobs in industries that no longer exist where he lived, and probably wouldn't have been successful in late-life skills retraining. easy to see why people like him are resentful of washington elites and willing to blow up the current political system. hopeless people have nothing to lose.

trza
25-02-2016, 10:33 PM
I've been to a bunch of towns that Trump won in already, the places where factories closed decades ago and he comes in and gives a speech about all the money he has made and how great America is. Then I have a neighbor with a confederate flag in his apartment window who I saw outside his house and he had a Trump sweater on, then a couple yard signs but not as many as the other guys.

Leo
26-02-2016, 05:49 PM
ok, now this campaign is just getting weird.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/02/marco-rubio-donald-trump-con-artist-219843

baboon2004
26-02-2016, 11:30 PM
Trump-Rubio ticket looks a bit less likely now :)

They do have something in common though - a propensity to mindlessly repeat the same stock phrases in place of anything of substance, usually banalities about America and the un-Americanness of Barack Obama. Granted, politics is soundbite central these days, but it's kinda embarrassing when someone (albeit himself an utter sleazebag) points this out, and you continue to do it:

e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9OZ8xHTX7c

vimothy
04-03-2016, 11:39 PM
Guardian readers discuss the ultimate taboo: 'Not even my wife knows': secret Donald Trump voters speak out (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/03/secret-donald-trump-voters-speak-out).

sufi
07-03-2016, 12:39 PM
this article manages to be both superficial and insightful,

How Professional Wrestling Explains American Politics (Especially Donald Trump) (https://medium.com/@owillis/how-professional-wrestling-explains-american-politics-especially-donald-trump-5449df1db9de#.pypb66z6k)

par for the course these strange days,

Leo
07-03-2016, 02:55 PM
another interesting perspective on the GOP meltdown
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/why-is-trump-driving-conservatives-so-crazy.html

vimothy
07-03-2016, 05:55 PM
Thanks for that.

Christopher Caldwell's recent article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-migrants-of-calais/article/2001284) about the crises in France is also worth reading for its perceptive analysis of the rise of the populist right:


You might think France is sitting on a powder keg, that its heavily immigrant suburbs are about to "blow." But that is not exactly what is going on. There is a new political configuration in France...

France has been cut in two by the globalization of its economy. The urban upper classes of Paris and a couple of other cities... have never been better off... But the benefits have been poorly spread. The middle class is shrinking. The gap between rich and poor is growing... [In La France Périphérique, "geographer" Christophe] Guilluy changes it all by asking a bold question: Why would you expect Paris to have a middle class?

Paris's prospects have improved because it has specialized. The division of labor has become global. Paris is now a place for couturiers, writers, film directors, CEOs, and other "symbolic analysts," the people who design, direct, conceive, and analyze things. But the jobs the middle class used to do all over France — manufacturing, mostly — are best done elsewhere. You would not expect a middle class in Paris any more than you would expect one on a cattle ranch. That's not what Paris is for...

Even if Paris does not need a middle class, it desperately needs a lower class. Those symbolic analysts require people to chop their sushi, mix their cocktails, dust their apartments, and push their children's strollers and their parents' wheelchairs. This means immigrants — and increasingly it means only immigrants... The banlieues are an integrated part of the world economy. There is now an immigrant-descended petite bourgeoisie. Naturally, as rich people monopolize the private housing stock, poor newcomers monopolize the welfare housing. Far from being a drain on rich people's taxes, these projects provide subsidized housing for their servants...

The acute problem is the reconstitution, recomposition, displacement, and... eviction of the native working and middle classes from the productive parts of the urban economy. These natives are locked out of a France that they thought belonged to them. The rich have bid up the price of urban real estate to the point where those from outside the metropolis cannot afford even to rent it. Public housing is not an option because its inhabitants are almost never French and are very often Muslim. To move into it is to become a despised minority in one's "own" country...

Unfortunately the political elite is congenitally incapable of recognising, let alone ameliorating, these problems:


This reconfiguration of French society is not the immigrants' fault. But the most explosive potential problems in France have everything to do with immigration. The system's main beneficiaries defend mass immigration as if it were a matter of civilizational life or death... In a recent interview, the financier George Soros lauded German chancellor Angela Merkel for being "farsighted when she recognized that the migration crisis had the potential to destroy the European Union, first by causing a breakdown of the Schengen system of open borders and, eventually, by undermining the common market." This is rather a non sequitur: Isn't it her bad decisions, rather than the crisis itself, that are destroying the EU? If a Union's survival depends on the unexpected arrival at random intervals of millions of desperate foreigners, it's probably not terribly stable to begin with.

It is better in some ways to be an immigrant in a housing project in La Courneuve, outside of Paris... than to be cut off from the global economy in... "peripheral France." The people who live there are doing badly, and they are coming to see this as the outcome of a deliberate policy. In January, INSEE... announced that the life expectancy of French people of both sexes had fallen for the first time since World War II... [T]hose banished from the big urban economies are "the nightmare of the ruling classes." This is because they still constitute an electoral majority, and they have chosen the National Front as their vehicle. The two main parties are both built on shrinking bases. The electoral base of France's Socialists consists of those enriched by globalization and those protected from it (like public employees). The electoral base of France's Republicans consists largely of retirees. The National Front is the fastest-growing party because it is the party of globalization's losers, and globalization is producing more losers than winners...

This is at least partly because they have no access to views outside their frame, which is defined by a positive orientation to globalisation:


If Guilluy is right... we are using antiquated categories that make the most explosive social problems of our time wholly invisible to us... From the age of social democracy, when class was measured by one dimension, income, we have inherited the habit of assuming political issues will pit "the rich" against "the poor." But today's issues don't. The dividing line on most issues is whether people are being helped or hurt by the global economy.

A journalist or sociologist or businessman looking only at Paris, with the best faith in the world, cannot form an objective view of whether France is doing well. You talk to rich and poor, old and young, black and white, male and female, immigrant and native .  .  . but these are all people for whom France is "working." What is more, the mainstream sources from whom one might absorb alternative information — journalists, television broadcasters, comedians — all inhabit this same world. Those who do not are so absolutely invisible that they cannot even be analyzed. You wouldn't know, for instance, that 64 percent of working-class people in France favor the death penalty.

The same dynamic is also at play in the US:


Surely something similar is at work in our own politics. Consider the Democratic primaries. Whether one likes the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders or not, everyone will agree that he has a more coherent political program than Hillary Clinton. But everyone is wrong. Sanders's textbook socialism makes sense for an industrial proletariat of 100 years ago, but this proletariat is an imaginary friend. In fact, Sanders is using a program designed for the wretched of the earth to appeal to the party of globalization's winners. Not all Democrats are winning the same way... but it is improving for all of them. For these groups Hillary is the better ideological match... Similarly, if one uses Guilluy's model to think of the Republicans as the party of those, from the top of the social scale to the bottom, for whom globalization has made things worse, one can see that Donald Trump... has been winning primaries because he has thus far been the best candidate, with "best" not meant in any condescending way. His success rests not on demagogic tricks but on a truth about the global division of labor that has eluded other candidates. Whatever that truth is, it has something to do with the word "again" in "Make America Great Again."

Mr. Tea
07-03-2016, 07:22 PM
Interesting (and worrying) stuff, cheers vim.

Leo
23-03-2016, 01:45 PM
"Lonesome Rhodes has come to life in the form of Donald Trump."

http://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trump-the-most-dangerous-face-in-the-republican-crowd/

droid
23-03-2016, 01:48 PM
Sanders is far from a 'textbook socialist'. Hes a new deal Democrat, less radical even.

trza
23-03-2016, 06:20 PM
Donald Trump's middle initial is J, making him DJ Trump. And Dj Trump has carefully curated a playlist that is repeated at extremely high volume at least three times before each live event. The playlist of seventies and eighties pop has the effect of building his crowd into a giant angry mob of psychopaths bent on violence and destruction. Songs like Rocket Man and Uptown Girl are replayed until the crowd starts to chant Turn It Off or people start punching the person next to them. This is a musical phenomenon.

Mr. Tea
09-04-2016, 02:04 PM
Has any else seen friends or friends-of-friends sharing this bloody damnfool Avaaz petition calling on Mr Trump to please, if he wouldn't mind, stop being such a mean old poopyhead?

http://secure.avaaz.org/en/deartrump/

I honestly can't imagine what they think they're going to achieve by this. Reactionary populists like Trump (and Farage, le Pen etc.) thrive on opposition and on a carefully cultivated sense of being 'excluded' and 'oppressed' by 'the liberal elite'. Trump, in particular, has made an entire career out of promoting the idea that white, straight, Christian, working-class and lower-middle-class Americans are somehow the victims of exactly the sort of people who sign Avaaz petitions.

So I think this effort is going to have no effect on his campaign whatsoever in the best case, and could even strengthen his position. Fucking gesture politics, clicktivism and virtue signaling, honestly.

Leo
09-04-2016, 05:05 PM
agreed...and yes, that petition is horseshit. having a bunch of europeans oppose him is only a plus for his campaign. remember, this is the guy who claims he's not sure NATO has any value, doesn't want to take the use of nukes in europe off the table and thinks the rest of the world should take care of their own problems instead of always expecting the US to do it for them. of course, he probably doesn't actually believe much (most?) of what he says on the campaign trail, but it sounds good to his hardcore followers.

luckily, there are signs that his campaign is imploding from the inside, mismanaging delegate recruitment and, as Politico says, having their own version of "hunger games" between three competing internal factions. there's no stopping him if he gets 1,237 delegate before the convention, but that's looking much less likely to happen now after his big loss in wisconsin. the convention will be nuts if he doesn't have to delegates going in, both he and his supporters will be batshit crazy if he collects the most votes but doesn't end up with the nomination. it's a conspiracy, he was cheated!!! the thing is, delegates are requited to vote as their districts/states voted on the first ballot, but then free to vote for whoever they want on subsequent ballots.

heroesandvillains
10-04-2016, 08:12 AM
Also worthy of a mention is that 10s of thousands of people tried to support having guns at the RNC. Even if the Secret Service "doesn't allow it" you know there will be guns at a contested convention.

Leo
10-04-2016, 04:12 PM
Also worthy of a mention is that 10s of thousands of people tried to support having guns at the RNC. Even if the Secret Service "doesn't allow it" you know there will be guns at a contested convention.

that "guns at the GOP convention" petition was great because it totally called their bluff, not one republican backed it. all these blowhard conservatives who always push for allowing open carry in Starbuck's, churches, schools, etc., were suddenly revealed as chickshit when it came to their own party supporters packing heat on their convention floor. so much hypocrisy.

droid
04-05-2016, 09:49 AM
Ted Cruz Announced He’s Suspending His Campaign To Tend To His Thousands Of Glistening Eggs

http://www.clickhole.com/article/tough-call-ted-cruz-announced-hes-suspending-his-c-4127?utm_campaign=default&utm_medium=ShareTools&utm_source=twitter

Leo
04-05-2016, 01:25 PM
by all rights, clinton should crush him but: a) he's such a wildcard, will say anything, nothing off the table, b) it will be an incredibly dirty campaign, c) she is often a bad campaigner, d) she's of course also vulnerable regarding the emails/server and various past clinton scandals and e) an october surprise terrorist attack in the states could scare voters into his corner.

in other words, i'm somewhat confident she'll beat him (and democrats might even be able to take back the senate), but i wish i felt more confident. i wish hillary was a better candidate, or a different person (and no, it's out of bernie's reach).

droid
04-05-2016, 01:54 PM
Yeah, its shame, I think Sanders would stand a better chance against Trump. He'd offer a clear alternative, have the weight of the party behind him, plus the added support of the new constituencies he's tapped into.

Leo
04-05-2016, 03:14 PM
Yeah, its shame, I think Sanders would stand a better chance against Trump. He'd offer a clear alternative, have the weight of the party behind him, plus the added support of the new constituencies he's tapped into.

true, but part of me still thinks it would be very difficult for middle america to vote for a 70-year old socialist jew as president. nothing against older people, socialists or jews, you understand, but the GOP would have a field day against him and many (many!) americans outside the east and west coasts aren't very open minded. bernie's popularity with new/younger voters is a plus but not sure it would outweigh GOP plus skittish independent voters.

trza
04-05-2016, 03:37 PM
Sanders and his "electability" argument are one of the biggest scams of this election. His ideas are divisive, unpopular, misguided or just wrong for the general election. He is not a likable person, his private life has plenty of scandals or stuff that can be taken out of context. He never faced a single attack ad, Hillary never wanted to anger his supporters.

The big right wing super-PACS were actually working on Hillary memes and ads tailored to make her unpopular with his supporters. The attacks against him would start with his self identification as a socialist, his huge spending plans, higher taxes, anti-business policies. The facebook memes would have his face right next to giant macro graphics of "90% Tax Rate" or "$30 Trillion in new Debt", and don't even ask how Trump would make everyone know about his vague promise to release a million prisoners.

Leo
04-05-2016, 07:21 PM
Sanders and his "electability" argument are one of the biggest scams of this election. His ideas are divisive, unpopular, misguided or just wrong for the general election. He is not a likable person, his private life has plenty of scandals or stuff that can be taken out of context. He never faced a single attack ad, Hillary never wanted to anger his supporters.

The big right wing super-PACS were actually working on Hillary memes and ads tailored to make her unpopular with his supporters. The attacks against him would start with his self identification as a socialist, his huge spending plans, higher taxes, anti-business policies. The facebook memes would have his face right next to giant macro graphics of "90% Tax Rate" or "$30 Trillion in new Debt", and don't even ask how Trump would make everyone know about his vague promise to release a million prisoners.

ha! yeah, i stopped trying to explain that sort of thing to most of my brooklyn hipster/champagne socialist friends for the past year, wasn't worth the effort. funny thing: they all view trump supporters/tea partiers/fox news viewers as closed-minded and unreasonable, when in fact many sanders supporters are the same way on the other end of the spectrum. it's great to be passionate, but it helps to be a little realistic too.

Mr. Tea
04-05-2016, 07:40 PM
Looking at the Sanders/Clinton race (edit: 'contest' might be a better word here!) from outside the US, the point I've read over and over again is the importance of race in this question. Specifically, very few black and Hispanic voters have voted for Sanders, and even writers who in principle support the guy are admitting that this is in part his fault, as he could seriously have undermined Clinton by pointing out the disastrous effects her husband's deregulation of Wall Street had on low-income Americans (who are disproportionately black and Hispanic, it hardly need be said) and by making much more noise about his own substantial history of anti-racist activism.

Going back to Trump, is it possible that his endless fulminations against those dastardly wetbacks could be his undoing? I mean, as popular as the rhetoric is with many white Americans, it's hardly going to endear him to Hispanic voters, is it?

Leo
04-05-2016, 08:08 PM
Going back to Trump, is it possible that his endless fulminations against those dastardly wetbacks could be his undoing? I mean, as popular as the rhetoric is with many white Americans, it's hardly going to endear him to Hispanic voters, is it?

that's the thing, trump's favorability ratings with hispanics is in the mid-20s, and not much higher with women. combine those two demographics and the numbers just don't work for winning a national election, there just aren't enough angry white males to outweigh them.

keep in mind that although trump might have been getting 50-60% of the vote in these recent elections, those were GOP primaries where (largely) only the hardest of the hardcore base turn out to vote. he definitely expanded turnout in some states and the diehards will stick with him, but it will be a different story when moderate republicans, independents and democrats are voting in the national election too.

droid
04-05-2016, 11:48 PM
He is not a likable person.

Just to ignore the polemics - yknow Sanders is the only one of the three remaining candidates to actually have a favourable rating in polls? The other two are in the negatives.

Corpsey
18-05-2016, 01:39 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/the-mind-of-donald-trump/480771/

An interesting article about Trump's psychology, by a psychologist, as inferred from his public statements and actions.

Corpsey
23-05-2016, 11:54 AM
Going back to Trump, is it possible that his endless fulminations against those dastardly wetbacks could be his undoing? I mean, as popular as the rhetoric is with many white Americans, it's hardly going to endear him to Hispanic voters, is it?

My take on this would be that Trump never thought he had a chance in hell of becoming President, although that might have changed now (shudder). I reckon, despite his egotism, he might have even surprised himself in succeeding so spectacularly: hence not giving a fuck about alienating large parts of the electorate.

Leo
26-05-2016, 07:11 PM
Is Trump sabotaging his own campaign?
The Morning Joe panel discusses Donald Trump's campaign and if the leading GOP candidate actually wants to be president.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/is-trump-sabotaging-his-own-campaign-693354563575

don't have to watch the whole thing, the first few minutes are enough.

interesting perspective: deep down inside, he's actually scared of being president.

in light of how he's been behaving and trashing GOP leaders, he could just be the typical egomaniac CEO who is convinced everything he does is right...or he could (consciously or unconsciously) be shooting himself in the foot. he's smart enough to know he needs to "pivot" and not be such a firebrand now that the primaries are done, but he's still chugging along making fun of romney, NM governor martinez (who is EXACTLY the type of successful/female/hispanic GOP supporter and possibly even running mate he needs to win general election). why attack her, of all people?

it might be crazy talk, but so much doesn't add up that it just might be true.

trza
26-05-2016, 07:37 PM
Trump fired one of his campaign workers after a dispute between his aides. But the guys name is Wiley and my twitter feed is filled with news and music and politics so it shows up like TRUMP FIRES WILEY.

sadmanbarty
30-05-2016, 02:29 PM
From a Krugman piece. Polling suggests Clinton will beat Trump

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton?version=meter+at+1&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FpmDPVpJ7Qd&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click

https://twitter.com/benchmarkpol/status/736213959779471361?version=meter+at+1&module=meter-Links&pgtype=article&contentId=&mediaId=&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FpmDPVpJ7Qd&priority=true&action=click&contentCollection=meter-links-click

droid
30-05-2016, 02:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irrbuaiUMVw

Corpsey
08-06-2016, 12:13 PM
Is there a good summary somewhere of why so many people seem to loathe Hilary?

I don't need to be told why they loathe Trump.

Leo
08-06-2016, 02:08 PM
Is there a good summary somewhere of why so many people seem to loathe Hilary?

opponents (both GOP and bernie supporters) depict her and the clintons in general as the symbol of crony capitalism. from bill's time in the white house to the clinton foundation, they are seen as selling access and power to the highest bidders regardless of how unsavory.

she gets tarred with all that was wrong with bill's presidency ("disgracing the office" with lewinsky, impeachment, etc.)

they see her as hypocritical in claiming to uphold democratic values while also cozying up to wall street (collecting $500k from goldman sachs for a 20-minute speech, etc.)

they say she's untrustworthy and plays by a different sent of rules (see: private email and server).

in fairness, the large majority of politicians help those who help them, suck up to big money donors and say/do whatever is politically expedient. i think the notion is the clintons take it all to the next level, elevating it to an art form.

i voted for her.

droid
08-06-2016, 02:33 PM
I thought it was because she's a ruthless, sociopathic war criminal.

trza
08-06-2016, 03:28 PM
Donald Trump just had the worst five days of his campaign, just an awful social media replay of himself doubling down and tripling down on the same self inflicted wound that he brought up for no good reason. The political press claims Ivanka and Chris Christie and two other close aides wrote his speech last night but that was five days of sticking every Republican in a trap where they need to sound like they disagree with him but can't insult his followers.

Leo
08-06-2016, 03:44 PM
I thought it was because she's a ruthless, sociopathic war criminal.

that's a bit hyperbolic, but i get your point. it's certainly an issue, but for this election, american voters don't seem to care as much about it. this time around, it's more about domestic issues: jobs/economy, stagnant/declining wages, loss of the middle class, wealth disparity (followed to a slightly lesser degree by immigration, domestic terrorist threat, supreme court justices, etc.).

not saying that's right, just saying how it is.

Leo
15-06-2016, 11:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbM6WbUw7Bs

trza
16-06-2016, 04:01 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClCgVFdWMAET5CS.jpg

So Wiley was fired, then rehired in a power play between some of the guys fighting for Trump's attention?

luka
16-06-2016, 08:09 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbM6WbUw7Bs

a great shame japan never overtook america as world cultural and economic hegemon as it was supposed to in the 1980s

Corpsey
22-06-2016, 09:31 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-leaders-alarmed-by-trumps-devastating-fundraising-start/2016/06/21/6dfa5b4c-37bc-11e6-a254-2b336e293a3c_story.html?tid=pm_pop_b

Hillary's warmongering sociopathy aside, the best possible result at this point is surely that she wins, Trump gets buried and the Republican party has to face up to the fact that it's effectively shot itself in the head by sucking up to the wingnuts all these years?

Corpsey
07-07-2016, 01:20 PM
Donald J. Trump on Wednesday offered a defiant defense of his campaign’s decision to publish an image widely viewed as anti-Semitic — saying he regretted deleting it — and vigorously reaffirmed his praise of Saddam Hussein, the murderous Iraqi dictator.

from the NYT

baboon2004
20-07-2016, 10:00 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/20/milo-yiannopoulos-nero-permanently-banned-twitter

I rarely have as extreme a reaction towards people as this guy (having watched a speech he made at a Trump rally) - absolutely repulsive, and dangerously able to make himself seem 'reasonable' if you stop tuning in for a second to what he is actually saying. i.e. the kind of person who would very much fit the mould of a future fascist leader somewhere.

Should be locked in a room and forced to undergo the therapy he desperately needs until he hates himself and others a little bit less.

droid
20-07-2016, 10:13 AM
Just posted about that on the Breitbart thread.

This is, I think, the scariest thing Ive read about trump:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all


“I put lipstick on a pig,” he said. “I feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is.” He went on, “I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.”

baboon2004
20-07-2016, 10:22 AM
Ah, didn't realise this was even a 'thing' til last night. Will check.

OK, that's cheered me up. best make the most of my time til next January then.

droid
20-07-2016, 10:31 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cnx-LRfUsAAzghS.jpg:large

Leo
20-07-2016, 03:37 PM
Report: Trump Plans to License His Name to His Administration, Not to Run It


...one source of skepticism has remained difficult to dismiss, even after the mogul clinched his party's bid: Why would Donald Trump want to be president?

After all, Trump really seems to enjoy being an eccentric pseudo-billionaire who spends his days cutting ribbons and watching cable news. And he has been utterly unwilling to perform the workaday duties of a presidential candidate, let alone those of an actual president. He refuses to make fundraising calls, or assemble a campaign staff large enough to achieve basic competence, or even to spend more than a dozen nights of the campaign away from one of his homes...This is a man who has shown no real interest in civics or governance at any point in his adult life — while showing immense interest in publicity stunts.

...And yet, this is also a man who transparently hates losing. Especially in a public fashion. Thus, one might reason that the ideal outcome for Trump would be to somehow win the election but not actually have to serve as president.

According to Robert Draper of The New York Times Magazine, that is, in fact, how the mogul's campaign described his endgame to John Kasich, when trying to convince the Ohio governor to become Trump's running mate:

One day this past May, Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., reached out to a senior adviser to Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who left the presidential race just a few weeks before. As a candidate, Kasich declared in March that Trump was “really not prepared to be president of the United States,” and the following month he took the highly unusual step of coordinating with his rival Senator Ted Cruz in an effort to deny Trump the nomination. But according to the Kasich adviser (who spoke only under the condition that he not be named), Donald Jr. wanted to make him an offer nonetheless: Did he have any interest in being the most powerful vice president in history?

When Kasich’s adviser asked how this would be the case, Donald Jr. explained that his father’s vice president would be in charge of domestic and foreign policy.

Then what, the adviser asked, would Trump be in charge of?

“Making America great again” was the casual reply.

As with so many of his ventures, Trump would like to brand his administration — but not actually run it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/trump-to-license-name-to-presidency-not-run-it.html

Corpsey
22-07-2016, 01:05 PM
Tangentially related to Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/a-big-divide-between-fox-news-ailes-sons-of-murdoch/2016/07/20/15094630-4ea8-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html



The two sons of media tycoon Rupert Murdoch have long harbored deep cultural and personal differences with Roger Ailes, the man who has shaped the right-wing Fox News that has cranked out profits for the Murdoch empire since the network’s inception two decades ago.

Now, less than two years after Rupert ceded more authority to sons Lachlan and James, those differences loom large as the pair is poised to oust the longtime Fox News chief executive amid allegations of sexual harassment.

Leo
22-07-2016, 02:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNiqpBNE9ik

Corpsey
25-07-2016, 11:26 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jul/21/trump-and-me-mark-singer-donald-review-hari-kunzru

''At the time of writing, Trump’s polling negatives are unprecedented, his campaign is broke, and his chances of beating Hillary Clinton in a general election seem slim. But even if he does not become the president of the United States, he points the way towards a future that looks very bleak indeed. The possibility of a collapse of democratic politics, or at least a hiatus, a temporary suspension of certain inconveniences such as transparency, accountability and the rule of law, has hung in the air since 9/11. Now it has been given shape as never before. This election (and other similar currents around the world) has the potential to open the way for someone or something entirely unanticipated. Singer gets a lot of laughs out of Trump – the ridiculous apartment, the humourless pomposity – but Trump is not the point. At best he is a sorcerer’s apprentice with little understanding of the forces he professes to control. At worst, he’s a sort of teetotal Yankee Yeltsin, a clown clearing the way for a future American Putin, someone with the potential to make a bonfire of the Enlightenment values that provide a fragile international barrier against savagery and horror.''

droid
25-07-2016, 02:09 PM
Hmmm...

Chance of winning:

Hillary Clinton 42.5%
Donald Trump 57.5%

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

Leo
25-07-2016, 02:51 PM
hmm...actually, it's currently at 53.7% for clinton (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/)

this is another interesting one, strictly betting odds (as opposed to polls or political pundits) with clinton at 66.4% Also, a 58.5% chance that the Dems take back the Senate: https://electionbettingodds.com.

trump probably got a post-convention bump, let's see if hillary does the same. will also be interesting to see if the whole "putin/wikileaks" factor works for or against trump. the emails reveal mostly a lot of inside baseball that political wonks are excited about but i'm not sure the average voter cares about debbie washerman schultz, etc.

also, isn't it kind of expected that the democratic national committee would be in favor of the candidate who has been one of their leaders for her entire adult life over a guy who isn't even a democrat but decided to (opportunistically, some would say) jump on their party bandwagon?

droid
25-07-2016, 02:54 PM
Thats the 'nowcast' - if the election was held right now.

Adjusted for polls Clinton is at 58% or so.

But still...

Corpsey
25-07-2016, 03:35 PM
I can imagine ppl on here loathing Michael Moore but this article in the Huff Post is very entertaining and seems depressingly accurate too:

5 Reasons Why Trump Will Win

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/5-reasons-why-trump-will-_b_11156794.html

Particularly the idea that anybody voting for Trump is going to be encouraging others to do so through a megaphone, while even young women in America aren't going to be feeling too enthusiastic about Hillary.

It's really going to be a flabbergasting, soul-destroying moment if Trump wins. Like Brexit to the power of ten.

droid
25-07-2016, 04:05 PM
Decent article. I, like many others assumed Clinton would have it in the bag, but as the smoke clears, it seems to all be up for grabs.

Leo
25-07-2016, 04:59 PM
it's very rare that americans reelect presidential candidates from the same party for three consecutive terms, last time it happened was in the 1920s. sometimes they vote to give the other party a chance each time, and pretty much always elect to do so after a president has served two terms. so in a way, history was stacked again hillary from the outset. the fact that she's not the best campaigner and the whole email server debacle hasn't helped.

the debates will be huge, trump could lose composure when grilled one-on-one for 90 minutes. hillary might not be likable but she's a good debater.

Corpsey
25-07-2016, 05:23 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/4teoxl/a_final_response_to_the_tell_me_why_trump_is_a/


Trump says the Chinese government "showed strength" in response to the Tienanmen Square protests in which they massacred between 250 to 3,000 civilians and peaceful protesters.

“The Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/11/donald-trump-tiananmen-square-china-playboy-interview

luka
25-07-2016, 07:27 PM
https://www.instagram.com/p/BB5KkANPaQg/

Corpsey
26-07-2016, 11:49 AM
Signs pointing to Russian involvement in/execution of the hacking that lead to the sacking of the Democratic party chief:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/all-signs-point-to-russia-being-behind-the-dnc-hack

Suggesting that Trump is being helped out by Putin?

WORRYING.

droid
26-07-2016, 11:54 AM
Yeah, this seems to have been verified in a few places. Seems like the FSB were definitely behind it.

Corpsey
26-07-2016, 12:04 PM
On the 'plus' side, if Trump DOES get in, at least we know that Putin won't be too quick to launch nukes at him.

luka
26-07-2016, 12:13 PM
http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2011/03/violence-is-golden/

vimothy told me this essay shook the scales from his eyes

Corpsey
26-07-2016, 12:45 PM
It does sometimes occur to me that it would be in the interest of those who abhor violence to become skilled in being violent, should such a need ever occur. Which, the violent being so violent, is a distinct possibility.

I mean to say that if decent, violence-abhorring people were trained to be effectively violent when pushed, than the people who LOVE being violent would be less able to inflict their violence on the unwilling.

For example, that video that was posted recently of the two yobs on a bus in Manchester being racist towards an innocent man - nobody else on the bus did anything, because they aren't comfortable with violence, and the yobs evidently would have been. But if everybody on the bus had been trained in the deadly art of Ninjitsu, they could have easily stood up to the yobs, outnumbering them as they did, and disabled them with shurkien stars.

NOTE: I realise this would open the way for all sorts of disastrous effects. I don't agree with that essay (from having skimmed it), although I see where he's coming from. The state has sanctions upon it, unlike individuals free of law, and therefore while the threat of violence is essential to law and order, the violence can (And has) become less gratuitously cruel over time. (Trump, of course, advocates MORE and WORSE violence.)

OTOH, it's something similar to women being taught self-defence techniques. Looking back, I was bullied as an infant, and though I don't nurse revenge fantasies (much), I think I'd have been better off having been trained in the deadly art of Ninjitsu at the age of 4, because then I could have disabled my attackers with shuriken stars. Every child knows (or knew, perhaps things have moved on since?) that telling the teacher was no good. A shuriken star in the eye is the only thing a bully understands.

luka
26-07-2016, 01:39 PM
https://www.instagram.com/p/BC82V1ggKPC/?tagged=wolvesofvinland

Mr. Tea
26-07-2016, 01:42 PM
If you think being a ninja is primarily about defending yourself, you're dead wrong.

Facts:

1. Ninjas are mammals.
2. Ninjas fight ALL the time.
3. The purpose of the ninja is to flip out and kill people. (http://www.realultimatepower.net/index4.htm)

Corpsey
26-07-2016, 01:52 PM
I'm saying us lefties need to be able to throw hands, cos the UKIP hordes are crowding the horizon, flailing their cricket bats, toting splintered pint glasses, high on bitter.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html


As this dystopian election campaign has unfolded, my mind keeps being tugged by a passage in Plato’s Republic. It has unsettled — even surprised — me from the moment I first read it in graduate school. The passage is from the part of the dialogue where Socrates and his friends are talking about the nature of different political systems, how they change over time, and how one can slowly evolve into another. And Socrates seemed pretty clear on one sobering point: that “tyranny is probably established out of no other regime than democracy.” What did Plato mean by that? Democracy, for him, I discovered, was a political system of maximal freedom and equality, where every lifestyle is allowed and public offices are filled by a lottery. And the longer a democracy lasted, Plato argued, the more democratic it would become. Its freedoms would multiply; its equality spread. Deference to any sort of authority would wither; tolerance of any kind of inequality would come under intense threat; and multiculturalism and sexual freedom would create a city or a country like “a many-colored cloak decorated in all hues.”

This rainbow-flag polity, Plato argues, is, for many people, the fairest of regimes. The freedom in that democracy has to be experienced to be believed — with shame and privilege in particular emerging over time as anathema. But it is inherently unstable. As the authority of elites fades, as Establishment values cede to popular ones, views and identities can become so magnificently diverse as to be mutually uncomprehending. And when all the barriers to equality, formal and informal, have been removed; when everyone is equal; when elites are despised and full license is established to do “whatever one wants,” you arrive at what might be called late-stage democracy. There is no kowtowing to authority here, let alone to political experience or expertise.

The very rich come under attack, as inequality becomes increasingly intolerable. Patriarchy is also dismantled: “We almost forgot to mention the extent of the law of equality and of freedom in the relations of women with men and men with women.” Family hierarchies are inverted: “A father habituates himself to be like his child and fear his sons, and a son habituates himself to be like his father and to have no shame before or fear of his parents.” In classrooms, “as the teacher ... is frightened of the pupils and fawns on them, so the students make light of their teachers.” Animals are regarded as equal to humans; the rich mingle freely with the poor in the streets and try to blend in. The foreigner is equal to the citizen.

And it is when a democracy has ripened as fully as this, Plato argues, that a would-be tyrant will often seize his moment.

Leo
26-07-2016, 02:25 PM
FLOTUS for POTUS!

baboon2004
26-07-2016, 10:18 PM
the debates will be huge, trump could lose composure when grilled one-on-one for 90 minutes. hillary might not be likable but she's a good debater.

I'm sure there's loads of footage I haven't seen, but when I checked out her 2008 head-to-heads against Obama, I've got to say that I wasn't impressed at the way Clinton handled the pressure (and prior to reviewing those, I'd held the view that she was a good debater if nothing else)...

vimothy
27-07-2016, 12:58 AM
I mean to say that if decent, violence-abhorring people were trained to be effectively violent when pushed, than the people who LOVE being violent would be less able to inflict their violence on the unwilling.

For example, that video that was posted recently of the two yobs on a bus in Manchester being racist towards an innocent man - nobody else on the bus did anything, because they aren't comfortable with violence, and the yobs evidently would have been.

There's some truth in that, but it's wrapped in (without wanting to offend) something like a juvenile superhero fantasy. The issue is not that people are no longer prepared to fight one another in the streets, but that there has been widespread societal breakdown; but, because of the nature of that breakdown, its effects are largely hidden from many. People lack social solidarity, the "moral unity" that previously bound them together by concomitant (sometimes sacred) obligations. It's notable that you refer to racist abuse - one of the few acts that that we can agree, as post-modern liberals, are immoral. What else would we be prepared to fight for?

Plato understood this: "the longer a democracy lasted... the more democratic it would become... [d]eference to any sort of authority would wither". Society cannot survive without authority, and authority must somehow be grounded to have any legitimacy. But in what? Maistre (Jack Donovan before there was 4chan) suggests the hangman's noose. We reject that, of course. But can we suggest anything in its stead? We have no religion, but we do have Facebook, and lots of stuff. Hopefully that is enough.

droid
27-07-2016, 10:18 AM
Anarchy.

Mr. Tea
27-07-2016, 02:28 PM
It's notable that you refer to racist abuse - one of the few acts that that we can agree, as post-modern liberals, are immoral. What else would we be prepared to fight for?


Not sure I agree with this. Most of us wouldn't want to get involved in a fight between two more or less equal-sized men (or women) but would either intervene, or at least wish we had the courage to intervene, in a clear case of a smaller and weaker person being picked on - older kids beating up a younger kid, or someone terrorizing a granny, a disabled person, or whatever.

The point about good, enlightened liberals having no clue how to defend themselves is given an interesting spin here (http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/05/21/expert-german-men-forgot-fight/) - a 'violence researcher' in Germany says the New Year's Eve mass sex attacks in Cologne happened because "German men no longer know how to stand up for themselves or face violent conflict", because they're used to having the State do it for them - although I can't agree with him that this is a good thing. It's surely desirable to be able to look after yourself, and if necessary other people, if the need arises, isn't it?

Note that I say this as someone who is in no way particularly 'hard' - the only black belt I own is the leather one I use to hold my jeans up. (Having said that, I did get into a fight with a guy on a train last year to stop him sexually assaulting a woman. Not sure what I'd have done if he'd had two or three mates with him, though.)

rubberdingyrapids
27-07-2016, 03:07 PM
A shuriken star in the eye is the only thing a bully understands.

sadly, this is true.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/5-POINTED-STAR-THROWING-KNIFE-/172281924420

Mr. Tea
27-07-2016, 04:00 PM
sadly, this is true.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/5-POINTED-STAR-THROWING-KNIFE-/172281924420

Lol - "people who view this item also viewed..." (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burgundy-CIA-Agent-Comb-with-Hidden-Knife/252428554561?_trksid=p2047675.c100623.m-1&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%2 6asc%3D37798%26meid%3D75739311474648f1ae64290ff54b 847b%26pid%3D100623%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D1722 81924420)

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xHAAAOSwc1FXY-3O/s-l500.jpg

Leo
27-07-2016, 08:33 PM
can we move this badman conversation to another thread, please. :confused:

we're missing the window of opportunity to discuss today's trump WTF: publicly encouraging russia to FURTHER meddle in a US election.

Corpsey
28-07-2016, 09:48 AM
Not to derail from any discussion of Trumputin, but this article about the other candidates for Republican nomination in the LRB hilariously and terrifyingly shows how Trump was an oaf in a field of lunatics: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked

Old news to most of you, but shocking to me that one of the two mainstream parties in the US is fielding candidates with views which would be seen in the UK as highly eccentric and possibly outright extremist.

baboon2004
28-07-2016, 02:48 PM
Not to derail from any discussion of Trumputin, but this article about the other candidates for Republican nomination in the LRB hilariously and terrifyingly shows how Trump was an oaf in a field of lunatics: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked

Old news to most of you, but shocking to me that one of the two mainstream parties in the US is fielding candidates with views which would be seen in the UK as highly eccentric and possibly outright extremist.

While I thought I understood how lunatic the Republican Party was, that article has shocked me out of my complacency. It really is even madder than I thought, and certainly extremist.

The Carly Fiorina 'demon sheep' advert is priceless. She was so fiscally conservative that she refused to pay for any special effects, choosing instead to make a man dress up as an unconvincing sheep. I guess that's kind of admirable in her world.

Leo
31-07-2016, 03:47 PM
HUGE post-convention bump in today's 538 now-cast: clinton 56.5%, trump 43.2% (last week: clinton 42.5% and trump 57.5%)

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

not sure it will last but a strong dem convention coupled with his senseless attack on that muslim family who spoke may have been a bridge too far for anyone but the hardcore trump supporters.

Corpsey
02-08-2016, 09:15 AM
Martin Amis reviews a couple of Trump's books: http://harpers.org/archive/2016/08/don-the-realtor/

As a fan of Amis's critical work, it's a relief to read an essay by him that doesn't cause the by now customary full body cringe.

Actually, Trump is the perfect subject for Amis, having made 'Money' look less and less like a satire lately. He's practically an Amis character, with his linguistic idiosyncrasy, his hypersensitive machismo and egomania, and most of all the cheerful, brazen, 'neon' vulgarity.

Corpsey
02-08-2016, 10:08 AM
Truly terrifying


Roger Stone, a long time confidante of Trump, amplified these concerns in an interview with a far right wing radio show.

Stone said: “I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly.”

Laying out a strategy for Trump to adopt, Stone added: “He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there’s voter fraud. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.’”

He also promised a “bloodbath” if the Democrats attempted to “steal” the election.

On Monday night, Trump also escalated his rhetoric about Democratic rival Clinton. In a packed rally in a high school gym in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, he called the former secretary of state “the devil”.


The Republican nominee was also quoted in an interview with USA Today saying that if his daughter Ivanka was sexually harassed, “I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/02/donald-trump-calls-hillary-clinton-the-devil-and-suggests-election-will-be-rigged

CrowleyHead
02-08-2016, 01:01 PM
Worst part is, he's got logic on his side from a Democratic p.o.v b/c Hillary power-played Sanders, as one does.

Its the subtle trick about Trump; he says a lot of things that are lies, but have enough basis in a logical argument when it comes to his opponent that he isn't just blowing smoke. Hillary is a TERRIBLE opponent for him to go up against as far as being a proper opposite, and in no way the figure of positive liberal change that a Barack had stood for symbolically. They can push her as the first female president for the US and simply not being a brazen rouser of the conservative working class in fascism, but she has built her career on numbers of questionable behavior that actually puts her closer to the boogeyman Trump concept beneath the veneer of 'goodness'.

Its one of the few things going for him; he points out the fraudulence of his foes, and the people respond to it with glee because the fact of the matter is, he's RIGHT. It doesn't make him himself a good candidate in reality, but its those little wins and (as I imagine his supporters/fans would describe it) the "balls" to say it, that gives him validation.

Still shocks me people are confused as to the hows and whys of his effectiveness sometimes. He's been the only guy playing smart this whole election rollout.

Corpsey
02-08-2016, 01:38 PM
Yeah, he's an anti establishment figure, and he's exposed how in-pocket his competitors are.

It's just a shame he's also happens to be a bigoted, narcissistic, amoral bastard.

I wonder if Trump's campaign sets up the possibility of other billionaires running for office in the future? After all, he's proven you can get far with the 'I'm not beholden to anyone' argument. And (to make a huge generalisation), Americans respect money. Could we see a tech billionaire like Bill Gates running for President next time around?

I wish Obama could run for a third time. I realise he's been very unpopular but surely he would blow Trump out of the water?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aip0BAWrdLw

Even many Republicans seemed to want him as president after this speech http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/28/obama_s_dnc_speech_praised_by_conservatives.html

baboon2004
02-08-2016, 02:46 PM
Its one of the few things going for him; he points out the fraudulence of his foes, and the people respond to it with glee because the fact of the matter is, he's RIGHT. It doesn't make him himself a good candidate in reality, but its those little wins and (as I imagine his supporters/fans would describe it) the "balls" to say it, that gives him validation.

Still shocks me people are confused as to the hows and whys of his effectiveness sometimes. He's been the only guy playing smart this whole election rollout.

That's a great point. He pointed out the fraudulence of Rubio and Cruz to devastating effect. I'm convinced that Clinton will not win the debates in the straightforward way that many expect her to.

@Corpsey - Obama is a brilliant political orator. I'd back him to win a debate vs just about anyone these days.

luka
02-08-2016, 03:14 PM
Obama is a good reader of speeches but an ineffectual debater/fighter

CrowleyHead
02-08-2016, 06:06 PM
It's just a shame he's also happens to be a bigoted, narcissistic, amoral bastard.



Why? "By the people, for the people, of the people" y'know?

@luka; you're not wrong, but he's never had to debate anyone with any value. Romney and McCain were never big threats. It'd be interesting if Trump had had to toe-to-toe with Obama and seeing just how that'd play out.

luka
02-08-2016, 06:57 PM
I agree. Celebrity death match. Trump argues like me. Home in on personal weakness. Win over the crowd. Put a label on someone they can't peel off. Ignore nerdy logic games and fact memorising contests.

baboon2004
02-08-2016, 08:43 PM
Obama debated Clinton and thrashed her in 2008, even when he was clearly nervous due to gap in experience between the two candidates. I prob overstated Obama's debate prowess as against his general oratory, but I still think he'd beat Trump too (who is certainly very dangerous in debates).

Trump just ignores what the other person says (granted, this is v effective in America) - don't think you do that Luka

CrowleyHead
03-08-2016, 12:46 AM
Well Luka's not playing to a crowd for entertainment.

Proper debate is boxing, Politics is pro-wrestling. Trump gets over because he does the unthinkable, the daring, what needs to be done; he's not afraid to get his hands dirty and take that extra step to ensure he wins, because there's a point where people feel a relief at a man who says 'screw the rules', and think to themselves "Finally, a man who does what I lack the courage to do so." It doesn't matter that he doesn't actually say anything of value, he just wins.

http://actionagogo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/12418041_1130111177008526_7205231270672089717_n.jp g

Mr. Tea
03-08-2016, 09:54 AM
Well Luka's not playing to a crowd for entertainment.

O RLY? Are we even talking about the same Luka?!



Proper debate is boxing, Politics is pro-wrestling.

I love this analogy.

Corpsey
03-08-2016, 09:58 AM
At a campaign event Tuesday in Ashburn, Va., Trump attacked Clinton for having a poor relationship with Putin, saying: 'This is a nuclear country we're talking about. Russia. Strong nuclear country.'

'Their stuff is newer; they have a lot more,' he said. 'She wants to play the tough one. She's not tough.'

Trump is making George Dubuya look like Oscar Wilde at this point.

Corpsey
03-08-2016, 10:02 AM
BTW Vince McMahon would be just as viable a President as Trump, and slightly less galling too.

Mr. Tea
03-08-2016, 10:10 AM
I've heard of a strong nuclear force, but a strong nuclear country is a new one on me.

It's true that Russia has a marginally bigger nuclear arsenal than the USA, but when you're talking about states with the capability to wipe all life more complex than a cockroach many times over, a difference of a few warheads one way or the other is pretty academic.

But yeah, bigging up the threat posed by some notional enemy and accusing your opponent of being insufficiently tough with respect to that enemy is surely one of the oldest tricks in the book for a good reason.

Corpsey
03-08-2016, 11:17 AM
I guess Crowley's right, in that a large proportion of the electorate don't want to hear things even phrased more complicatedly than 'Their stuff is newer', let alone discussed.

sadmanbarty
03-08-2016, 11:53 AM
Krugman raised the point that Hilary will be able to attack Trump on things that Republican's weren't able to in a debate. He gave the example of Hilary being able to attack Trump's business acumen. Republican's weren't able to do so because of the worship of "job creators" on the American right.

I've seen a couple of people suggest that Trump will try and avoid debating Clinton one on one because he'll lose in that format.

It's hard for me to personally have an opinion because I'm very much from the "nerdy fact remembering" school of debate. However, Ford's "no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe" gaffe shows that not understanding key issues can cost you electorally.

The other hope is that seeing Clinton in a debate might help show people that she isn't the caricature that's been cultivated by the right wing media for two decades.

droid
03-08-2016, 12:00 PM
I agree. Celebrity death match. Trump argues like me. Home in on personal weakness. Win over the crowd. Put a label on someone they can't peel off. Ignore nerdy logic games and fact memorising contests.

And the resemblance doesn't end there! Narcissism, arrogance, tiny hands/penis, bizarre personal appearance...

Leo
03-08-2016, 04:15 PM
trump hates to lose, but he also doesn't really want to give up his current life and do the hard work of being president. his ideal win-win situation would be to lose by a point or two, allowing him to both save face by blaming the rigged voting system AND not have to actually be president.

if by some chance he wins, we'll basically have president pence with trump focused on ribbon cuttings and other ceremonial stuff (aka, making america great again).

droid
03-08-2016, 11:09 PM
Clinton has just gone to 85% on the nowcast.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=538twitter#now

Presumably on the basis of persistent rumors that Trump plans to pull out.

Corpsey
04-08-2016, 09:34 AM
Clinton has just gone to 85% on the nowcast.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=538twitter#now

Presumably on the basis of persistent rumors that Trump plans to pull out.

Wow! Is this an aberration?

Where can I read about Trump planning to pull out? Is this swing anything to do with his remarks aimed at Khizr Khan?

droid
04-08-2016, 09:44 AM
Its a snapshot, so its prone to wild swings.

My understanding is that the Republicans think trump has had an appalling 2-3 day period and are getting antsy - the failure to endorse Ryan is a major issue, but in general I think theyre realising that he is incapable of reining himself in.

droid
04-08-2016, 09:47 AM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/is-donald-trump-poised-to-drop-out-of-the-presidential-race-and-what-would-happen-if-he-did-a7170566.html

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/republicans-think-trump-might-quit-so-theyre-scrambling-to-find-a-replacement-abc-news/

Corpsey
04-08-2016, 11:07 AM
In the event of a disastrous result for Trump, what will become of the Republican party? You can't help but wonder if (and hope that) they've shot themselves in the foot/head by pandering to the FOX News demographic for so many years. By so doggedly courting and cultivating stupidity, they've created a Frankenstein's monster (no bolts, one toupee) who is far too stupid to be elected. Trump crushed his competitors in the primaries, so why wouldn't he (or some other similarly unelectable wingnut) do so again in four years' time? After all, it's not as if his competitors for the race were particularly sane (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked) even in comparison to the Donald.

Leo
04-08-2016, 01:30 PM
In the event of a disastrous result for Trump, what will become of the Republican party? You can't help but wonder if (and hope that) they've shot themselves in the foot/head by pandering to the FOX News demographic for so many years. By so doggedly courting and cultivating stupidity, they've created a Frankenstein's monster (no bolts, one toupee) who is far too stupid to be elected. Trump crushed his competitors in the primaries, so why wouldn't he (or some other similarly unelectable wingnut) do so again in four years' time? After all, it's not as if his competitors for the race were particularly sane (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked) even in comparison to the Donald.

the GOP situation is a bit deceiving. while they've sucked at presidential campaigns of late, they have held majorities in both the senate and house (although looks like the senate may fall back to the dems this year). but their real strength is in state legislatures, where lots of laws are made. 31 of 50 states have GOP governors and a good number of those states have legislatures (state rep/state senate) that are also both controlled to the GOP. that's where the koch brothers put their contributions, enabling their favored candidate to hugly outspend and crush a local democratic opponent.

obviously the presidency is the big deal but the GOP has to this day been pretty successful in pushing the conservative agenda on a state level.

also, i think trump is a one-in-a-lifetime character, not likely the next wingnut will have the reality tv show huckster character and popularity that's driven trump's campaign forward.

Corpsey
04-08-2016, 04:34 PM
That's interesting. So from an American perspective, what power does the President have that trumps all that state legislature? Foreign policy?

(Forgive my sophomoric questions, I've only very belatedly taken an interest in politics and it's a half-baked enterprise on my part.)

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trump-and-putin-a-love-story?utm_source=nextdraft&utm_medium=email


“Putin is convinced that absolutely everything in this world is done for money. He is a religious fanatic, and money is his god. With money, it is possible to solve any problem, buy any interlocutor. He bought the Olympic Games, he bought the World Cup. It will be easy to deal with Trump. He won’t need to use words in negotiations, only figures. When they don’t agree, it will only be necessary to find the right price.”

Vladimir Putin is a cunning and cynical reader of his adversaries. He notices that Trump does not know the difference between the Quds Force and the Kurds, or what the “nuclear triad” is; that his analysis of Brexit was based in part on what might be good for his golf courses in Britain; that his knowledge of world affairs is roughly that of someone who subscribes to a daily newspaper but doesn’t always have time to get to it. Overwhelmed with his own problems at home, Putin sees the ready benefit in having the United States led by an unlettered narcissist who believes that geostrategic questions are as easy to resolve as a real-estate closing. Putin knows a chump when he sees one.

Leo
05-08-2016, 02:18 PM
that new yorker quote is frightening, and probably entire true.

RE: presidential power...yes, certainly foreign affairs and military actions. there's also the president's ability to appoint people to cabinet positions who have certain views and thus influence an administration's direction and policy. george bush had lifers from the big oil companies in his department of energy and even department of environmental affair, so you can imagine how those special interests guided our energy and environmental policies during those years.

more indirectly, it's also the authority of the president to nominate supreme court justices (although our checks and balances system require congressional approval of the selection). the supreme court has the power to uphold or strike down state laws.

for instance, a GOP governor and state legislature might pass a law banning gay marriage, but if the law is challenged and makes it to the supreme court, the court can (and has) overturn(ed) the state law. it can't tell states what to do, but it can overrule state rulings when the law violate the constitution.

hence the ongoing battle of presidents trying to stock the supreme court bench with justices who will tend to interrupt the constitution from either a conservative or liberal viewpoint.

Leo
09-08-2016, 07:46 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L0k2-kO_yc&feature=youtu.be

Corpsey
15-08-2016, 11:46 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/12/a-massive-new-study-debunks-a-widespread-theory-for-donald-trumps-success/


conomic distress and anxiety across working-class white America have become a widely discussed explanation for the success of Donald Trump. It seems to make sense. Trump's most fervent supporters tend to be white men without college degrees. This same group has suffered economically in our increasingly globalized world, as machines have replaced workers in factories and labor has shifted overseas. Trump has promised to curtail trade and other perceived threats to American workers, including immigrants.

Yet a major new analysis from Gallup, based on 87,000 interviews the polling company conducted over the past year, suggests this narrative is not complete. While there does seem to be a relationship between economic anxiety and Trump's appeal, the straightforward connection that many observers have assumed does not appear in the data.

According to this new analysis, those who view Trump favorably have not been disproportionately affected by foreign trade or immigration, compared with people with unfavorable views of the Republican presidential nominee. The results suggest that his supporters, on average, do not have lower incomes than other Americans, nor are they more likely to be unemployed.

Yet while Trump's supporters might be comparatively well off themselves, they come from places where their neighbors endure other forms of hardship. In their communities, white residents are dying younger, and it is harder for young people who grow up poor to get ahead.

Mr. Tea
15-08-2016, 01:37 PM
From that piece:


Economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton recently documented startling increases in the middle-aged white death rate in the past decade, but Rothwell finds that people's support for Trump didn't seem to be affected by changes in the white death rate where they lived.

Bit of an about-face, careerwise?

Corpsey
18-08-2016, 09:44 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/hillary-clinton-prepare-trump-debate-lewinsky-227033

Interesting article about how Clinton needs to find somebody who's willing to be unspeakably rude to her in preparation for the September debates.

Leo
26-08-2016, 01:13 PM
TRUMP EMBRACES NIGEL FARAGE, HIS BRITISH ALTER EGO
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-embraces-nigel-farage-his-british-alter-ego?mbid=social_facebook

droid
26-08-2016, 02:01 PM
Clinton still waaaay ahead in all metrics.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#plus

Corpsey
01-09-2016, 09:18 AM
From the Wa Po: 'If it weren't for Trump, in fact, Clinton would be the most unpopular major-party presidential nominee in modern American history.' (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/31/a-record-number-of-americans-now-dislike-hillary-clinton/)

Corpsey
01-09-2016, 09:29 AM
An aside: I was curious as to what Obama's approval rating currently is (it's 54%, according to Gallup), and in finding that out I found out G,W, Bush's historical approval ratings:

HIGHEST APPROVAL: 92 (9/21/01)

HIGHEST DISAPPROVAL: 77 (10/10–12/08)

He's the record holder in both.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/76/8d/34/768d34a969ec8ede9d6a76696614664b.jpg

A truly singular man. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/be/04/3a/be043a482b1b65c123c9b91ad52f9bf7.jpg

HMGovt
11-09-2016, 08:08 PM
Hillary is too ill to stand... literally


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo-pG2qChUI

Leo
11-09-2016, 11:53 PM
being treated for pneumonia, hopefully will be able to bounce back quickly.

Mr. Tea
12-09-2016, 08:08 AM
I hope so too, but is it a disease you 'bounce back quickly from' in later middle age?

HMGovt
13-09-2016, 10:55 AM
I hope so too, but is it a disease you 'bounce back quickly from' in later middle age?

The symptoms point to Parkinson's disease, or some other neurological dysfunction. Akinesia, anti-seizure sunglasses. It'll all come out eventually, but in the meantime it's all smoke, mirrors, excuses and collusion.

HMGovt
15-09-2016, 11:07 AM
this is a wild ride. Trump, Pepe, Kek and Chaos Magick intertwine on 4chan

https://pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com/

vimothy
15-09-2016, 11:14 AM
this is a wild ride. Trump, Pepe, Kek and Chaos Magick intertwine on 4chan

https://pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com/

Fold in Nick Land and the Order of Nine Angles for extra lulz.

Mr. Tea
15-09-2016, 12:46 PM
this is a wild ride. Trump, Pepe, Kek and Chaos Magick intertwine on 4chan

https://pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com/

Brilliant. It's like Umberto Eco reimagined by neckbearded dwellers. Dan Brown for the generation raised on South Park, GTA and rotten.com.

Leo
23-09-2016, 01:18 PM
Oculus Rift founder Palmer Luckey spends fortune backing pro-Trump 'shitposts'
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/23/oculus-rift-vr-palmer-luckey-trump-shitposts

not all trump supporters are uneducated lower-income rural whites...

Leo
09-10-2016, 12:09 AM
Make America Grope Married Women and Grab Them By the Pussy Again!

Corpsey
09-10-2016, 12:57 AM
Surely he's sunk himself now. Not to mention the Republic Party.

vimothy
09-10-2016, 07:48 PM
A lot of closets have skeletons in them: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/30/the-billionaire-pedophile-who-could-bring-down-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton.html

Leo
10-10-2016, 01:13 AM
A lot of closets have skeletons in them: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/30/the-billionaire-pedophile-who-could-bring-down-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton.html

is there evidence that bill did something, or just guilt by association? seems like a stupid political strategy: bill's not running, she is. and campaign research finds women largely sympathize with the wife a philandering husband.

romney won a sizable majority of white suburban women voters and lost the election. trump is currently losing them by nearly 20 points. this type of thing doesn't win him additional voters in that demographic.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 07:43 AM
Yeah, there might be some knuckleheads who find Trump's crass misogyny endearing but they'll have been planning to vote for him already, surely? With a bit if luck a few million women swing voters will take it as a wake-up call.

Corpsey
10-10-2016, 09:07 AM
I only read about half of the article on Epstein, and of course it's all disgusting, if true, though hardly surprising; at the risk of sounding like Detective Seinfeld of Operation Yewtree, what's with all these rich paedos?

I noticed from a google search that the Epstein/paedophile connection is mainly talked about in stories from less reputable sites like the Daily Mail, VICE, etc. Is this because there isn't enough grounds for coverage in the reputable press, or that the less reputable press is free to fling accusations at people because their reputations preclude them being taken entirely seriously?

luka
10-10-2016, 12:01 PM
So let me get this straight.. Bill Clinton had an affair with an intern, fathered a baby (possibly more than one) and abandoned him. Hillary defended a child rapist, had people killed in Benghazi, deleted 33k emails on a private server, systematically created and armed ISIS, had 6 billion dollars unaccounted for as Secretary of State. And the media doesn't care. Donald Trump said something 11 years ago in a "locker room conversation" and the media is now going crazy. The hypocrisy is astounding!

"Last night a friend claimed that Donald Trump wouldn’t make a good president; he is brash, he is racist, he is a loudmouth; you know the normal things people learn to recite after being programmed by television news. The one I loved was that, “Trump is arrogant.” My friend questioned if one man could make “that much difference in the world today.” To my friend's credit, she was respectful enough to let me respond when she asked, “Really, what has Trump done?”
I said, “In June of last year, Trump entered the race for president. In just a little over a year, Trump has single handedly defeated the Republican party. He did so thoroughly. In fact, he did so in such a resounding way that the Republican Party now suffers from an identity crisis. He literally dismantled the party. Trump even dismantled and dismissed the brand and value of the Bush family.
Trump has Obama petrified that Trump will dismiss programs that weren’t properly installed using proper law.
Trump has single handedly debunked and disemboweled any value of news media as we knew it—news now suffering from an all-time level of distrust and disrespect.
Trump has leaders from all over the world talking about him, whether good or bad. Trust me, powerful men who have been president before weren’t liked by the global community. I doubt Mikhail Gorbachev liked Reagan when Reagan said, "Tear down that wall."
Trump has expressly disclosed the fraud perpetrated on the American public by Hillary Clinton. He has, quite literally, brought Hillary to her knees—if you believe that nervous tension and disorders offer physical side effects and damage.
Trump has unified the silent majority in a way that should be patently frightening to “liberals.”
As the press accuses Trump of being a house of cards, Trump has proven the press is the real house of cards. He has whipped up the entire establishment into pure panic. Trump has exposed them for who they are and worse, what they are. George Clooney was right when he said Trump draws live news coverage of his podium that he’s not yet approached. Thanks, George, you were perfectly correct.
What we see as headline news today are actually the last bubbles from the ship that is now sunk—meaning the standard news media, as a propaganda machine, has been exposed. They have no more value.
In the same way Trump asked the African-American community this question, I asked my friend, ”At this point, what do you have to lose?” We have mass cop shootings, riots in our streets, ambushed cops, double digit inflation, bombs blowing up in our cities, targeted police, #BLM, a skyrocketing jobless rate, no economic growth, privately owned land being seized by the federal government, the worst racial tension in my lifetime, no God in schools, more abortions than ever, illegal aliens pouring into our country, sick veterans receiving no care, and a debt that doubled in seven years to $19 trillion. Are you really happy with the condition of the current system?
One man has done all of this in one year—one guy, and on his own dime. And with everything I’ve written above, you believe Trump hasn't done anything? You claim that you are afraid of Donald Trump? No wonder we’re in trouble. You can say that Trump is a lousy presidential candidate. That’s your right. Just don’t ever say he’s not effective.
That Megan Kelly, FOX News, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Rachel Maddow, the Huffington Post, the New York Times, Raleigh’s News and Observer, the AP, Don Lemon, Jake Tapper, and many more, failed to implement their collectively orchestrated lie on the American people against Trump, is actually a massive testament to Trump. The press colluded pure propaganda to accomplish his demise … and they have collectively failed and miserably.
Here's just one example of how badly America is injured right now. There are high school football players on their knees during the national anthem simply because the press used as propaganda to program those kids to do that very thing. But, these kids are mimicking NFL stars the same way the same kids chooses which brand of football shoe to purchase—they're overtly brain-washed to do that very thing.
Now, we have a generation of children who hate America.
America’s problem isn’t that little children are on their knee in collective disrespect of America. Our problem is that America is on her knee from collective disrespect by Americans.
You can disrespect America all you want. But, it’s high-time you respect the silent majority. Because they’re not simply the “silent majority” as you’ve been trained to believe when Hillary calls them “deplorables.” The fact is, they are simply the majority. And now they're no longer silent either. Donald Trump changed all of that, single-handedly and within one year."

luka
10-10-2016, 12:03 PM
Thing is, however disgusting Trump is, Hillary's leftist PC brigade supporters are worse. Wish him win just to see their butthurt. And afterall America's destiny is decided at Wall Street and in Silicon Valley, which is good.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:05 PM
Bill clinton rapes 12 Year olds and gets away with it and Hillery backs him up. No wander she wants to Move in Sharia Law and 550,000 Muslims.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:06 PM
Look it up you bunch of Muslim sharia law dogs. He is a Rapeists dog.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:06 PM
In Hillerys World All Pedophiles will be Protected and safe under her government she will make Laws to Protect Them so Bill can never be touched for his sicko Crimes of Rape.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 12:07 PM
Do "leftists" support Hilary, though? Most of them supported Sanders, I thought, and were so anti-Hilary that with Sanders out of the picture they're going to abstain or vote Green. Or in some cases maybe even vote Trump, to "show the establishment" or as part of some idiotic 'accelerationist' agenda.

(I appreciate you're quoting internet mouth-breathers, of course, who may not have a very accurate idea of what "leftist" means.)

luka
10-10-2016, 12:08 PM
anyone can hear trump was laughing when he said it, nothing but locker room talk. Joking and talking about something and doing it a different thing, if he has been groping women where is all the evidence???? He is married to a super model he doesn't need attention from other women. Most women would be shocked if they heard how guys banter and joke, that doesn't make them a sexual predator

luka
10-10-2016, 12:25 PM
I've become quite a Trump fan this year. He's refreshingly brash and honest whatever people may think about his laddish boasts. I know that in my 70s I still exchange such pleasantries with my peers. Young blokes I come in contact with are just as outrageous. The memories of successes and missed opportunities with women are the stuff of male bonding, and long may they remain so.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:29 PM
Shillery defended Bill's terro against women by destroying Bill's victims.
Who are the victims more scared of.....Bill or Shillery???

luka
10-10-2016, 12:35 PM
Triggered

Benny B
10-10-2016, 12:39 PM
lool luka!


I've become quite a Trump fan this year. He's refreshingly brash and honest whatever people may think about his laddish boasts. I know that in my 70s I still exchange such pleasantries with my peers. Young blokes I come in contact with are just as outrageous. The memories of successes and missed opportunities with women are the stuff of male bonding, and long may they remain so.


anyone can hear trump was laughing when he said it, nothing but locker room talk. Joking and talking about something and doing it a different thing, if he has been groping women where is all the evidence???? He is married to a super model he doesn't need attention from other women. Most women would be shocked if they heard how guys banter and joke, that doesn't make them a sexual predator


seen plenty of comments like this, but the ironic thing is trump is totally accurate when he calls it 'locker room talk', we all know that is how men actually speak about women. Even worse are all these hypocritical liberal lefty dudes feigning shock and disgust, then go off and defend (and wank to) porn where women are degraded in even more horrible ways for real.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:42 PM
I agree that Trump won that debate. The Russian Mr.s M said the woman is evil hence the moving to a different planet statement she made. And Trump still has Benghazi in his back pocket. People need to understand what happened there and if he drops that bomb it is over for Hitlery.

The consulate in Benghazi called for help to the state department. No one answered. Our diplomats died as a result and those would be diplomats appointed by Obama.

She just doesn't care about anyone but her self. I have heard women are starting to become embarrased of Hitlery. They think she is making them look bad. That is the word on the street anyway. They feel that they are being patronized.

Hillary made women mad at her.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:46 PM
Benny. All men except you or all men including you? I'm curious

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 12:47 PM
lool luka!
seen plenty of comments like this, but the ironic thing is trump is totally accurate when he calls it 'locker room talk', we all know that is how men (except me, of course) actually speak about women. Even worse are all these hypocritical liberal lefty dudes (except me, of course) feigning shock and disgust, then go off and defend (and wank to) porn where women are degraded in even more horrible ways for real.

Fixed it 4 U.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 12:50 PM
Tu quoque.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:53 PM
Tu quoque.

No, just idle curiosity. It's not the debating society

vimothy
10-10-2016, 12:54 PM
It wasn't directed at you.

luka
10-10-2016, 12:55 PM
Oh. (triggered)

Benny B
10-10-2016, 01:06 PM
Benny. All men except you or all men including you? I'm curious

men *in general*, or rather a dominant theme in masculine culture. The one we all know very well. Even if you don't participate directly in it yourself, we all know it, ignore it, tolerate it in our friends, fail to challenge it or even question it a lot of the time. And many liberals condemning trump who are quick to point out that they're 'not like that' use/defend porn and prostitution where women are degraded in far worse ways. I think its much better to admit there's a problem that all men are implicated in to some degree and ask ourselves what we can do about it rather than just make lazy, hypocritical condemnations of outright misogynists like trump.

luka
10-10-2016, 01:35 PM
i dont think what youre saying is entirely without merit Benny, just to make that clear. I was wondering to what extent you are willing to implicate yourself.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 01:45 PM
It's an extreme cliche at this point, but it largely boils down to class and partisan alignment. People who defend Clinton don't care about her defence of her "philandering" (and alleged rapist) husband and his "association" with the notorious billionaire paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/jeffrey-epstein-decade-scandal-prince-andrew) (including multiple trips on his private jet (http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-1681039971), the so-called "Lolita Express"). What matters is that the people attacking her are uneducated, mouth-breathing types who can't string coherent sentences together. Equally, the people who defend Trump don't care about his misogyny, the accusations of sexual assault (including a recent accusation of child rape, stemming from his "association" with Epstein), tax avoidance, personal instability, etc, etc. What matters is that the people attacking him are smug elitists who think they're better than everyone else.

Benny B
10-10-2016, 01:52 PM
What matters is that the people attacking him are smug elitists who think they're better than everyone else.

this was kind of my point

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 02:23 PM
Even if you don't participate directly in it yourself, we all know it, ignore it, tolerate it in our friends, fail to challenge it or even question it a lot of the time.

Speak for yourself, mate.

Benny B
10-10-2016, 02:30 PM
Speak for yourself, mate.

triggered

Leo
10-10-2016, 02:50 PM
What matters is that the people attacking her are uneducated, mouth-breathing types who can't string coherent sentences together.

that's not true. for decades before trump even ran for office, the republican establishment (aka, washington elites) carried out sustained attacks on the clintons, both through official means (numerous congressional hearings, impeachment proceedings, etc.) and right-wing media outlets.

Leo
10-10-2016, 02:52 PM
"all men says those things" doesn't make it right or tolerable

"all men" aren't running for president of the USA.

baboon2004
10-10-2016, 03:15 PM
It's one of the worst choices in the history of politics. Two pretty awful people, but one appreciably even more awful. That said, clearly for a lot of people life won't be any better whatsoever under Hillary 'I'm proud we slashed welfare' Clinton than it will under Trump, and that's why HC's cheerleaders are pretty sickening.

Trump threatening Clinton with prison and then saying that he really respected that she didn't give up was grimly fascinating dissociation.

baboon2004
10-10-2016, 03:16 PM
and Dissensus is male locker-room conversation too right?

But Benny has a point, though I'd have phrased it slightly differently, as I think the way Trump talked was an extreme example of the kind of misogyny that is very prevalent when groups of men are talking (and lots of stuff goes unchallenged, for sure, but that's the same with implicitly racist comments etc). Wider than that, male privilege/female disadvantage is so interwoven with what we take as 'normal', that almost all men have a limit to the extent to which they support women's emancipation, or delude themselves that societal pressure/conditioning for women to be a certain way is 'free choice' (sexualisation of appearance being the most obvious). I include myself in that, cos I'd be delusional if I didn't. Although I am making some effort to unpack the conscious and unconscious misogyny...

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 03:26 PM
triggered

lol

But seriously though, if such a notable feminist as yourself can't be bothered to stand up to sexism, what hope is there for the rest of us?

baboon2004
10-10-2016, 03:31 PM
C'mon Tea, casual sexism goes unchecked all the time. As above, I differ from Benny (if I'm reading his original comment correctly) in that I think the Trump example is the extreme edge of a general trend, rather than itself typical of the way men talk about women behind closed doors.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 03:33 PM
That said, clearly for a lot of people life won't be any better whatsoever under Hillary 'I'm proud we slashed welfare' Clinton than it will under Trump

What's dangerous is that a large number of Americans actually would benefit materially from Trump's policies. In the short to medium term at least, before civil society finally and irrevocably collapsed.

Benny B
10-10-2016, 03:34 PM
Well if such a notable feminist as yourself can't be bothered to stand up to sexism, what hope is there for the rest of us?

I'm not a feminist

And are you aware your #notallmen-isms are making you sound like an MRA...again.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 03:38 PM
C'mon Tea, casual sexism goes unchecked all the time. As above, I differ from Benny (if I'm reading his original comment correctly) in that I think the Trump example is the extreme edge of a general trend, rather than itself typical of the way men talk about women behind closed doors.

But does Benny B, personally, just let it slide? Is he as guilty as the rest of us? I don't understand the psychology of the extreme white-knight type of male feminist who constantly bangs on about how terrible men are. Do they include themselves in the great suppurating morass of Bad Men? Because it has very weird implications either way.

Or is it like, I'm bad too, but I at least know I'm bad, which makes me less bad than the rest?

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 03:42 PM
I'm not a feminist

And are you aware your #notallmen-isms are making you sound like an MRA...again.

I honestly don't know what to say to that. You make these great, sweeping generalizations that are obviously untrue, and then anyone who quibbles is an "MRA"? Because to except even yourself from your own generalizations would be "not-all-men"-ism?

Leo
10-10-2016, 03:47 PM
actually, vim, i think i may have misunderstood your comment...if you are referring to this election specifically as opposed to historical attacks on the clintons, then yes you're correct, his hardcore base is often depicted as the uneducated knuckleheads. at the same time, the reality is there are plenty of establishment republicans who also back him.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 05:06 PM
Sure, he's their candidate (although he doesn't seem particularly popular with establishment republicans).

Benny B
10-10-2016, 05:57 PM
But does Benny B, personally, just let it slide? Is he as guilty as the rest of us? I don't understand the psychology of the extreme white-knight type of male feminist who constantly bangs on about how terrible men are. Do they include themselves in the great suppurating morass of Bad Men? Because it has very weird implications either way.

Or is it like, I'm bad too, but I at least know I'm bad, which makes me less bad than the rest?

I don't think men are terrible by nature or anything, but like baboon was saying, we are all 'guilty' of enjoying male privilege and that goes hand in hand with the deeply embedded sexism in masculine culture - its delusional for anyone to think they are somehow outside of this socialisation.

When you say 'speak for yourself mate' - can you honestly say you have never in your life done or said anything sexist, or ignored a mate's sexist comments, gone along with or joined in 'harmless' sexist bantz just because its easier than challenging it? Or watched any porn where degrading language is used towards women. Ever?

I admit to having done all of these things in the past. The best I can say is that nowadays I'm much more aware of these things than before and make as much effort as possible to never do them again (though I admit still ignore it when friends/workmates occasionally make sexist comments), and fully deserve to get pulled up on them if and when I do.

Feminism will always be (or should always be) uncomfortable for all men, allies or not, because it requires implicating ourselves and giving up our privileges. I think that should be the first thing to realise and accept if you want to be any kind of feminist ally. Liberal men who claim to be feminist allies (or even outright feminists!) and make noises about how shocking and terrible trumps comments are, and how misogynistic the alt-right is, then go defend degrading porn because of 'free choice' and (and often watch it themselves) are not being feminist allies, they're part of the problem. And it's there in both the left and the right.

Benny B
10-10-2016, 06:03 PM
I honestly don't know what to say to that. You make these great, sweeping generalizations that are obviously untrue, and then anyone who quibbles is an "MRA"? Because to except even yourself from your own generalizations would be "not-all-men"-ism?

Sure, we're all talking in generalisations to some extent by necessity. And there is obviously a huge scale of sexism ranging from unconscious assumptions, casual jokes up to outright violent misogyny - but then again I don't think trump's comments were all that far from the norm in masculine culture - and none of it can be said to be acceptable or beyond criticism. I don't think anyone who quibbles with this *is* an MRA, but a fair few of your comments are reminiscent of the type of reactionary arguments they make. It only ever serves to divert attention away from the depth and scale of the major problem.

I don't think it's cynical of me to be suspicious of this impulse to always jump to defend men whenever someone criticises masculinity and male entitlement, or talks about it in a generally negative way. Sure, #notallmen are like donald trump, but all men have some part to play in the problem, and liberal guys clamouring to declare "I'm not like that!" aren't helping one bit. Sorry, but I think even just shutting the fuck up and saying nothing is probably more helpful than that.

craner
10-10-2016, 10:09 PM
I think Trump could win this.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:12 PM
You and Michael Moore. But yeah, there's only two competitors so why not. It looks highly unlikely at this stage and we're guaranteed more 'revelations' along the way but who knows

vimothy
10-10-2016, 10:14 PM
Me too.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 10:19 PM
It's not that I think it's particularly likely - I honestly have no idea. My heuristic is like this: inside the giant media bubble, this outcome is impossible. But the media bubble has been calling the collapse of his campaign since it started, and it's got it completely wrong so far.

craner
10-10-2016, 10:22 PM
Rust belt blocs highly motivated to vote for him who don'te give a shit about "revelations", relish his style and as there are a lot of ex-Democrats in that demographic will be happy with mainstream GOP defections or abstentions; minority blocs too disaffected to get out for Clinton. Silent, "shy" Trump voters; a large group of Democrats who loathe the Clintons.

It's too close not to add all these things up, and I'm not just calculating on the UK 2015 election, Corbyn or Brexit examples, which are sort of relevant buto not really here.

I might put a bet on it this time.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:22 PM
Perfectly reasonable. It's how I often predict the outcome of boxing matches. If everyone says one boxer has no chance I often assume he'll win.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:24 PM
If I had to make a prediction it would be that he'll lose fairly heavily but who knows.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 10:29 PM
It's interesting how the process appears to move forward without memory. Every couple of weeks we learn a new revelation that will definitely destroy his candidacy, followed by a great deal of triumphalism in the media. It doesn't stick and we go on to the next controversy for another iteration.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:31 PM
They'll keep coming. I don't think they'll help him in the long run.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 10:32 PM
Sure, we're all talking in generalisations to some extent by necessity. And there is obviously a huge scale of sexism ranging from unconscious assumptions, casual jokes up to outright violent misogyny - but then again I don't think trump's comments were all that far from the norm in masculine culture - and none of it can be said to be acceptable or beyond criticism. I don't think anyone who quibbles with this *is* an MRA, but a fair few of your comments are reminiscent of the type of reactionary arguments they make. It only ever serves to divert attention away from the depth and scale of the major problem.

I don't think it's cynical of me to be suspicious of this impulse to always jump to defend men whenever someone criticises masculinity and male entitlement, or talks about it in a generally negative way. Sure, #notallmen are like donald trump, but all men have some part to play in the problem, and liberal guys clamouring to declare "I'm not like that!" aren't helping one bit. Sorry, but I think even just shutting the fuck up and saying nothing is probably more helpful than that.

What annoyed me was your "we do this..." and "we do that..." line. I'm like, you've never met me, I've never met you, all you know about me is what I type into a browser window. So I don't really like being told what I do and don't do. If you have to work through your own issues by implicating yourself in this great cesspit of generalized male depravity, then fine, but leave me out of it.

And come on, as comebacks go, "#notallmen" is tired as all hell and has long ago been beaten into meaninglessness.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:34 PM
Nate Silver has Trumps chances of winning at 16.6%

craner
10-10-2016, 10:35 PM
P J O'Rourke will be on Newsnight in a minute explaining why he's voting for Hillary.

craner
10-10-2016, 10:36 PM
Nate got the UK election dead wrong.

vimothy
10-10-2016, 10:37 PM
Silver's predictions bounce around a lot. A month ago it was too close to call.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:37 PM
I didn't say he was infallible but he's a probably got a better record than you when it comes to US politics

vimothy
10-10-2016, 10:38 PM
I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm just suspicious of the general air of certainty.

craner
10-10-2016, 10:39 PM
True. But WE'LL SEE.

luka
10-10-2016, 10:39 PM
Anyway, time will tell and you two can crow all you like once he wins. Till then you're just two crypto fascists with a hunch (albeit my two most favourite crypto fascists)

craner
10-10-2016, 10:40 PM
I am too. It's still incredible to me that people rely on polls so heavily.

Leo
10-10-2016, 10:41 PM
I might put a bet on it this time.

i'm in, what do you want to wager?

craner
10-10-2016, 10:41 PM
At least this time I'll win lots of money for a massive bender.

Mr. Tea
10-10-2016, 10:42 PM
It's interesting how the process appears to move forward without memory. Every couple of weeks we learn a new revelation that will definitely destroy his candidacy, followed by a great deal of triumphalism in the media. It doesn't stick and we go on to the next controversy for another iteration.

Yeah, I was going to say earlier: how many times is it now that Trump has, by popular consensus, "destroyed" or at least "sabotaged" his own campaign? Wasn't this supposed to have happened already after he insulted veterans' families, took the piss out of McCain for "letting himself get captured", and a bunch of other occasions? Maybe he'd be more popular now without having made these gaffes, but they clearly haven't finished him off, either individually or in aggregate.

craner
10-10-2016, 10:51 PM
I agree. The argument during the nomination campaign was, OK, so GOP voters don't care, but see how that plays when he goes to the country. Now we're at a close place, 40/50s, so that comfort has been destroyed. And for the reasons I mentioned above, maybe this shit will actually be less relevant. It's a scary thought, but I think you'd be foolish to discount it.

I was in America during the GOP debates; he was a joke then. He's not now, and maybe he never was.

Leo
10-10-2016, 10:56 PM
obviously nothing is for certain, but clinton has a pretty strong ground game with hundreds of offices for a year in key swing states while trump has almost no ground game at all. he equates crowds to popularity. getting a few thousand people at a rally feels good but is meaningless if you don't have a mechanism for getting the vote out. his hardcore base was enough to win a republican primary race split across 16 other candidates, but they aren't enough for a national election against one opponent.

also, for example in key swing state pennsylvania, the rust belt area is sparsely populated while inner city philadelphia is heavily populated by reliable democratic minority voters and trump's "women" problems is losing him the white suburbs. the numbers just don't work for him.

the other thing is the race doesn't start with each candidate at zero. firm red and blue states give democrats a significant advantage in national elections before the first vote is even cast, so he needs to win many more swing states than she does. trump, as a republican, essentially starts in a hole.

Benny B
11-10-2016, 07:12 AM
What annoyed me was your "we do this..." and "we do that..." line.

And come on, as comebacks go, "#notallmen" is tired as all hell and has long ago been beaten into meaninglessness.

Evidently not