Jump to content

It's today then ... (Trump thread)


mikehoncho

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

I realise I probably shouldn't bother replying to you as I'm unlikely to suddenly change your mind and there's every chance you're Quagmire or another troll, but I'm just going to try this once.

As myself and others have said to you in the other thread, nobody is giving a pass to liberals or (in the US) Democrats who have behaved terribly. The point is that it doesn't matter what others have done when we're talking about what Trump has done. Comparison is stupid. Just because one person does something shitty, it doesn't negate the shitty things Trump has done and continues to do. You're engaging in Whataboutery, which is a pretty standard move from Trump supporters and Trump himself, for example in his reaction to Charlottesville. 

Do you get that whatever Hilary Clinton did or didn't do, the things Donald Trump has done and continues to do are unacceptable? 

I don't believe many people thought Hilary Clinton was an arbiter of social progress, only that - on balance - she'd make a better President of the United States than Donald Trump. Actually, the fact that she was so unpalatable even to progressives is a big reason Trump won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 7:21 PM, NoUseforaUsername said:

The fact that Hillary was married to a sex pest, and her own treatment of his victims, was consistently ignored or underplayed while every Trump accusation was played to the hilt.

The fact that Harvey Weinstein was in league with Obama, and then Clinton, and helped to fund their campaigns, while they surely knew of his proclivities, has failed to really gain any kind of traction.

The fact that Trump is called a "nazi" by all these people lampooning him, while Hillary was mentored by a former KKK member...

How can people protest Trump using these terms and act like Hillary and his predecessor are arbiters of social progress when one was married to someone with Clinton's baggage and both took campaign money off a serial rapist.

*moved from sexual harassment thread

Here's the thing: the campaign is over. Hillary Clinton lost, Donald Trump won. Those of us who don't like Donald Trump had to put up with months of, "you lost, get over it, SO MUCH WINNING", but it's Trump and his supporters who aren't over it, who seem to think that they're still fighting the campaign.

Hillary Clinton is irrelevant. Bill Clinton is irrelevant. It's not a defence of Donald Trump to say, "But Hillary...", that's just obfuscation. You might have been able to get away with it during the campaign, when it was a two horse race and it was only natural to compare the two candidates, but now Trump has won, he has to be defended on his own merits. It is not a defence of Donald Trump to say, "Bill Clinton did..." or "but Hillary was..." or "but Obama...", or to deflect on to anyone else.

If you support the man, defend him, don't deflect on to other people that don't matter. Nobody but Trump and his supporters gives a shit about Bill or Hillary Clinton in 2017.

Edited by BomberPat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
21 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

If you support the man, defend him, don't deflect on to other people that don't matter. Nobody but Trump and his supporters gives a shit about Bill or Hillary Clinton in 2017.

I totally agree, the thing that's messed up is that Hillary (and to a lesser extent, dirty old Bill) matters a whole lot to Trump's base. Plenty of rumours swirling around that Jeff Sessions is going to attempt to placate Trump by appointing a special counsel to investigate the Uranium One deal, thus deflecting scandal toward the Clintons, and (I think) diluting the idea of a special counsel in much the same way William Safire tried to dilute the "gate" suffix. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Yeah, the only way Trump can retain support is by behaving as if he's still on the campaign trail. Flogging merch, shouting about Hillary Clinton and telling people what they want to hear. Because if he's not doing that, it becomes painfully obvious that he's completely clueless and unsuited for the job.

But when it comes to Trump supporters using "but Hillary!" as an argument, it just pisses me off, because it assumes that there's still a binary choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and there isn't - there's just Donald Trump. And if people who allegedly support him can only do so by saying, "but look at Hillary Clinton!" rather than talking about the merits of any of Trump's policies, or anything he's achieved, it looks like there's bugger all to support him for, so why do it?

Edited by BomberPat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

There’s similar, though slightly different over here too. I know a number of people who voted Tory and all the majority of them do is still bang on about how weird Corbyn is, whilst managing to avoid having any opinion on how May is doing, mainly because they are too fucking stupid, lazy and ignorant to say “she’s doing terribly”, they haven’t a clue. Get wrapped up in the media circus/reality TV of the election, then completely turn off from wanting to understand politics. They did remember that the opposition rides a bike and makes sandwiches though, the cunt.

I’ve never understood this kind of mentality. If the person you voted for wins but turns out to be a lunatic or just incredibly shit, I would (and assumed many would) call them out on it. I will never grasp the idea of being so blind to how bad someone is in order to save face.. because that’s all it seems to be.. that or absolute ignorance/stupidity/moronic.

However, if you truly believe what that leader is doing is correct and their behaviour and policies are exactly what you want from a leader, then by all means support him or her, as Pat and Serg have said, support doesn’t mean attacking irrelevant opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

The time I was visiting and I threatened to throw my dad's Daily Mail out of the car window, it was over him going on and on about Milliband's kitchen. He seems to have chilled a bit now that Trump has turned out to be Putin's little mate and Brexit didn't bring back King Arthur, but for a while it was impossible to talk to him, he was a bona fide "Clintons are murderers/Labour party want to kick everyone white out of Britain" twat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Mines still in that mode, but he does recognise May is shit.

His answer though.. is Boris. I’ve pressed him on this once and it’s basically because he is somewhat humorous to laugh at. I fear that my dad is one of many disenfranchised, disinterested tabloid readers who can’t see past this being a form of Saturday night entertainment. Sandwiched inbetween Michael McIntyre rembering what being in the Euro all those days ago was like... and Till Death Do Is Part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right in the middle of BLM, the families of two British men criticized Obama for the lack of governmental response to racially motivated murders which happened in Florida several years ago.

It's that kind of cherry picking I despise when it comes to press coverage of events in America.

Obama got a lot of leeway for being obstructed by senate, while people are all too quick to criticise Trump when his directives are constantly being challenged at every turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
3 hours ago, NoUseforaUsername said:

Right in the middle of BLM, the families of two British men criticized Obama for the lack of governmental response to racially motivated murders which happened in Florida several years ago.

It's that kind of cherry picking I despise when it comes to press coverage of events in America.

Is this some sort of self-aware joke, because if it is, bravo to you. 

If not, this is just painful. Quis cherrypicks ipsos cherrypickmen?

Edited by Sergio Mendacious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
8 hours ago, NoUseforaUsername said:

Right in the middle of BLM, the families of two British men criticized Obama for the lack of governmental response to racially motivated murders which happened in Florida several years ago.

It's that kind of cherry picking I despise when it comes to press coverage of events in America.

Obama got a lot of leeway for being obstructed by senate, while people are all too quick to criticise Trump when his directives are constantly being challenged at every turn.

What a fucking Duane.

Just disappear off for a few days when people make valid points you have no answer to and then come back crying about Obama. Fuck outta here. If you can't engage with the actual discussion then you're not needed.

I'm currently failing to see that you add any value by existing, and you're heading for a ban if this keeps up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

In the same insane Duane vein that messes with your brain, here's damning, DAMNING evidence from Shaun Hannity last night, proof positive that Hillary Clinton is closer to the Uranium One deal than she is to her own alleged husband.

w6I393q.jpg.3b4b041579f07ef5756712bcbba8d26b.jpg

Notably, the Rand Corporation has managed to stay out of the picture A-GAIN, protecting the reverse vampires from the cleansing sunlight of truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/2/16588964/america-epistemic-crisis

Interesting article from Vox on the "epistemic crisis" facing America, as people are increasingly prepared to ignore facts, and discredit those institutions historically selected to mediate when determining truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...