Know your Enemy: Steve Bannon by Amy Goodman

Page 13 of 14 [ 207 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,264

08 Feb 2017, 12:51 am

AceOfSpades wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
Maybe you and adifferentname require absolute certainty before you will pronounce someone a follower of the ideology that dare not be named. I am more inclined to accept the "looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like duck" standard.
I find it absurd that someone who deliberately pulls numbers right out of his ass in order to scapegoat the Asian community in Silicon Valley is still being unconditionally given the benefit of the doubt. Even after he has been established as a blatant liar, people still attribute his motives to everything but malice and come up with all sorts of false dichotomies and elusive goal posts.

I'm not buying the old "It's not about race; it's about _____" argument, especially when racism, nationalism, and power hunger tend to go hand in hand with each other and don't have to be mutually exclusive. As for "evidence" of racism, I've already addressed this but I will add that the stubbornness and evasiveness that come with shifting goal posts are not to be confused with true skepticism.

I can understand being skeptical of all the accusations of racism if we're going by his questionable statements alone (which I personally found suspicious to begin with). But now that we can corroborate his questionable statements with his fabricated statistics, it just borders on gas lighting at this point.


What we're seeing is political correctness, right-wing style. Never call a winger racist because it "triggers" them, and they need their "safe space". They're not racists, they're just unusually perceptive "special snowflakes", they'll say.

You can already see the political correctness in action, as they make the Senate floor a "safe space":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pow ... character/

Where will they go next, I wonder?


_________________
I stand with our American citizens living abroad. We need to move to residence-based taxation.


namesalltaken
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 65
Location: Southeast Australia

08 Feb 2017, 3:13 am

Quote:
What about when the political motivations of an aggressive enemy are based solely upon a religion?

That refers quite well to Bannon himself, by his own words a kind of religious univeralist.

He wants to return the "western hemisphere" to Pre-WW1 conditions, but with a twist - A sort of caliphate if you will, with America at it's head rather than the Vatican, but where Christianity commands supreme moral authority.

Ultimately, the conflict between economic liberalism and cultural conservatism is the source of his grievance, even if he blames the "immorality and internationalism" of the capitalists on their lack of religious devotion.

The national populists who voted trump are just useful idiots in removing a "corrupt" centre-right establishment.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

08 Feb 2017, 6:51 am

Mikah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I laugh at people like you every day when I watch the news, you can not understand the satisfaction I get watching you lose and lose and lose. Everything Trump has done has given me more confidence in him, he should use his mandate to its fullest extent. :D


Seconded. I'm really beginning to enjoy watching the news. It's also nice to see the workings of the Trump cabinet's masterminds.

To everyone else: if you are annoyed by the so-called "muslim ban" you had better lubricate yourself for what is coming. The seven country "ban" was just street theatre, firstly to distract the media from everything else in play, secondly to identify political enemies and human obstacles to future plans (you'll find people who used their power to get in the way will be quietly fired or have their powers reduced in future) and lastly for the enjoyment of people like myself and Jacoby.


Such bullshit. All this proves is that the new right-wing Trump devotees care more about tribalistic polemics than policy that affects Americans. You guys are the anti-left, nothing more. I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way. Ordinary Americans won't have the luxury to worry about the far-fetched prospect of Muslims invading when they're fighting for their own financial survival in a hostile political landscape. I get that you're not even an American, but I don't know what makes people like Jacoby think these pseudo-populists actually give a f**k about anyone but themselves.



Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 29
Posts: 643
Location: England

08 Feb 2017, 7:25 am

Quote:
I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way.


The Left will make a fuss certainly, but there will barely be a whisper of complaint from Trump supporters if those things happen. If you have learned anything from 2016 it's that immigration concerns trump economic concerns.


_________________
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

08 Feb 2017, 7:41 am

marshall wrote:
Mikah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I laugh at people like you every day when I watch the news, you can not understand the satisfaction I get watching you lose and lose and lose. Everything Trump has done has given me more confidence in him, he should use his mandate to its fullest extent. :D


Seconded. I'm really beginning to enjoy watching the news. It's also nice to see the workings of the Trump cabinet's masterminds.

To everyone else: if you are annoyed by the so-called "muslim ban" you had better lubricate yourself for what is coming. The seven country "ban" was just street theatre, firstly to distract the media from everything else in play, secondly to identify political enemies and human obstacles to future plans (you'll find people who used their power to get in the way will be quietly fired or have their powers reduced in future) and lastly for the enjoyment of people like myself and Jacoby.


Such bullshit. All this proves is that the new right-wing Trump devotees care more about tribalistic polemics than policy that affects Americans. You guys are the anti-left, nothing more. I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way. Ordinary Americans won't have the luxury to worry about the far-fetched prospect of Muslims invading when they're fighting for their own financial survival in a hostile political landscape. I get that you're not even an American, but I don't know what makes people like Jacoby think these pseudo-populists actually give a f**k about anyone but themselves.


FWIW I was responding to someone that thought putting a bunch of :lol: :lol: :lol: smilies was really sticking it to us so I responded with what I found funny.

Am I supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton or the Democrats who hold me in open disdain care about me or anyone else for that matter tho? 'We're not talking about that!', well you can't talk about one thing without the other. Trump is actually doing what he said he was going to do, like during the campaign the media is playing up hysterics but really nothing to controversial or unexpected so what sticks out to me are the reactions. Who, what, and why should I support anyone else? You win an election, you win a majority, you get to govern, that's how it works but now the media and certain billionaires are trying to run interference on our democracy and are trying undermine/delegitiimize our new president.

There is almost zero credible opposition in this country, there were some encouraging things said by Chuck Schumer right after the election before he let partisan politics take hold. Calling the MSM the opposition party is a statement of fact, the DNC has an incestuous relationship with the media to the point that you can no longer call it the free press and it definitely isn't journalism. A quote I've heard recently is 'journalism is printing something others don't want printed while every else is just pubic relations'; this is pretty much a literal fact with CNN who was clearing its stories with the Clinton campaign, pre-screening debate questions, and were taking editorial direction from them on how to cover Trump. We don't call foreign elections like this free and fair, there were serious crimes committed by the Democrats in 2016 during the election and they should be held accountable by the fullest legal extend of the law I think. How can we Clinton people on tape plotting to physically attack Trump supporters and nobody be held accountable?

Calling me simply anti-left wouldn't make much sense since that would imply that I would of supported any 'right wing' candidate when the truth is that I held the GOP leadership in lower regard than anyone, Trump defeating and emasculating the Bush family and the neoconservatives is one the things that sold me on his candidacy. I would not of voted just for any Republican but also remember that the Clinton's presented a unique threat in their life long criminality and their record is not something I ever forgot unlike so many others that bought into Hillary 3.0. I can't waste my time worrying about things that think could happen based on whatever prejudice.

As long as there is this theatrics and foaming at the mouth from Democrats and the left there is no way anybody could take them seriously about whatever they're afraid of that day. They are digging their own graves with this stupid 'resistance' crap.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,896
Location: Long Island, New York

08 Feb 2017, 9:26 am

Mikah wrote:
Quote:
I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way.


The Left will make a fuss certainly, but there will barely be a whisper of complaint from Trump supporters if those things happen. If you have learned anything from 2016 it's that immigration concerns trump economic concerns.


Economic concerns unless in time of total war or other such crises are always the number one concerns. If the Rust belt states that put Trump over the top were doing well economically you would be documenting President Clinton's globalist takeover. The immigration issue is largely economically driven. The idea of restricting immigrants from Muslim countries was a added on to take political advantage of ISIS attacks. The original campaign theme was about Mexicans.


_________________
How can Autism be trendy and a popular insult at the same time?

Recovering from tongue cancer and suspected Ramsey Hunt Syndrome (Ear Shingles), somewhat verbal.
Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity


Adamantium
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1017
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,998
Location: Erehwon

08 Feb 2017, 9:57 am

Jacoby wrote:
You win an election, you win a majority, you get to govern, that's how it works but now the media and certain billionaires are trying to run interference on our democracy and are trying undermine/delegitiimize our new president.

That's not what we have seen for the last eight years.

Obama actually won the popular vote by a large margin and initially dems had control of the congress. Rather than happily submitting to the clear will of the people as expressed in the election, the Republicans became the party of NO and met Obama's early efforts at non-partisan cooperation with a plan of obstructing every single thing he did including blocking Republican initiatives if they later were backed by Obama.

Really, the Democrats should follow that example and take every available means to obstruct Trump in every single thing he does.

Back to the Immigration Act of 1924.

There is a kind of would-be "stealth" racist, exemplified by individuals like John Derbyshire and Kevin MacDonald, who seek to introduce racist ideas to political discourse despite the stigma that has long been attached to racism. Like Mr. Derbyshire, they often fail because they can't keep up the pretense very long and their open racism leaks out, but you can find in their work all the bogus justifications for racist policy that are being dredged up now in defense of Bannons enthusiasm for the racist Immigration Act of 1924.

Bear in mind that the definition of racist that I am working with includes the idea that races have fixed attributes. These attributes are said by the race thinkers to generate culture.They say that we can look at a nation's culture and draw conclusions about the intrinsic biological properties, the racial characteristics, as they see it, of that nation's citizens. Take Korea, for example. Since culture is biologically driven, we see near identical cultures developing on both sides of the DMZ despite the different ideologies adopted by the North and South after the second World War. It' doesn't work, does it? That's why these racists don't focus on Korea.

What is interesting is that they all love the Immigration Act of 1924 and they claim it isn't racist, but merely nationalist. They love to quote Representative Vaile's discussion of the Act as proof that it isn't racist or racially motivated, when the Senator's words show the exact opposite.

You can read Kevin MacDonald here
And John Derbyshire here

The part they love, because it includes positive words about other races, is from the Congressional Record, April 8, 1924. They love it because Representative Vaile says Czech are sturdy, Jews are good businessmen and Italians are spiritual. How can they be racist when they sing the praises of these types? Well, because they actually think Czechs have a certain constitution, Jews an approach to business, and Italians... This is the essence of racist thinking. Here's the text from Senator Vaile:
Quote:
Let me emphasize here that the restrictionists of Congress do not claim that the `Nordic` race, or even the Anglo-Saxon race, is the best race in the world. Let us concede, in all fairness that the Czech is a more sturdy laborer…that the Jew is the best businessman in the world, and that the Italian has…a spiritual exaltation and an artistic creative sense which the Nordic rarely attains. Nordics need not be vain about their own qualifications. It well behooves them to be humble.

What we do claim is that the northern European and particularly Anglo-Saxons made this country. Oh, yes; the others helped. But… [t]hey came to this country because it was already made as an Anglo-Saxon commonwealth. They added to it, they often enriched it, but they did not make it, and they have not yet greatly changed it.

We are determined that they shall not…It is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves.”

The argument Vaile made, claiming he wasn't racist was that:
* Races are real and have fixed qualities.
* America was created by and belongs to Anglo-Saxons and
* it's reasonable for Anglo-Saxons to take measures to prevent non-Anglo-Saxons from guiding America's future.

This is clear evidence that racist thinking was at the heart of support for the 1924 Immigration Act, something I am confident is well understood by both Bannon and Sessions.

But there is much more to be gleaned from the history of this terrible act.

Also from the Congressional Record of April 9, 1924 is the "shut the door" speech of Sentor Smith:
Quote:
I think we now have sufficient population in our country for us to shut the door and to breed up a pure, unadulterated American citizenship. I recognize that there is a dangerous lack of distinction between people of a certain nationality and the breed of the dog. Who is an American? Is he an immigrant from Italy? Is he an immigrant from Germany? If you were to go abroad and some one were to meet you and say, “I met a typical American,” what would flash into your mind as a typical American, the typical representative of that new Nation? Would it be the son of an Italian immigrant, the son of a German immigrant, the son of any of the breeds from the Orient, the son of the denizens of Africa? We must not get our ethnological distinctions mixed up with out anthropological distinctions. It is the breed of the dog in which I am interested. I would like for the Members of the Senate to read that book just recently published by Madison Grant, The Passing of a Great Race. Thank God we have in America perhaps the largest percentage of any country in the world of the pure, unadulterated Anglo-Saxon stock; certainly the greatest of any nation in the Nordic breed. It is for the preservation of that splendid stock that has characterized us that I would make this not an asylum for the oppressed of all countries, but a country to assimilate and perfect that splendid type of manhood that has made America the foremost Nation in her progress and in her power, and yet the youngest of all the nations. I myself believe that the preservation of her institutions depends upon us now taking counsel with our condition and our experience during the last World War.

Without offense, but with regard to the salvation of our own, let us shut the door and assimilate what we have, and let us breed pure American citizens and develop our own American resources. I am more in favor of that than I am of our quota proposition. Of course, it may not meet the approbation of the Senate that we shall shut the door—which I unqualifiedly and unreservedly believe to be our duty—and develop what we have, assimilate and digest what we have into pure Americans, with American aspirations, and thoroughly familiar with the love of American institutions, rather than the importation of any number of men from other countries. If we may not have that, then I am in favor of putting the quota down to the lowest possible point, with every selective element in it that may be.


I will quote a brief section of the introduction of The Passing of a Great Race as an illustration of the pseudo scientific race thinking prevalent in that era and instrumental in the Passage of the Immigration Act of 1924.

Quote:
It will be necessary for the reader to divest his mind of all preconceptions as to race, since modern anthropology, when applied to history, involves an entire change of definition. We must, first of all, realize that race pure and simple, the physical and psychical structure of man, is something entirely distinct from either nationality or language. Furthermore, race lies at the base of all the manifestation of modern society, just as it has done throughout the unrecorded eons of the past and the laws of nature operate with the same relentless and unchanging force in human affairs as in the phenomena of inanimate nature.


A good, quick write up of the contributing forces behind the Act can be found here
Quote:
When President Calvin Coolidge gave his inaugural address, he argued that new immigrants should be restricted by America's capability to absorb them as decent citizens while the country still maintained its own American character. Many Americans had the notion that according to "biological laws," people from northern Europe (the "Nordic" races, the English, Germans, and Irish) were superior to eastern and southern Europeans and that they somehow deteriorated when mixed with their inferiors. By excluding the "lower races," it was hoped that Americans would achieve racial "purity."

In 1922, Congress extended the 1921 law another two years. Representative Albert Johnson, who chaired the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, hoped for even stricter limitations. In 1922, his committee began gathering evidence to argue for tighter restrictions. Harry H. Laughlin, a proponent of eugenics, was the committee's chief scientific adviser. Eugenicists preached that selective breeding could improve the human race, similar to cattle herds becoming strengthened by getting rid of weak cows. Laughlin headed the New York-based Eugenic Records Office, which accumulated statistics concerning the transmissible traits of Americans. Frequently, he gave testimony before the Immigration Committee regarding the "bad stock" that was allowed to immigrate to the United States. He alleged that many inmates of mental hospitals, prisons, and poorhouses stemmed from eastern and southern European stock, particularly Italians, Jews, Poles, and Slavs. Laughlin claimed that inherited traits in populations influenced crime and poverty and in due course could be eliminated from America by allowing only the "superior" races to immigrate to America to breed. Utilizing the 1910 census data had permitted too many "inferior races" to slip into the United States, he finished.


I encourage anyone who cares about these issues to research it further. The writing of that period is a cesspool of racist ideas and it is impossible to take separate the Immigration Act of 1924 from the despicable ideology that generated it. Bannon knows that background a Sessions knows that background and yet both men praise the Act and discuss it as model for Americas future. In this, I find sufficient reason to consider them racists and to expect them to Exercise their governmental authority in the new regime from a racist position.

I would love to be wrong about this. We'll see how "law and order" plays out as the new regime fleshes out it's domestic agenda.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,907
Location: Queens, NYC

08 Feb 2017, 10:04 am

1924, or thereabouts, was the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan.

The Immigration Act of 1924 was an obvious attempt to exclude "undesirables."

Lynching was pretty much in its heyday, too.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

08 Feb 2017, 12:49 pm

Mikah wrote:
Quote:
I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way.


The Left will make a fuss certainly, but there will barely be a whisper of complaint from Trump supporters if those things happen. If you have learned anything from 2016 it's that immigration concerns trump economic concerns.

No. Trump promised to help the working man. If his administration fails to bring back prosperity to the rust belt, he will lose those states. Hardcore trump supporters and die-hard Republicans alone cannot win elections. Trump only won because he brought in some blue-collar voters who normally vote for Democrats. Islam-fear isn't a main issue here in the United States. Muslims make up 1.5% of the population. We aren't Europe.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

08 Feb 2017, 1:01 pm

Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Mikah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I laugh at people like you every day when I watch the news, you can not understand the satisfaction I get watching you lose and lose and lose. Everything Trump has done has given me more confidence in him, he should use his mandate to its fullest extent. :D


Seconded. I'm really beginning to enjoy watching the news. It's also nice to see the workings of the Trump cabinet's masterminds.

To everyone else: if you are annoyed by the so-called "muslim ban" you had better lubricate yourself for what is coming. The seven country "ban" was just street theatre, firstly to distract the media from everything else in play, secondly to identify political enemies and human obstacles to future plans (you'll find people who used their power to get in the way will be quietly fired or have their powers reduced in future) and lastly for the enjoyment of people like myself and Jacoby.


Such bullshit. All this proves is that the new right-wing Trump devotees care more about tribalistic polemics than policy that affects Americans. You guys are the anti-left, nothing more. I suspect when the new administration, along with their Republican plutocrat buddies, destroy healthcare and Social Security the tide will swing back the other way. Ordinary Americans won't have the luxury to worry about the far-fetched prospect of Muslims invading when they're fighting for their own financial survival in a hostile political landscape. I get that you're not even an American, but I don't know what makes people like Jacoby think these pseudo-populists actually give a f**k about anyone but themselves.


FWIW I was responding to someone that thought putting a bunch of :lol: :lol: :lol: smilies was really sticking it to us so I responded with what I found funny.

Am I supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton or the Democrats who hold me in open disdain care about me or anyone else for that matter tho? 'We're not talking about that!', well you can't talk about one thing without the other. Trump is actually doing what he said he was going to do, like during the campaign the media is playing up hysterics but really nothing to controversial or unexpected so what sticks out to me are the reactions. Who, what, and why should I support anyone else? You win an election, you win a majority, you get to govern, that's how it works but now the media and certain billionaires are trying to run interference on our democracy and are trying undermine/delegitiimize our new president.

There is almost zero credible opposition in this country, there were some encouraging things said by Chuck Schumer right after the election before he let partisan politics take hold. Calling the MSM the opposition party is a statement of fact, the DNC has an incestuous relationship with the media to the point that you can no longer call it the free press and it definitely isn't journalism. A quote I've heard recently is 'journalism is printing something others don't want printed while every else is just pubic relations'; this is pretty much a literal fact with CNN who was clearing its stories with the Clinton campaign, pre-screening debate questions, and were taking editorial direction from them on how to cover Trump. We don't call foreign elections like this free and fair, there were serious crimes committed by the Democrats in 2016 during the election and they should be held accountable by the fullest legal extend of the law I think. How can we Clinton people on tape plotting to physically attack Trump supporters and nobody be held accountable?

Calling me simply anti-left wouldn't make much sense since that would imply that I would of supported any 'right wing' candidate when the truth is that I held the GOP leadership in lower regard than anyone, Trump defeating and emasculating the Bush family and the neoconservatives is one the things that sold me on his candidacy. I would not of voted just for any Republican but also remember that the Clinton's presented a unique threat in their life long criminality and their record is not something I ever forgot unlike so many others that bought into Hillary 3.0. I can't waste my time worrying about things that think could happen based on whatever prejudice.

As long as there is this theatrics and foaming at the mouth from Democrats and the left there is no way anybody could take them seriously about whatever they're afraid of that day. They are digging their own graves with this stupid 'resistance' crap.

Why are you still talking about Hillary? Why are you so obsessed with her? Why can't you stay on topic? How do you think Trump is going to make America prosperous? It seems like you really just don't care. All you care about is hating "the Left". I'd also like to see proof that the Trump administration is "anti-establishment" when he appoints mostly plutocratic billionaires, just like every other Republican. This new-right rants non-stop about this nebulous "global elite", but can't provide any evidence of such a sinister plot. It just seems like a typical quasi-fascist scapegoat, in a similar vein as "the bankers" or "the Jews", etc... A thing to distract from the fact that the real elite doesn't give a s**t and is more than willing to work with Trump to rob everyone blind.



Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 29
Posts: 643
Location: England

08 Feb 2017, 1:58 pm

The true enemy is, of course, 4chan. Steve Bannon is just their puppet.

Image


_________________
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

08 Feb 2017, 6:41 pm

marshall wrote:
Why are you still talking about Hillary? Why are you so obsessed with her? Why can't you stay on topic? How do you think Trump is going to make America prosperous? It seems like you really just don't care. All you care about is hating "the Left". I'd also like to see proof that the Trump administration is "anti-establishment" when he appoints mostly plutocratic billionaires, just like every other Republican. This new-right rants non-stop about this nebulous "global elite", but can't provide any evidence of such a sinister plot. It just seems like a typical quasi-fascist scapegoat, in a similar vein as "the bankers" or "the Jews", etc... A thing to distract from the fact that the real elite doesn't give a s**t and is more than willing to work with Trump to rob everyone blind.


You asked why I believed Trump is on my side and that's because he spoke to issues I cared about and opposed the people I wanted blocked from power, not only did he oppose them he humiliated them. Hillary's relevant as she was the alternative to Trump and someone I never would have voted for. I don't think you understand how much I disliked the Clinton's, over my entire lifetime they may as well been Satan incarnate and I don't think I am alone in this way of thinking by the looks of it. Allowing Clinton to rig the Democratic primary 8 years in advanced is an unforgivable crime, I believe Obama's 2008 victory over Hillary was just as much or more because of anti-Clinton sentiment than his qualities as a candidate which are significant don't get me wrong. So Hillary directly/indirectly from her candidacies got both our country's first black president and Donald frickin' Trump elected.

The GOP was not much better, Romney was their chosen candidate in 2012 & scripted loser and Jeb was suppose to the job in 2016. Never once did I think Romney had a chance at winning, never once did I think Hillary was going to win, talentless duds running for money & their own vanity. Democrats do not have any guts at policing their own and their 'activist' base is becoming more & more extreme, they're in a no win situation since the moderate saner wing part of the party is corrupt to its core and by the looks of it they are going to double down on the tactics that helped them lose the election.

The Ron Paul candidacies and how the mainstream media & establishment politicians worked against him impacted my support of Trump because I saw the same forces working against him and attempt to use the same tactics, seeing Trump navigate it and defeat them at their own game convinced me of his genius in this regard which is why I never wavered in my support or my belief in his eventual victory.

Simply put, Trump is doing what he said he was going to do and I support the great majority of it. Maybe if Bernie wasn't a coward he would of actually tried to differentiate himself from Hillary and the Democratic establishment he could of won the nomination, I never took his candidacy seriously because he was never really serious about running and again I believe it was the anti-Clinton sentiment with no other alternative that powered his candidacy. I liked Jim Webb but he got chased out of the Democratic party, I like Tulsi Gabbard but look at how the Democratic establishment treats her. If Democrats are really afraid of what Trump and the GOP might do then they are obligated to work with him because who is else is Trump going to work with the other party won't cooperate? Do you think Trump is beholden to the GOP? The only way that can happen is if they're the only people who will work with him, I think Trump can be reasoned with a lot easier than Paul Ryan or Ted Cruz.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,896
Location: Long Island, New York

08 Feb 2017, 7:22 pm

Bannon and Trump's tweets is a distraction from the fact that especially with domestic policy that we have a Pence administration.


_________________
How can Autism be trendy and a popular insult at the same time?

Recovering from tongue cancer and suspected Ramsey Hunt Syndrome (Ear Shingles), somewhat verbal.
Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

08 Feb 2017, 7:59 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Bannon and Trump's tweets is a distraction from the fact that especially with domestic policy that we have a Pence administration.


Pence was for TPP and NAFTA, I also doubt Pence would of kept the executive order in place protecting LGBTQ federal contractors from discrimination plus he was for amnesty, I think Pence's influence is vastly overstated. He is one of out many voices, Trump does not surround himself with yes men.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

09 Feb 2017, 6:28 am

Jacoby wrote:
You asked why I believed Trump is on my side and that's because he spoke to issues I cared about and opposed the people I wanted blocked from power, not only did he oppose them he humiliated them. Hillary's relevant as she was the alternative to Trump and someone I never would have voted for. I don't think you understand how much I disliked the Clinton's, over my entire lifetime they may as well been Satan incarnate and I don't think I am alone in this way of thinking by the looks of it. Allowing Clinton to rig the Democratic primary 8 years in advanced is an unforgivable crime, I believe Obama's 2008 victory over Hillary was just as much or more because of anti-Clinton sentiment than his qualities as a candidate which are significant don't get me wrong. So Hillary directly/indirectly from her candidacies got both our country's first black president and Donald frickin' Trump elected.

The GOP was not much better, Romney was their chosen candidate in 2012 & scripted loser and Jeb was suppose to the job in 2016. Never once did I think Romney had a chance at winning, never once did I think Hillary was going to win, talentless duds running for money & their own vanity. Democrats do not have any guts at policing their own and their 'activist' base is becoming more & more extreme, they're in a no win situation since the moderate saner wing part of the party is corrupt to its core and by the looks of it they are going to double down on the tactics that helped them lose the election.

The Ron Paul candidacies and how the mainstream media & establishment politicians worked against him impacted my support of Trump because I saw the same forces working against him and attempt to use the same tactics, seeing Trump navigate it and defeat them at their own game convinced me of his genius in this regard which is why I never wavered in my support or my belief in his eventual victory.

Simply put, Trump is doing what he said he was going to do and I support the great majority of it. Maybe if Bernie wasn't a coward he would of actually tried to differentiate himself from Hillary and the Democratic establishment he could of won the nomination, I never took his candidacy seriously because he was never really serious about running and again I believe it was the anti-Clinton sentiment with no other alternative that powered his candidacy. I liked Jim Webb but he got chased out of the Democratic party, I like Tulsi Gabbard but look at how the Democratic establishment treats her. If Democrats are really afraid of what Trump and the GOP might do then they are obligated to work with him because who is else is Trump going to work with the other party won't cooperate? Do you think Trump is beholden to the GOP? The only way that can happen is if they're the only people who will work with him, I think Trump can be reasoned with a lot easier than Paul Ryan or Ted Cruz.

I'm just interested in how you think politics affects YOU personally. When I read your posts I just get the sense that politics is like a soap opera to you. You're emotionally invested, but it isn't tied to anything that concretely affects you in any way whatsoever. It's just a stage show with heros and villains.

Honestly, I don't think Trump won because of people like you. The average Joe sixpack doesn't have the time or political curiosity to dig up all the scandalous information on Hillary. The people who swayed the election in Trumps favor where not people who normally fall into political camps. They were mostly apolitical blue collar workers from the rust belt. Trump won because he made certain economic promises that the mainline Democrats weren't willing to make. He said things that people wanted to hear. He said he would bring manufacturing jobs back from China. Hillary promised nothing. That's the real reason she lost. As far as character goes, neither candidate was very likeable.