Page 2 of 5 [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

20 Jan 2016, 3:30 pm

Hopper wrote:
I am sure some Muslims did sign the petition, yes. What does that have to do with the matter? That's like dismissing a petition about animal rights because some pet owners have signed it.


How dare those filthy citizens follow procedures and exercise their democratic rights? How dare parliament honour its agreement with the British public? What next, votes for black people? HARRUMPH!

Allergy Warning! This post may contain sarcasm.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Jan 2016, 4:13 pm

This is the kind of thing you get with direct democracy / populism. Trump of all people should understand populism.

Governance is about determining whether is is good idea or not. Petitioners aren't always right.



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

20 Jan 2016, 4:20 pm

0_equals_true wrote:
This is the kind of thing you get with direct democracy / populism. Trump of all people should understand populism.

Governance is about determining whether is is good idea or not. Petitioners aren't always right.


Trump isn't a populist, he's an opportunist.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Jan 2016, 4:30 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Trump isn't a populist, he's an opportunist.


Trump is a textbook populist. Maybe he hasn't got the range of populism that Hilary has tried over her career but it a brand of populist.

The school of populism that Trump adheres to is the vague school. Keep thing a vague as possible but discuss popular ideas.

Quote:
Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector.



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

20 Jan 2016, 4:39 pm

0_equals_true wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Trump isn't a populist, he's an opportunist.


Trump is a text book populist. Maybe he hasn't got the range of populist that Hilary has tried over her career but it a brand of populist.

The school of populism that Trump adheres to is the vague school. Keep thing a vague as possible but discuss popular ideas.


Hilary isn't a populist either, she's an establishment Democrat. Bernie Sanders is the only populist on the democratic side and I think Rand Paul is the closest to a populist on the republican side. Trump is just throwing red meat to the base because he knows what they want to hear. I don't think he believes even half of what he's been saying.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Jan 2016, 4:45 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Hilary isn't a populist either, she's an establishment Democrat. Bernie Sanders is the only populist on the democratic side and I think Rand Paul is the closest to a populist on the republican side. Trump is just throwing red meat to the base because he knows what they want to hear. I don't think he believes even half of what he's been saying.


You described populism, it isn't really about believing it.

Hilary's stance on gay marriage change changed when the popular position on gay marriage changed. When it reached the 50% threshold. Similarly on Iraq war.

Bernie Sanders has stuck to his principles over his career.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Jan 2016, 4:50 pm

Trump also is populist because he re-branding ideas that would otherwise could come from left.

This is becuase because people when to see thing a certain way, they like certain associations to be made and not others.



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

20 Jan 2016, 5:20 pm

0_equals_true wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Hilary isn't a populist either, she's an establishment Democrat. Bernie Sanders is the only populist on the democratic side and I think Rand Paul is the closest to a populist on the republican side. Trump is just throwing red meat to the base because he knows what they want to hear. I don't think he believes even half of what he's been saying.


You described populism, it isn't really about believing it.

Hilary's stance on gay marriage change changed when the popular position on gay marriage changed. When it reached the 50% threshold. Similarly on Iraq war.

Bernie Sanders has stuck to his principles over his career.


I think believing what they say is essential otherwise every politician is a populist. I think Hillary is too much of an insider to be a populist.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 96,354
Location: the island of defective toy santas

20 Jan 2016, 5:22 pm

anybody that gets that high in the social register is an insider IMHO.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

20 Jan 2016, 5:58 pm

Raptor wrote:
Hey, at least you'll be closer to this:
Image


Not really, wrong place and period. :P

If you want something like this:

Image

You better go to Bavaria.

Also you will be getting warm larger and pork scratchings, maybe a plowman's lunch not your usual them park fair.



androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

20 Jan 2016, 6:10 pm

I'm starting to think Trump is going to be the next POTUS. Hillary's not going to be able to overcome her liabilities (Benghazi, her husband,) and Sanders could never beat Trump. He is too emotive.
After recovering from the realization of this, I am consoling myself with another realization - No matter his failings Trump couldn't be worse than W.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 96,354
Location: the island of defective toy santas

20 Jan 2016, 6:16 pm

^^^no, but he could be JUST AS BAD, which is terrifying in itself.



ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

21 Jan 2016, 1:28 pm

Hopper wrote:
You don't seem all that Zen, Den.
I know what a hissy fit is. I was asking for examples of other 'English hissy fits'. You said this debate over banning trunp was 'another English hissy fit'. I was asking what other English hissy fits you had in mind.
As to it being over 'in less than a week' - if he made the remarks on the 8th of December, that makes it a good six weeks already.
Yes, there are matters of more importance going on in Britain. How does this mean that the matter of Trump's remarks over Muslims should not be discussed?
I am sure some Muslims did sign the petition, yes. What does that have to do with the matter? That's like dismissing a petition about animal rights because some pet owners have signed it.
As to this
Quote:
Very civilized. Have the Parliament do your fighting for you instead of facing the English "Bobbies?"

it's not either/or, you know.
It is up to you as an individual how seriously you take it, as it is up to the news organisations. The parliamentarians involved would have taken the matter seriously.
You like Trump, or you dislike Muslims, or the English, or what you see as an attempt to stifle his 'free speech'. Whatever combination of these that has riled you, it's been a delight to watch your rationalise and try and bring together that 1) this petition and discussion is an outrage and 2) that it is insignificant.


You don't seem all that Zen, Den.
I don't understand what you mean. Do you know anything (for sure) about Zen? I'd love to have you teach me. Please say something with some Zen significance for us, or perhaps a teaching of your own religion? :D
I know what a hissy fit is. I was asking for examples of other 'English hissy fits'. You said this debate over banning trunp was 'another English hissy fit'. I was asking what other English hissy fits you had in mind.
Did I say I had specific other English "hissy fits" in mind? Don't think I did. Do you want me to dredge up some particularly embarrassing incident to make you happy you got an answer? It seems like your entire system is given over to "hissy fits" from my point of view.
As to it being over 'in less than a week' - if he made the remarks on the 8th of December, that makes it a good six weeks already.
Yes. It seemed very strange it took 6 weeks to get around to a discussion of something (important to GB) in Parliament. If it is so important why wasn't it discussed before this time? Perhaps the counting of the petitions, etc. takes a while?
Yes, there are matters of more importance going on in Britain. How does this mean that the matter of Trump's remarks over Muslims should not be discussed? See above.

I am sure some Muslims did sign the petition, yes. What does that have to do with the matter? That's like dismissing a petition about animal rights because some pet owners have signed it.
Sorry. I forgot how large the Muslim religion is in England. I was certainly thinking of Muslim immigrants and not citizens of GB. By the way... my question about England adopting Sharia law remains to be answered. Perhaps this is another "first step" in the process?
As to this:
Quote:
Very civilized. Have the Parliament do your fighting for you instead of facing the English "Bobbies?"

it's not either/or, you know.
It is up to you as an individual how seriously you take it, as it is up to the news organisations. The parliamentarians involved would have taken the matter seriously.
As I indicated above: If this issue was a real concern to the majority of English voters it certainly would have been discussed long before now by Parliament, no?]
You like Trump, or you dislike Muslims, or the English, or what you see as an attempt to stifle his 'free speech'. Whatever combination of these that has riled you, it's been a delight to watch your rationalise and try and bring together that 1) this petition and discussion is an outrage and 2) that it is insignificant.
On the other hand you don't see such nonsense being discussed in Congress here, have you?
I'm happy you find "significance" in the actions of your Parliament. It's in-significance (for us) is shown by how well it fits the "hissy fit" description, which according to you, fits very well.
"it's been a delight to watch your rationalise and try and bring together that 1) this petition and discussion is an outrage and 2) that it is insignificant."
An outrage? Perpetrated, not on us, but you.
Insignificant to the U.S. and Donald Trump, but not for everyone, yourself for example.



Last edited by ZenDen on 21 Jan 2016, 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

21 Jan 2016, 1:29 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Hopper wrote:
I am sure some Muslims did sign the petition, yes. What does that have to do with the matter? That's like dismissing a petition about animal rights because some pet owners have signed it.


How dare those filthy citizens follow procedures and exercise their democratic rights? How dare parliament honour its agreement with the British public? What next, votes for black people? HARRUMPH!

Allergy Warning! This post may contain sarcasm.


The BEST.



pluto
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,568
Location: Paisley,Scotland UK

21 Jan 2016, 5:57 pm

ZenDen wrote:
At first I thought (of the "ban Trump" people): "I guess this again points out the difference between the U.S. with it's "Bill of Rights" and it's 'Freedom of Speech" when compared to G.B. I still think this is a valid comparison.

Has G.B. banned ALL politicians from Iran (and including N.Korea, etc. et al)???? This would show some consistency and fortitude. Now, in those other countries, is where you hear some really GREAT hate speech. No prevarication there...they will kill you. Shouldn't all such be announced publicly as "haters" when they are banned? Why are they not? Or have they been "secretly" banned?

Or is this another English put-on "hissy fit" for show in order to gain attention (my guess)......? Just like to jump on someone else's bandwagon when you yourself have nothing to contribute (but want some of that "limelight.")

Typical. I'm not impressed.


Here is an example of a "hissy fit" -
Donald Trump's reaction to the UK parliament holding a democratic debate on whether his views constitute 'hate speech',a criminal offence in Britain.
- "If you ban me I'm going to withdraw my £700 million investments in Scotland,so there! "
A ban was never going to happen anyway as the UK government had already stated so,regardless of the debate.
While Trump in the meantime attacks his republican rival for being born in Canada,he conveniently forgets that he himself is half-Scottish. Hypocritical or what ?
Talking of conveniently forgetting things,it should be remembered that it's the whole of the UK that's debating it,not just England.


_________________
I have lost the will to be apathetic


0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

21 Jan 2016, 7:27 pm

The population of the UK is 64.1 million your worried about 577,240 who could be arsed to sign a petition to ban Trump.

You should be thanking them for the free publicity.

This goes to show that "direct democracy" is meaningless. US has its own version with change.org.