13 Oct 2021, 5:34 pm
auntblabby wrote:
i would have been more willing to overlook his manifold faults if he wasn't a fascist and GOP and if his policies all weren't so harmful to working-class types and minorities. if only he had at least not tried to destroy health care. if only he didn't [deliberately] nearly bankrupt the nation to give to the undeserving tax-shirking rich. if only he wasn't a stochastic terrorist against LGBT/minorities/women. if only he didn't brownnose the world's tyrants and encourage them to do worse. if only he had lifted a finger to TRY to make this a better country for the 99% and not just the 1%. if only he hadn't set us all against one another. if only he had lifted a finger to TRY to set a positive tone for this country.
As I have mentioned innumerous times, POC benefited enormously under Trump.
"Did not" doesn't "cut the mustard".
13 Oct 2021, 5:35 pm
Mr Reynholm wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Jakki wrote:
Mr Orange : made tariffs on Chinese imports , restarted steel mills in the USA .
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
He is responsible for both the good and the bad, yes.
Some people simply can't see their "Confirmation Bias", however.
It also depends on perspective. If you work in the US steel industry you might appreciate his actions there, if you work in an industry that uses steel you probably don't because Trump's tariffs raise your raw material costs.
You can be negatively or positively affected by a political decision *and* still be objective.
There seems to be a dearth of objectivity in America, however.
Gas is pretty expensive now but at least there are no mean tweets.
My oil shares are doing well.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,499
Location: Right over your left shoulder
13 Oct 2021, 5:46 pm
Pepe wrote:
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
We agree on that. The only motivation to vote would seem to be to keep the even worse candidate out.
Pepe wrote:
All it takes is to make the observation that some people *always* defend one side over the other.
So like, if someone consistently supports whoever Sky News is reporting favourably on? I think you're on to something here.
13 Oct 2021, 5:58 pm
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Jakki wrote:
Mr Orange : made tariffs on Chinese imports , restarted steel mills in the USA .
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
He is responsible for both the good and the bad, yes.
Some people simply can't see their "Confirmation Bias", however.
It also depends on perspective. If you work in the US steel industry you might appreciate his actions there, if you work in an industry that uses steel you probably don't because Trump's tariffs raise your raw material costs.
You can be negatively or positively affected by a political decision *and* still be objective.
There seems to be a dearth of objectivity in America, however.
Gas is pretty expensive now but at least there are no mean tweets.
Gas was pretty expensive then too, but at least Americans can go to bed at night without worry about the shitstorm they'd wake up to in the morning because President Manchild couldn't stop tweeting the dumbest things that entered his head all night.
A "manchild" versus someone who is in obvious cognitive decline.?
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
Must say inspite of all things ,, i really really do not think we should have a big money influenced careers politician as a president, Trump did not need the money , in fact if you research it , he did not take pay for his service to the USA . And hence less suseptable to media corruption and they hated him for that , amongst other fauxpaux against the media. ( media = corporate influence)
13 Oct 2021, 6:03 pm
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
We agree on that. The only motivation to vote would seem to be to keep the even worse candidate out.
Pepe wrote:
All it takes is to make the observation that some people *always* defend one side over the other.
So like, if someone consistently supports whoever Sky News is reporting favourably on? I think you're on to something here.
Your observation skills and knowledge about me are sadly lacking.
Many on Sky News support Trump.
I, on the other hand, wish he would retire from the political arena and let new blood in.
Please connect the dots.
Just one of many examples where I differ from the traditional conservatives.
13 Oct 2021, 6:08 pm
Jakki wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Jakki wrote:
Mr Orange : made tariffs on Chinese imports , restarted steel mills in the USA .
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
Orangeman bad bad bad.
STILL he shouldn't of messed with the healthcare ! ! ! ! ! !
He is responsible for both the good and the bad, yes.
Some people simply can't see their "Confirmation Bias", however.
It also depends on perspective. If you work in the US steel industry you might appreciate his actions there, if you work in an industry that uses steel you probably don't because Trump's tariffs raise your raw material costs.
You can be negatively or positively affected by a political decision *and* still be objective.
There seems to be a dearth of objectivity in America, however.
Gas is pretty expensive now but at least there are no mean tweets.
Gas was pretty expensive then too, but at least Americans can go to bed at night without worry about the shitstorm they'd wake up to in the morning because President Manchild couldn't stop tweeting the dumbest things that entered his head all night.
A "manchild" versus someone who is in obvious cognitive decline.?
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
Must say inspite of all things ,, i really really do not think we should have a big money influenced careers politician as a president, Trump did not need the money , in fact if you research it , he did not take pay for his service to the USA . And hence less suseptable to media corruption and they hated him for that , amongst other fauxpaux against the media. ( media = corporate influence)
Unsurprisingly, some on the left of politics attacked Trump for not taking a presidential salary.
Take about hyperpartisanship.
People like that have absolutely no credibility, like Xi.
13 Oct 2021, 8:25 pm
Pepe wrote:
Unsurprisingly, some on the left of politics attacked Trump for not taking a presidential salary.
Take about hyperpartisanship.
People like that have absolutely no credibility, like Xi.
Take about hyperpartisanship.
People like that have absolutely no credibility, like Xi.
To be precise, he did take a salary, but made equivalent donations to various agencies.
The liberal complaint was that it was meaningless since he made money off the presidency in other ways. Charging for secret service use of the rooms at his resorts, for example, using his properties for events (for a fee), and the pandering foreign diplomats did by staying at his hotel.
13 Oct 2021, 11:11 pm
He could have done both but didn't.
As I said, partisanship, if not hyperpartisanship.
13 Oct 2021, 11:11 pm
14 Oct 2021, 2:23 am
Pepe wrote:
He could have done both but didn't.
As I said, partisanship, if not hyperpartisanship.
As I said, partisanship, if not hyperpartisanship.
yeah, you're just playing now.
14 Oct 2021, 2:27 am
14 Oct 2021, 12:04 pm
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,499
Location: Right over your left shoulder
14 Oct 2021, 12:27 pm
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
We agree on that. The only motivation to vote would seem to be to keep the even worse candidate out.
Pepe wrote:
All it takes is to make the observation that some people *always* defend one side over the other.
So like, if someone consistently supports whoever Sky News is reporting favourably on? I think you're on to something here.
Your observation skills and knowledge about me are sadly lacking.
Many on Sky News support Trump.
I, on the other hand, wish he would retire from the political arena and let new blood in.
Please connect the dots.
Just one of many examples where I differ from the traditional conservatives.
They've got both pro and anti figures on, and they're pretty consistent on issues besides Trump. I know they're not OAN and 100% in the Trump camp because the Murdochs aren't pro-Trump, they seem to be as not pro-Trump as the market's audience will let them get away with. (Fox News has to pander to the pro-Trump crowd a lot more than Sky)
You seem pretty solidly aligned with their talking heads who aren't pro-Trump. You disagree about Trump with their ones who are pro-Trump.
Here's some relatively minor differences that distinguish me from one faction within this bloc, therefore I am totally distinct from this bloc.
14 Oct 2021, 4:37 pm
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
I am astounded Amerians can't do betta.
We agree on that. The only motivation to vote would seem to be to keep the even worse candidate out.
Pepe wrote:
All it takes is to make the observation that some people *always* defend one side over the other.
So like, if someone consistently supports whoever Sky News is reporting favourably on? I think you're on to something here.
Your observation skills and knowledge about me are sadly lacking.
Many on Sky News support Trump.
I, on the other hand, wish he would retire from the political arena and let new blood in.
Please connect the dots.
Just one of many examples where I differ from the traditional conservatives.
They've got both pro and anti figures on, and they're pretty consistent on issues besides Trump. I know they're not OAN and 100% in the Trump camp because the Murdochs aren't pro-Trump, they seem to be as not pro-Trump as the market's audience will let them get away with. (Fox News has to pander to the pro-Trump crowd a lot more than Sky)
You seem pretty solidly aligned with their talking heads who aren't pro-Trump. You disagree about Trump with their ones who are pro-Trump.
I doubt you are as au fait with Sky News as I am, since I watch it every single day.
funeralxempire wrote:
Here's some relatively minor differences that distinguish me from one faction within this bloc, therefore I am totally distinct from this bloc.
Did I say I am totally distinct?
Some of you guys have a habit of misrepresenting people.
I am a political independent who favours rational, objective thinking and is appalled by sactimony, self-righteousness, and virtue-signalling.
I will let you guess which side of the political divide I lean towards.
Keep in mind, Australian conservatives are different from American conservatives.
Some Amerians and Kanadians have a problem with that concept.
14 Oct 2021, 4:46 pm
Jakki wrote:
if a person is less suseptable to corporate infuence ..... you are less suseptable taking corporate favours and bribes . the media is under direct influence of the corporate structure and their influencers . Which constitutes billions of dollars in corporate gains . Can you imagine the differences in profits to Trump between his renting rooms in his hotel , to the amount of money involved in corporate contracts over many years . And if he donated his presidential earnings , that would still would not amount to a crumb compared to the media And corporate contracts . He , Trump was well aware of these things . And was in the television industry aswell . And this gave him the experience of how to raise his ratings . And had a basic working knowledge of how to manipulate the media . Which is a major factor in running a presidential campaign . But also knew , what was BS manipulation in the media world . And repeatedly you saw often how he dealt with those on public trlevision.
Media used cuts and snippets of his interveiws to try to cause his image to be manipulated badly .
Often he would cut off reporters that tried to do this. This was also shown by the media. With attempts to colour his image . Have dealt with media manipulation personally , and grew up on the fringes of the TV and music industry . Sorting these mushy issues can be hard for even the best of us.
Media used cuts and snippets of his interveiws to try to cause his image to be manipulated badly .
Often he would cut off reporters that tried to do this. This was also shown by the media. With attempts to colour his image . Have dealt with media manipulation personally , and grew up on the fringes of the TV and music industry . Sorting these mushy issues can be hard for even the best of us.
Some people are more enlightened that others, about media misrepresentation for political gain.
People who blindly believe what they see on the media are "Useful Idiots".
Being a useful idiot gives the media power to corruptly manipulate the system.
The best defence against this is developing critical thinking skills, rejecting groupthink, and waiting for the facts to come in. All it takes is some discipline and practice.
15 Oct 2021, 8:48 am
Pepe wrote:
Jakki wrote:
if a person is less suseptable to corporate infuence ..... you are less suseptable taking corporate favours and bribes . the media is under direct influence of the corporate structure and their influencers . Which constitutes billions of dollars in corporate gains . Can you imagine the differences in profits to Trump between his renting rooms in his hotel , to the amount of money involved in corporate contracts over many years . And if he donated his presidential earnings , that would still would not amount to a crumb compared to the media And corporate contracts . He , Trump was well aware of these things . And was in the television industry aswell . And this gave him the experience of how to raise his ratings . And had a basic working knowledge of how to manipulate the media . Which is a major factor in running a presidential campaign . But also knew , what was BS manipulation in the media world . And repeatedly you saw often how he dealt with those on public trlevision.
Media used cuts and snippets of his interveiws to try to cause his image to be manipulated badly .
Often he would cut off reporters that tried to do this. This was also shown by the media. With attempts to colour his image . Have dealt with media manipulation personally , and grew up on the fringes of the TV and music industry . Sorting these mushy issues can be hard for even the best of us.
Media used cuts and snippets of his interveiws to try to cause his image to be manipulated badly .
Often he would cut off reporters that tried to do this. This was also shown by the media. With attempts to colour his image . Have dealt with media manipulation personally , and grew up on the fringes of the TV and music industry . Sorting these mushy issues can be hard for even the best of us.
Some people are more enlightened that others, about media misrepresentation for political gain.
People who blindly believe what they see on the media are "Useful Idiots".
Being a useful idiot gives the media power to corruptly manipulate the system.
The best defence against this is developing critical thinking skills, rejecting groupthink, and waiting for the facts to come in. All it takes is some discipline and practice.
Very true.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Loving with a pure heart |
24 Mar 2024, 3:24 pm |
| Loving the child hating their autism? |
16 Apr 2024, 7:08 am |
| Biden's 'cannibals' comment |
22 Apr 2024, 2:51 pm |
| We officially have a Biden-Trump rematch |
06 Mar 2024, 8:18 pm |
