45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.
Discussion
Guybrush said:
I expect Trump will have more success in helping the jobless etc. far more than Obama has done in all the years he's had the chance to do.
So you think he will take unemployment down another 4ppt roughly? To... 0.5%?? Despite the fact it's never dropped below 2.5% ever, IIRC?
That sounds more optimistic than having the most people attend your inauguration. Period.
KrissKross said:
walm said:
I meant Spicer on the subject of crowd-size. You know, the press secretary who obviously speaks on POTUS's behalf.
No I don't know who you meant, that's why I asked. Do you have a link to his (Spicer') conversation?It's kind of a big deal.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/21/media/sean-spicer-...
V6Pushfit said:
tommunster10 said:
Guybrush said:
tommunster10 said:
Wow, I never knew Thatcher was so pro poor and pro coal. Amazing what you learn on Pistonheads..... So Thatcher was a 'leftie' after all....
It's hilarious watching the old right wingers try to pretend Trumps "help the poor and be anti establishment" stance is something they agree with after years of defending Thatcher...
Well, with age comes wisdom and sooner or later you realise the right of centre is all about helping everyone and not just pretending to help the 'needy' etc. (as Labour has for so many years pretended to do).It's hilarious watching the old right wingers try to pretend Trumps "help the poor and be anti establishment" stance is something they agree with after years of defending Thatcher...
US politics is different and Trump is no Scargill he's more of lunatic, if that's possible, and without the industrial suicide bit, and the coal thing with him is just part of a 'keep it at home' policy without thinking of what people actually want or need.
Where were the champions of the down trodden and the poor before Trump came along?
Stickyfinger said:
and ?, the 1960's FFS ?
What numbers were blocked THIS time.
I, like you, have no idea. yet you're making it sound like protesters had huge numbers of would-be attendees kettled in the streets unable to reach the Mall. Presumably the fake news press are keeping all that to themselves.What numbers were blocked THIS time.
tommunster10 said:
Point i'm making is why is a celebrity like Trump given a free pass to say we should kick it to big corporations, fight the establishment, help the poor, spread the wealth, yet if another celebrity like Russel Brand says it he's called a champagne socialist?
Where were the champions of the down trodden and the poor before Trump came along?
To bring that bizarre bloke Brand into it is a bit confusing. Was Brand standing for election in the US? Where were the champions of the down trodden and the poor before Trump came along?
walm said:
Have you heard of google?
It's kind of a big deal.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/21/media/sean-spicer-...
Have I heard of google, are you 12, why do you try to wind people up like that, unnecessary really if you want to be take seriously.It's kind of a big deal.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/21/media/sean-spicer-...
Ok I just watched the video for the first time:
1. He explain that security/fences were erected at positions that were open in the past. Makes sense to me that maybe not so many people were allowed into the parts where photos were taken. Would that be reasonable in your view?
2. "This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period," Spicer said - Well I have never watched a presidential inauguration before on the TV, neither has my family. So maybe the overall audience numbers are higher even if not on site?
So whats your point again, and how is it going to help you and your families day to day lives, shouldn't that be all you really care about instead of all this petty tit for tat rubbish?
vonuber said:
walm said:
He's going to house all the unwanted babies in Trump Tower.
It will be wonderful.
Don't worry.
Would be funny if it wasn't so sad. But I want to hear our favourite climate change denier his opinion (I'm convinced him and don4l are the same person It will be wonderful.
Don't worry.
).When there's no visible causal human signal in any global climate data even the molested type, it's sensible to not "believe" either truly or at all in manmade climate change, unless of course it's a political or religious decision.
Believing in tolerant inclusive left-liberalism hasn't been going too well recently either.
Team Trump's start on the road to sanity was just about OK, taking down the White House climate fairytales webpage on the day of his inauguration, but it's what he does in practice that matters.
vonuber said:
walm said:
He's going to house all the unwanted babies in Trump Tower.
It will be wonderful.
Don't worry.
It Would be funny if it wasn't so sad. But I want to hear our favourite climate change denier his opinion (I'm convinced him and don4l are the same person It will be wonderful.
Don't worry.
).Edited by don4l on Monday 23 January 18:41
Rude-boy said:
Forget the Russian angle, forget the Pacific Trade angle, forget the Mexican wall and the build/buy American things all going on i believe that we might well be looking back in 4 years and considering that Trump's impact on the Media has been the most significant and long lasting item of his time in office (assuming that he doesn't get a second term).
Finally we seem to have a World leader who is not an outright despot (some may agree but this isn't like Gambia) who is willing to stand up to the media and to hold them to account and call them out without seeming to constantly fear the repercussions of doing so.
I have been banging on about this for 20 years or more but it really looks like we might finally have someone who has the power and the balls to start to force the news media to report events based on fact, rather than to create the facts (through selective use of the 'right' sections of interviews, secondary and tertiary information, and their own pet stooges).
Frankly I am pig sick of having to spend 3 times as long as necessary to obtain sufficient information to come to a considered view on things because of the amount of Media bias I have to sift through to extract the real facts.
I am not in favour of a sate sponsored or controlled media but what we have now is a media lead by unaccountable despots with no morals, little accountability and their own agenda.
Let's get back to the facts please people and let those with a brain work it out for themselves.
Well saidFinally we seem to have a World leader who is not an outright despot (some may agree but this isn't like Gambia) who is willing to stand up to the media and to hold them to account and call them out without seeming to constantly fear the repercussions of doing so.
I have been banging on about this for 20 years or more but it really looks like we might finally have someone who has the power and the balls to start to force the news media to report events based on fact, rather than to create the facts (through selective use of the 'right' sections of interviews, secondary and tertiary information, and their own pet stooges).
Frankly I am pig sick of having to spend 3 times as long as necessary to obtain sufficient information to come to a considered view on things because of the amount of Media bias I have to sift through to extract the real facts.
I am not in favour of a sate sponsored or controlled media but what we have now is a media lead by unaccountable despots with no morals, little accountability and their own agenda.
Let's get back to the facts please people and let those with a brain work it out for themselves.
There has always been a certain level of bias in the news, and such bias is unavoidable as it is human beings who collect and transmit the news, but the fact that formerly prestigious news organisations seem to have turned themselves into out and out propaganda organisations is deeply disturbing.
Yes there is always going to be bias in the stories the media reports on and the order in which the show the news. But to have opinion presented as fact, or to only ever present one side of what are in fact deeply complex issues, means that you can place little reliance on the MSM.
vonuber said:
turbobloke said:
but it's what he does in practice that matters.
Right, so his cutting all federal funding for abortion? You going to answer the question?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff