From Twitterā¦
@Mike4Eastleigh: Mrs Trump steals Michelle Obamaās speechā¦Mr Trump steals Hitlerās
Michael Moore is calling a Trump victory, is not happy about it.
The Hillary Problem. Can we speak honestly, just among ourselves? And before we do, let me state, I actually like Hillary - a lot - and I think she has been given a bad rap she doesnāt deserve. But her vote for the Iraq War made me promise her that I would never vote for her again. To date, I havenāt broken that promise. For the sake of preventing a proto-fascist from becoming our commander-in-chief, Iām breaking that promise. I sadly believe Clinton will find a way to get us in some kind of military action. Sheās a hawk, to the right of Obama. But Trumpās psycho finger will be on The Button, and that is that. Done and done.
Letās face it: Our biggest problem here isnāt Trump - itās Hillary. She is hugely unpopular ā nearly 70% of all voters think she is untrustworthy and dishonest. She represents the old way of politics, not really believing in anything other than what can get you elected. Thatās why she fights against gays getting married one moment, and the next sheās officiating a gay marriage. Young women are among her biggest detractors, which has to hurt considering itās the sacrifices and the battles that Hillary and other women of her generation endured so that this younger generation would never have to be told by the Barbara Bushes of the world that they should just shut up and go bake some cookies. But the kids donāt like her, and not a day goes by that a millennial doesnāt tell me they arenāt voting for her. No Democrat, and certainly no independent, is waking up on November 8th excited to run out and vote for Hillary the way they did the day Obama became president or when Bernie was on the primary ballot. The enthusiasm just isnāt there. And because this election is going to come down to just one thing ā who drags the most people out of the house and gets them to the polls ā Trump right now is in the catbird seat.
I read a piece on stats the other day and there was an example where Trump had blatantly lied.
It was about white people murdered by black people - he quoted a survey that stated that 81% of murders fell into this category.
The real figure is 15%, and the survey he quoted was from an imaginary organisation that his campaign team had made up.
The worrying thing is that the media is too embedded in political campaigns to call people out on these things.
You can lie your way to the White House, which is ridiculous in an age where there is little excuse for voters to be uneducated about the simple basics of world affairs.
1 Like
Hey Bernie. Now that youāve endorsed Hillary, how do you and other US voters feel about the whole system, working against you and never giving you a chance?
The so-called Democratic Party is anything but. The actions of the party establishment are nothing short of an affront to democracy.
It is time for the Democrats to wake up and smell the coffee. The polls are closer than they should be, with a rival of such questionable aptitude for the role of President as Donald Trump. If Clinton is to appeal to the left, she must apologise immediate for any form of misconduct from the DNC, and put an end to the neo-McCarthyist attitude that pollutes it.
Seen on FB and pilfered.
3 Likes
There is a lot a negative everywhere about both Hilary and Donald. The Internet seems to give a louder voice to criticism than praise. So, whatever your politics Hilary and Donald canāt be all bad, they must have some positive traits. My questions is, what are they! (This could probably be a good e excise on the Corbyn v smith) thread
Donāt know really, but iāll have a go.
Trump - In touch with feminine side as he uses a lot of hairspray. Isnāt afraid to talk bollocks.
Clinton - Uses a lot fo hairspray. Isnāt afraid to talk bollocks.
Neck and neck as far as i can see.
9 Likes
As has happened here with UKIP, I think we have to acknowledge that there are/were people out there with views that were being underrepresented by mainstream political parties.
Personally, I would have preferred that those views continued to be underrepresented, but thatās democracy for you.
It looks really dumb from a distance. How has America managed to get Trump on the card? What do they think they will get the day after he (please, no) is elected President. Do they know? Have they researched it? Do they even care?
But Iāve seen the same happen here with the EU Referendum, so Iāll have to think twice before throwing stones at Americans from within this glass house.
5 Likes
There are rumours that Bernie is going to get himself back on the nomination in the wake of these latest revelations, that determine that the Democratic Party machinery actively worked against him.
Senator Sanders is speaking to the Democratic National Convention tonight, and according to a press release about his prepared remarks, the Vermont senator is expected to double down on his endorsement of Hillary Clinton.
However, the fallout from the DNC emails revealed by WikiLeaks on the eve of the convention, along with Hillary Clinton giving disgraced former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz a top position in her campaign, has some Sanders supporters hoping their candidate will rebel against the Democratic establishment.
MSNBC producer Kyle Griffin confirmed the news of a roll call vote on Sandersā nomination with Sanders campaign spokesman Michael Briggs
http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-speech-hot-mic-nomination/
I donāt understand the US party political terms there, papster.
What does a āroll call voteā mean and why is Bernie being put in nomination significant?
Does it mean that they can open the nomination process up again?
Surely not?
It is _meant _to be a procession, the final confirmation of the presumptive nominee, in which he or she is actually nominated.
The presumption is that with everything sorted, every delegate is going to confirm āHillary Clintonā, and the procession goes along as normal.
If Bernieās name is on the roll call vote, people can say āBernie Sandersā instead.
If a majority of them say āBernie Sandersā, sheās no longer the Democratic nominee. No re-nomination process is required. The Sanders camp might just turn a procession into a contest, though.
Gotcha.
Interesting.
But I would fear that a Bernie win could increase the chance of a Trump presidency.
Disagree.
Trump wins against Hillary all year long. There are too many people that already donāt like her. She and her cronies have just been shown to have stolen the nomination, and there is a huge deposit of mineable and damaging information Trumpās people can draw on from the past.
Bernie Sanders is the only hope. I hope he has the balls to go through with this.
Sanders was the last hope
1 Like
http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/donald-trump-and-politics-of-resentment.html
Hands down the best analysis of the situation that Iāve read so far.
"Hereās a relevant example. It so happens that you can determine a huge amount about the economic and social prospects of people in America today by asking one remarkably simple question: how do they get most of their income? Broadly speakingāthere are exceptions, which Iāll get to in a momentāitās from one of four sources: returns on investment, a monthly salary, an hourly wage, or a government welfare check. People who get most of their income from one of those four things have a great many interests in common, so much so that itās meaningful to speak of the American people as divided into an investment class, a salary class, a wage class, and a welfare class.
Thereās a vast amount that could be said about the four major classes just outlined, but I want to focus on the political dimension, because thatās where they take on overwhelming relevance as the 2016 presidential campaign lurches on its way. Just as the four classes can be identified by way of a very simple question, the political dynamite thatās driving the blowback mentioned earlier can be seen by way of another simple question: over the last half century or so, how have the four classes fared?
The answer, of course, is that three of the four have remained roughly where they were. The investment class has actually had a bit of a rough time, as many of the investment vehicles that used to provide it with stable incomesācertificates of deposit, government bonds, and so onāhave seen interest rates drop through the floor. Still, alternative investments and frantic government manipulations of stock market prices have allowed most people in the investment class to keep up their accustomed lifestyles.
The salary class, similarly, has maintained its familiar privileges and perks through a half century of convulsive change. Outside of a few coastal urban areas currently in the grip of speculative bubbles, people whose income comes mostly from salaries can generally afford to own their homes, buy new cars every few years, leave town for annual vacations, and so on. On the other end of the spectrum, the welfare class has continued to scrape by pretty much as before, dealing with the same bleak realities of grinding poverty, intrusive government bureacracy, and a galaxy of direct and indirect barriers to full participation in the national life, as their equivalents did back in 1966.
And the wage class? Over the last half century, the wage class has been destroyed.
In 1966 an American family with one breadwinner working full time at an hourly wage could count on having a home, a car, three square meals a day, and the other ordinary necessities of life, with some left over for the occasional luxury. In 2016, an American family with one breadwinner working full time at an hourly wage is as likely as not to end up living on the street, and a vast number of people who would happily work full time even under those conditions can find only part-time or temporary work when they can find any jobs at all. The catastrophic impoverishment and immiseration of the American wage class is one of the most massive political facts of our timeāand itās also one of the most unmentionable. Next to nobody is willing to talk about it, or even admit that it happened."
"Thereās a further barrier, though, and thatās the response of the salary class across the boardāleft, right, middle, you name itāto any attempt by the wage class to bring up the issues that matter to it. On the rare occasions when this happens in the public sphere, the spokespeople of the wage class get shouted down with a double helping of the sneering mockery I discussed toward the beginning of this post. The same thing happens on a different scale on those occasions when the same thing happens in private. If you doubt thisāand you probably do, if you belong to the salary classātry this experiment: get a bunch of your salary class friends together in some casual context and get them talking about ordinary American working guys. What youāll hear will range from crude caricatures and one-dimensional stereotypes right on up to bona fide hate speech. People in the wage class are aware of this; theyāve heard it all; theyāve been called stupid, ignorant, etc., ad nauseam for failing to agree with whatever bit of self-serving dogma some representative of the salary class tried to push on them.
And that, dear reader, is where Donald Trump comes in.
The man is brilliant. I mean that without the smallest trace of mockery. Heās figured out that the most effective way to get the wage class to rally to his banner is to get himself attacked, with the usual sort of shrill mockery, by the salary class. The manās worth several billion dollarsādo you really think he canāt afford to get the kind of hairstyle that the salary class finds acceptable? Of course he can; heās deliberately chosen otherwise, because he knows that every time some privileged buffoon in the media or on the internet trots out another round of insults directed at his failure to conform to salary class ideas of fashion, another hundred thousand wage class voters recall the endless sneering putdowns theyāve experienced from the salary class and think, āTrumpās one of us.ā"
7 Likes
An interesting read, SO5.
I see the parallels with the Brexit vote too.
1 Like
How the fuck does a billionaire son of a multi millionaire connect with the working class?
That is some going.
That article goes quite some way to answering that question! Heās made a concerted effort to get himself attacked by the same dismissive sneers, attempted language-policing and moral finger-wagging that the working class find themselves subjected to any time they try and discuss an issue thatās affected their livelihood.
Globalisation doesnāt benefit the working class. At all. It really is that simple. And if both the mainstream left continue to ignore this fact completely, then more and more ordinary people will vote for increasingly radical political options not because theyāre making a protest vote or are full of hatred for other people, but because they sincerely believe its in their own interest to do so.
Think about the Bremain campaign in the UK. How many remainers did you actually hear spelling out, point-by-point how the EU benefitted the working class? Not, āwas good for the economyā, or āincreased GDPā but actually benefitted the working class? As in, i_mproved their lives_, made them richer etc.?
None whatsoever; apart from some vagueries about how supposedly the EU protected workers rights more than a Tory government (easily dismissed given the recent goings-on at Sports Direct & BHS that the EU hasnāt been able to do anything to stop).
The political game in elections is actually fairly simple; its about spelling out to your voters how youāre going to improve their lot and why itās in their interest to vote for you.
6 Likes
Good posts Trampā, but I think CBās post was rhetorical.
yep - need a shaking head cock emoji or something like that