Politics Unfiltered

[blackbelt2003]

I take issue with the Corbyn statement.

He has his detractors, but he has a lot of love, too, from left wing outlets. Or at least he did before his pathetic Brexit posturing which has rightly earned him criticism for party politicking instead of stepping up and saying what he thinks.

Diane Abbott gets more criticism than he does...she has become something of a national joke. Her blue equivalent, Boris Johnson, gets as much stick as she does. Jacob Rees-Mogg, a low level back bencher of little consequence, has become a national figure of hate for the left and the MSM. I agree he gets support from the right, but they aren't MSM.

They are all comparable to Corbyn in levels of MSM hatred.

May gets a lot of shit as well, but I concede she has had pockets of support from some shitty tabloids.

I just find it hard to single out Corbyn as a victim when there is hatred and vitriol flying around aimed at most of the prominent Brexit voices with virtually no redeeming opinions.




Black

[the ollie reed fan club]

(02-11-2019 01:04 PM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  I was part of a large scale industrial strike. The way in which we were reported on the news and in press was a fucking disgrace, and at that point I knew that the news was nothing more than a tool of those higher up.

In this country, no politician receives less favourable press coverage than left winger Jeremy Corbyn. The treatment he receives is also a fucking disgrace. Before him, Ed Milliband and even more so Gordon Brown were routinely savaged, even by "neutral" state broadcaster the BBC. FYI I am no fan of Corbyn, indeed I am a lifelong labour voter who now can never see himself voting for labour again.

Now, if we want to get down to more policy driven stuff, let me give you an example of something which ties into the twitter stuff I am talking about. I deeply dislike Trumps policiy and attitude toward climate change. Now I know you dont believe in it War. I also know there are fucking screeds and screeds of pages on the internet one way and the other. My personal opinion is that its not really a question of if but when we will have irrepairably fucked our planet. I believe we are well on our way already and Mother Nature will shit us out like a bad virus sooner than we think if we do not try to address it.

So how does that relate to Trump and his twitter rantings? Well his recent procession of tweets about the subject, focusing on the fact that its cold so how can there be global warming is one of two things. Its either indicative of a serious lack of even basic understanding of the concept of climate chamge (ie no one thinks its just straight up Wordl gets hotter)

OR its indicative that he knows there are enough stupud people following him that he can influence them by acting like them and feed them whatvever misinformation he likes.

Now if you google Donald Trump lies, there are numbers quoted about how many times he has lied or spread false information based on the work of multiple "fact checking" bodies. Without fact checking the fact checkers, (then who would fact check the fact check checker?) It seems that this president habitually lies at great volume. If you want to dispute that, fair enough, point me to the fact check checkers, but if you even accept that he lues a tenth of what they say he does, dont you have a problem with that?

I do. I think Trump is as complicit in the spreading of misinformation as his much maligned MSM is.

Trump is clearly trolling on the climate change issue, it really should be super obvious. I do agree that humanity is polluting the planet but I don't tie that to climate change. Climate change has been occurring for millions of years before humans invented plastic bags and will continue long after we are gone from thew planet.

When it comes to fact checking, are you referencing the likes of Snopes and Media Matters? Yeah they are left leaning junk organisations. The SPLC is another example, they used to be decent but that was many moons ago.

Has Trump told a bigger whopper than 'you get to keep your doctor?' I'll guarantee you that if Obama was put under the same level of scrutiny as Trump you'd see just as many 'lies.'

Trump also uses Cunningham's Law as a tactic quite routinely and very effectively which I think you need to take into account when analyzing his public utterances.

[lloyd mayflower]

Black, Brexit has been a bit scattergun as the whole thing is a total shambles. Mogg gets abused on the street but not in the media. Johnson is somehow pandered to as his self made "figure of fun" image by the media. None of it is as bad as the constant anti semite angle they use for Corbyn, or the time the BBC put him against a red background and almost made him look like a soviet propaganda poster.

He does deserve a tough time over Brexit. Thats policy driven though, whereas the last few years has been outright character assassination by the likes of the BBC.

The same BBC who also fail to report the utterly disgusting and contemptuous treatment of Scottish MPs in Westminster btw. The same BBC who have ran an SNPBAD campaign for longer than anyone has ran any Trump one. We arent seeing anything new with Trump, just on a larger scale with the added drive of ever expanding social media.

[the ollie reed fan club]

To anyone (Lloyd) who doesn't realize that Trump far from being thin skinned is the worlds greatest and most epic troll, just look at his latest effort, retweeting the video below: Master Troll level +1,000,000,000.

I can literally hear Liberals heads popping globally

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTJbX8ifoJc

The Chans are also genius, I think if Lloyd could get over his liberal tendencies he'd really enjoy those boards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqqwTgk8ri0

[lloyd mayflower]

Yeah, except for me, the troll angle is bullshit, carefully presented to mask his shortcomings, and more importantly than that trolling is for fucking about on messageboards.

If dicking about winding people up was a basic requirement to get to the top I would be much wealthier than I am.

Besides, his thinnskin has been exhibited for years and was pretty evident when he came to Scotland years ago and tried to bully various people over his golf course and over offshore wind farms. He wasnt trolling then. He was behaving like a fucking prick.

[the ollie reed fan club]

(02-16-2019 03:59 AM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  Yeah, except for me, the troll angle is bullshit, carefully presented to mask his shortcomings, and more importantly than that trolling is for fucking about on messageboards.

If dicking about winding people up was a basic requirement to get to the top I would be much wealthier than I am.

Besides, his thinnskin has been exhibited for years and was pretty evident when he came to Scotland years ago and tried to bully various people over his golf course and over offshore wind farms. He wasnt trolling then. He was behaving like a fucking prick.

Well he trolled his way to the White House so I'd suggest he is a helluva lot better at it than you give him credit for. But hey he came to Scotland a few years ago and upset the locals, boo fucking hoo.

[lloyd mayflower]

Fucking hell.....

So entrenched that now in your opinion its fine to reduce politics to a trolling competition. How many tear stained tweets and lies does he need to put out there for people to stop making excuses for him. Right back to the whole "oh you people are always taking Trump literally".

Well aye, he told numerous rallies of baying mobs that he would make Mexico pay for his wall. Now he has fabricated an emergency to spend Americans money using the same powers that people would want to go to war for if the Democrats used it.

Its also.... What? Not ok for me to dislike the man based on his actions in my country, yet really cool that he "trolls" people from the most powerful chair in the world?

The manchild is turning his supporters into juveniles too. No wonder politics is fucked.

---

Like the gun stuff we have done to death on here, its clear my views are wildly different and never going to align with the more conservative posters on here, but this state of emergency thing would see steaming piss coming out the ears of most if the democrats get in and use it. It would be nice to see some realistic commentary over that.

Would be genuinely shocked for example if Warlord was comfortable with it, as overreaching of government is something he has posted a lot aboht over the years

[Warlord]

Some general responses to some of the stuff.

Is Trump a thin-skinned troll?

He is a bit thin-skinned, but he is not a troll. Trolls do what they do because they take pleasure in making people angry. Trump has never thrown the first punch. Even the leftist media has correctly characterized him as a "counter-puncher." Trump never draws first blood. He simply responds. And considering how hard and how often the media comes at him, and considering their level of dishonesty in crafting false narratives, Trump has been forced to take on the role he has. Destroying the media narrative is a full-time job, and one that Trump excels at.


Trump is using taxpayer's money to pay for the wall.

No, he isn't. Trump never said Mexico was going to write a check to America. He said they would pay for it through tariffs and through new trade deals (both of which have already happened.) Mexico couldn't even write a check if they wanted to. American law states that any money gifted to the United States must be apportioned and distributed by Congress. The person donating doesn't get to attach strings (and rightly so).

So even if the money was gifted to America by Mexico, Trump would still need Congress to allot that money for the wall, which leads to...


Is Trump's emergency declaration government overreach?

No, because we are in a state of emergency. This is not an abuse of power by Trump. He has done everything he can to negotiate with Congress, but you have a party who is so desperate for power that they want to sacrifice half the country (the right) and replace them with voters who will reliably vote Democrat (dirt poor illegals who get amnestied and then live off the government teat).

[lloyd mayflower]

So one day when the Dems justify using state of emergency to enact strict gun laws you will be cool with that?

[Warlord]

(02-16-2019 09:00 AM)lloyd mayflower Wrote:  So one day when the Dems justify using state of emergency to enact strict gun laws you will be cool with that?

No, and you don't seem to understand how the American political system works. I'm not blaming you, by the way. Most Americans don't understand, let alone non-Americans.

If Trump declares a national emergency (which he has done), it does not give him the right to enact new laws or override currently existing laws. Declaring a national emergency doesn't give the President carte blanche.

Declaring a national emergency gives Trump the power to take federally apportioned money from the DOD (apportioned for emergencies) and use it at his discretion. Again, that does not mean he can suddenly decide to abolish an amendment he doesn't agree with. That is beyond his power.

What it does mean is that he can take that money and use it to combat an emergency insofar as the law allows him to. Building a border wall is within a President's rights. It isn't against the law, nor is it unconstitutional for a sitting President to construct border walls. Trump has, thus far, been unable to build the wall solely because Democrats have enough numbers in Congress to prevent him from receiving the necessary funding.

In other words, he has the right to build a wall, but not the means. Under a national emergency he would have those means to go alongside his pre-existing right.

A Democrat president could not suddenly enact gun control under the guise of a national emergency because Presidents do not have the power or authority to either create new laws, nor to abolish existing laws (parts of the Constitution they don't agree with).

I hope I explained that well enough to make it clear.