REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!

POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 11:14
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 191653
PAGE 23 of 34

Friday, November 18, 2016 6:12 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Like a lot of things posted by 'g', thugger and second, absolutely fictitious.

I thought this was supposed to be REAL. WORLD. EVENTS.

It is not looking good for Trump and his chances of winning. Hillary is ahead by more than a million votes:

62,109,875 votes (48.0%) Hillary
61,000,837 votes (47.1%) Trump
1,109,038 vote difference.

“But what happens when no candidate receives a 50% majority of votes?” asked Jefferson. “A run-off election is undignified” declared Washington with great firmness. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison suggested, “We shall have a panel of experts, No! A College of Experts! to declare you, pardon us, A President.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)#Evolut
ion_to_the_general_ticket


www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president Nov 18, 2016 5:00AM CST


www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/apotheosis-donald-trump-proceed
ing-apace

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 6:22 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
So, second. hitlery lost.

Shake out your shoulders. Take a deep breath.

Bernie is trying to create a coalition of progressives to counter Trump. Are you going to still obsess over Trump even though it did absolutely NO GOOD the last time around? Are you still going to write Bernie off because he's stooped? Or are you going to join up with Bernie as the most logical place at the moment to DO SOMETHING about what Trump represents?

Your choice. Fruitless obsession? Or active participation?

Bernie is for co-operating with Trump’s infrastructure plan, which actually has nothing in common with liberal ideas on infrastructure. What the hell is Bernie thinking? Rather than spend new money on important priorities that only the public sector can execute, Trump is proposing tax cuts for private companies that are already investing in profitable private infrastructure schemes.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/16/13628382/donald-trump-infra
structure-plan


The way to handle Trump is the same way the Republicans handled Obama. I remember them loudly and clearly declaring Obama a Kenyan ineligible to be President. Trump was birther, too. One of the loudest, I might add. Democrats will have an advantage, because what they can say will be truthful about Trump.

Bernie could learn how it is done properly by Arizona Rep. Ruben Gallego, who concluded that it would be ridiculous for Democrats to trust Trump to manage a series of infrastructure public-private partnerships:

“Given everything we know about Donald Trump — and everything we don’t know — I was alarmed by the words of senior leaders from both the progressive and centrist wings of the party regarding their openness to working with Donald Trump on infrastructure.

Under ordinary circumstances, we would welcome a plan to invest in infrastructure — even if that plan came from the other side of the aisle. Especially if it came from the other side of the aisle!

But Donald Trump is not an ordinary politician. He is a con artist. He has refused to give the American people reason to believe that he is not in this to enrich himself. In fact, he has bucked tradition by maintaining his family's interest in a private corporation.

And, unfortunately, his infrastructure plan is really a privatization scheme, rife with graft and corruption, whose real purpose is to enrich the Trump family and his supporters. He is not reaching out. He is reaching his hand into America's pockets, just as he has his whole career. And we must not let him do it.”




The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 7:00 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Is this what 1kiki had in mind for Trump bringing peace in the Mideast?

President-elect Donald Trump has offered the post of national security adviser to Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, potentially elevating a retired intelligence officer who believes Islamist militancy poses an existential threat on a global scale to one of the most powerful roles in shaping military and foreign policy, according to a top official on Trump’s transition team.

It was not clear whether Flynn, 57, a registered Democrat who was fired as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014 by President Barack Obama, had accepted the position. Flynn advised Trump throughout his campaign, and as national security adviser, would be a critical gatekeeper to the president, overseeing a staff of roughly 400 people.

In the role, he often would have the last word on how Trump should handle crises that could range from a showdown with China over the South China Sea to an international health crisis like the Ebola epidemic.

Given Trump’s lack of experience on national security matters, Flynn could serve a role of even greater importance than his predecessors.

Flynn would bring to the White House a belief that the problem in the Middle East for the United States is ultimately with the Islamic faith itself. He has criticized the religion as being nothing more than a “political ideology,” has made a point of using the phrase “radical Islamist terrorism” as often as possible, and once posted a video on his Twitter account that included the phrase “Fear of Muslims is rational.” He has also claimed that Islamic law, known as Shariah, is spreading in the United States, without providing evidence.

“We’re in a world war, but very few Americans recognize it,” he wrote in “The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies,” a book he wrote this year with Michael Ledeen, a national security expert. “Fewer still have any idea how to win it.”

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 9:16 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by G:
Thanksgiving is shaping up to be a real swell time. "So, Trump.... so far so good?" Where are my manners?!

How about this conversation starter:

I hear that Trump will keep his promise of more factory jobs by building fake factories staffed with poor rural white people paid a universal basic income under the table so that they think they're actually working for their money and don't get all butt hurt about it.

Trump took credit yesterday for Ford not moving a factory to Mexico. Ford had no plans to move the factory even before Trump was elected. Now Ford still doesn't have any plan, so Victory for Trump!

www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-takes-credit-for-keeping-ford-factory-
but-was-it-ever-moving-2016-11-17

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 9:45 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Misattributed quote again. Second said that not G. Conclusion: proof that meaningful discussion not possible. Ideas, thoughts, facts do not connect.= GSTRING
I guess that's what happens when someone posts at 4 AM, dopey on Benadryl!

You have to admit, GSTRING, that post of SECOND'S was very GSTRING-like.

Who knew that SECOND could be as big as asshole as you? She usually hides her nastiness behind other people's opinions!

Well, just change the attribution from you to SECOND, but everything I posted applies to you, too. Especially the part where you follow me from thread to thread just to attack. You're a troll, GSTRING.



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 11:50 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

I guess that's what happens when {I} post at 4 AM, dopey on Benadryl!

You have to admit, GSTRING, that post of SECOND'S was very GSTRING-like.

Who knew that SECOND could be as big as asshole as you? She usually hides her nastiness behind other people's opinions!

Well, just change the attribution from you to SECOND, but everything I posted applies to you, too. Especially the part where you follow me from thread to thread just to attack. You're a troll, GSTRING.

It is second, never SECOND.

Signym skipped over everything about Trump to focus only on Signym’s trivial and personal feuds, being uninterested in how and why Americans bring suffering on themselves by making mistakes, whether through false “knowledge”, bad decision-making, or both combined with bad luck.

A lot of people in politics and the media are scrambling to normalize what just happened to us, saying that it will all be OK and we can work with Trump. No, it won’t, and no, we can’t. The next occupant of the White House will be a pathological liar with a loose grip on reality; he is already surrounding himself with racists, anti-Semites, and conspiracy theorists; his administration will be the most corrupt in America history.

How did this happen? There were multiple causes, but you just can’t ignore the reality that key institutions and their leaders utterly failed. Every news organization that decided, for the sake of ratings, to ignore policy and barely cover Trump scandals while obsessing over Clinton emails, every reporter who, for whatever reason — often sheer pettiness — played up Wikileaks nonsense and talked about how various Clinton stuff “raised questions” and “cast shadows” is complicit. And then there’s the FBI: it’s quite reasonable to argue that James Comey, whether it was careerism, cowardice, or something worse, tipped the scales.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 1:04 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by G:

Lots of blame to go around. I will not give the American public any excuses or passes. We got what we deserved (they did, they will).

Trump often promised to be a different kind of Republican. He even wrote it down: “I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.”
www.donaldjtrump.com/media/why-donald-trump-wont-touch-your-entitlemen
ts

“Why Donald Trump Won’t Touch Your Entitlements.”

Donald will disappoint his voters. Trump’s transition team’s point man on Social Security is a longtime advocate of privatization of SS.
www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/12/trump-advisers-back-deregulation-p
rivatized-social-security.html


And all indications are that the incoming administration is getting ready to kill Medicare, replacing it with vouchers that can be applied to the purchase of private insurance. Oh, and it’s also likely to raise the age of Medicare eligibility.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/paul-ryan-says-medicare-p
rivatization-is-on.html


Trump’s attack on Medicare will be a blatant violations of a campaign promise.

Candidate Trump ran on exactly the opposite position from the one President-elect Trump seems to be embracing.

Speaker Ryan says, and Trump is not contradicting him, that “Because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke.” This is false. The Medicare trust fund has been extended 11 years as a result of the passage of Obamacare, whose cost reforms have helped bring health care inflation to historic lows.
www.cbpp.org/research/health/medicare-is-not-bankrupt

So why try to destroy successful programs? The main answer, from the point of view of people like Speaker Ryan, is probably because Medicare is a success. It would be very helpful for opponents of government to do away with a program that clearly demonstrates the power of government to improve people’s lives.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 18, 2016 6:48 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


The Trump University deal does not require Trump to acknowledge wrongdoing.

Schneiderman said the $25 million to be paid by Trump or one of his business entities includes restitution for victims and $1 million in penalties to the state.

Trump "fought us every step of the way, filing baseless charges and fruitless appeals and refusing to settle for even modest amounts of compensation for the victims of his phony university. Today, that all changes," Schneiderman said in a statement.

He called the settlement "a stunning reversal by Donald Trump and a major victory for the over 6,000 victims of his fraudulent university."

Plaintiffs' attorney Jason Forge says all 6,000 people in the class-action case will get at least half their money back, and some receive a full refund.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 2:25 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Is this what 1kiki had in mind for Trump bringing peace in the Mideast?

And yet, I never posted that Trump would bring peace to the ME, or even had it 'in mind'. What DID I post? You haven't gotten it right yet after over a dozen tries and as many corrections.

What IS it with you SECOND?. Mere reality too complicated for you? Honesty too difficult?






How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 2:35 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Bernie is for co-operating with Trump’s infrastructure plan ...

No he's not.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 2:39 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


It is not looking good for Trump and his chances of winning. Hillary is ahead by more than a million votes ...
Yes, if only we could go back in time and undo the Electoral College - or HEY! I KNOW! IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION! Then we could have a REAL democratic election!




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 7:48 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Yes, if only we could go back in time and undo the Electoral College - or HEY! I KNOW! IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION! Then we could have a REAL democratic election!


Always too sure of yourself, 1kiki. Please, don't stop, but consider what Alexander Hamilton, designer of the College, wrote in Federalist Paper Number 68. The Electors were supposed to stop a candidate with “Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” from becoming President. The Electors were supposed to be “men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”

They were to “possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations” as the selection of the President, and they were supposed to “afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder.” They were even supposed to prevent “the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”

Hamilton was talking about demagogues. The word “demagogue” appears in both the first and last Federalist Papers; in Federalist Paper Number 1, for instance, Hamilton worried about the “military despotism of a victorious demagogue.”

The Electoral College of Today is run as a vote counting machine, rather than as it was designed: to stop a demagogue—a tyrannical mass leader who preys on our prejudices—from becoming President.

http://time.com/4575119/electoral-college-demagogues/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 7:53 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:

What IS it with you SECOND?. Mere reality too complicated for you? Honesty too difficult?

Maybe your deep thinking is too subtle? Or simply slippery? There is the thinking of Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon, who has no regrets: "Darkness is good. Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when liberals get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."

www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trum
ps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747


Bannon’s fascinating interview ends: "I am," he says, with relish, "Thomas Cromwell in the court of the Tudors."

Thomas Cromwell was arrested, humiliated, condemned to death without trial and beheaded on Tower Hill. Does Bannon know?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cromwell#Downfall_and_execution

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 9:45 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by G:

Funny thing - with a Republican president I suddenly feel the need to go buy a boat load of guns . . .

Infrastructure Build or Privatization Scam?

November 19, 2016 9:26 am November 19, 2016 9:26 am
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/infrastructure-build-or-pr
ivatization-scam
/

Trumpists are touting the idea of a big infrastructure build, and some Democrats are making conciliatory noises about working with the new regime on that front. But remember who you’re dealing with: if you invest anything with this guy, be it money or reputation, you are at great risk of being scammed. So, what do we know about the Trump infrastructure plan, such as it is?

Crucially, it’s not a plan to borrow $1 trillion and spend it on much-needed projects — which would be the straightforward, obvious thing to do. It is, instead, supposed to involve having private investors do the work both of raising money and building the projects — with the aid of a huge tax credit that gives them back 82 percent of the equity they put in. To compensate for the small sliver of additional equity and the interest on their borrowing, the private investors then have to somehow make profits on the assets they end up owning.

You should immediately ask three questions about all of this.

First, why involve private investors at all? It’s not as if the federal government is having any trouble raising money — in fact, a large part of the justification for infrastructure investment is precisely that the government can borrow so cheaply. Why do we need private equity at all?

One answer might be that this way you avoid incurring additional public debt. But that’s just accounting confusion. Imagine that you’re building a toll road. If the government builds it, it ends up paying interest but gets the future revenue from the tolls. If it turns the project over to private investors, it avoids the interest cost — but also loses the future toll revenue. The government’s future cash flow is no better than it would have been if it borrowed directly, and worse if it strikes a bad deal, say because the investors have political connections.

Second, how is this kind of scheme supposed to finance investment that doesn’t produce a revenue stream? Toll roads are not the main thing we need right now; what about sewage systems, making up for deferred maintenance, and so on? You could bring in private investors by guaranteeing them future government money — say, paying rent in perpetuity for the use of a water system built by a private consortium. But this, even more than having someone else collect tolls, would simply be government borrowing through the back door — with much less transparency, and hence greater opportunities for giveaways to favored interests.

Third, how much of the investment thus financed would actually be investment that wouldn’t have taken place anyway? That is, how much “additionality” is there? Suppose that there’s a planned tunnel, which is clearly going to be built; but now it’s renamed the Trump Tunnel, the building and financing are carried out by private firms, and the future tolls and/or rent paid by the government go to those private interests. In that case we haven’t promoted investment at all, we’ve just in effect privatized a public asset — and given the buyers 82 percent of the purchase price in the form of a tax credit.

Again, all of these questions could be avoided by doing things the straightforward way: if you think we should build more infrastructure, then build more infrastructure, and never mind the complicated private equity/tax credits stuff. You could try to come up with some justification for the complexity of the scheme, but one simple answer would be that it’s not about investment, it’s about ripping off taxpayers. Is that implausible, given who we’re talking about?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 10:53 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, there is SECOND, cherry-picking again.

SECOND, instead of picking out one sentence in an entire interview, why not post the whole thing? (Well, I know why- it has to do with your predilection to ... ahem ... lie).

The entire interview, which I saw elsewhere, is quite interesting and even positive.

Quote:

"I'm not a white nationalist, I'm a nationalist. I'm an economic nationalist," Bannon tells THR media columnist Michael Wolff as the controversial Breitbart News chief turned White House advisor unleashes on Hillary Clinton, Fox News and his critics.
So Steve Bannon doesn't see this as a "white" issue, and neither do I.

Quote:

In late summer when I went up to see Steve Bannon, then recently named CEO of the Donald Trump presidential campaign, in his office at Trump Tower in New York, he outlined a preposterous-sounding scenario. Trump, he said, would do surprisingly well among women, Hispanics and African-Americans, in addition to working men, and hence take Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan — and therefore the election.
So mainstream media - which couldn't find the Trump electorate with two hands and a flashlight - had this available to them. Instead of looking into this unwelcome news objectively, they were busy pumping out FAKE NEWS, thumping Hillary, and you were busy sucking it up. As a consequence of continuing to live in your bubble, YOU WERE ALL WRONG.

Quote:

On Nov. 15, when I went back to Trump Tower, Bannon, promoted by the president-elect to chief strategist for the incoming administration, and by the media as the official symbol of all things hateful and virulent about the coming Trump presidency, said, as matter-of-factly as when he first sketched it out for me, "I told you so."

The liberal firewall against Trump was, most of all, the belief that the Republican contender was too disorganized, outlandish, outré and lacking in nuance to run a proper political campaign. That view was only confirmed when Bannon, editor of the outlandish and outré Breitbart News Network, took over the campaign in August. Now Bannon is arguably the most powerful person on the new White House team, embodying more than anyone the liberals' awful existential pain and fury: How did someone so wrong — not just wrong, but inappropriate, unfit and "loathsome," according to The New York Times — get it so spot-on right?

Because the NYT is a dick-whack publication which even promoted the entirely fictitious Saddam-"yellowcake"-9/11-WMD-concoction.

On a little sideways note, one of my public radio stations - KPCC - was offering a digital subscription to the NYT as a "reward" for donating to the station and all I could think of was "Why would I even waste my time on that piece of dreck?... And why are you even offering it?".

Any reliance that anyone puts on that paper is entirely misplaced.

Quote:

In these dark days for Democrats, Bannon has become the blackest hole.

"Darkness is good," says Bannon, who amid the suits surrounding him at Trump Tower, looks like a graduate student in his T-shirt, open button-down and tatty blue blazer — albeit a 62-year-old graduate student. "Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they" — I believe by "they" he means liberals and the media, already promoting calls for his ouster — "get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."

On that precise point, The New York Times, in a widely circulated article, will describe this day at Trump Tower as a scene of "disarray" for the transition team. In fact, it's all hands on:

Don't believe anything the NYT publishes. Or the BBC for that matter.

Quote:

Mike Pence, the vice president-elect and transition chief, and Reince Priebus, the new chief of staff, shuttling between full conference rooms; Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and by many accounts his closest advisor, conferring in the halls; Sen. Jeff Sessions in and out of meetings on the transition team floor; Rudy Giuliani upstairs with Trump (overheard: "Is the boss meeting-meeting with Rudy or just shooting the shit?"), and Bannon with a long line of men and women outside his corner office. If this is disarray, it's a peculiarly focused and organized kind.

It's the Bannon theme, the myopia of the media — that it tells only the story that confirms its own view, that in the end it was incapable of seeing an alternative outcome and of making a true risk assessment of the political variables — reaffirming the Hillary Clinton camp's own political myopia. This defines the parallel realities in which liberals, in their view of themselves, represent a morally superior character and Bannon — immortalized on Twitter as a white nationalist, racist, anti-Semite thug — the ultimate depravity of Trumpism.

The focus on Bannon, if not necessarily the description, is right. He's the man with the idea. If Trumpism is to represent something intellectually and historically coherent, it's Bannon's job to make it so. In this, he could not be a less reassuring or more confusing figure for liberals — fiercely intelligent and yet reflexively drawn to the inverse of every liberal assumption and shibboleth.

A working class kid, he enlists in the navy after high school, gets a degree from Virginia Tech, then Georgetown, then Harvard Business School. Then it's Goldman Sachs, then he's a dealmaker and entrepreneur in Hollywood — where, in an unlikely and very lucky deal match-up, he gets a lucrative piece of Seinfeld royalties, ensuring his own small fortune — then into the otherworld of the vast right-wing conspiracy and conservative media.

Which, in this case, happened to be stunningly and publicly correct.

Quote:

(He partners with David Bossie, a congressional investigator of President Clinton, who later spearheaded the Citizens United lawsuit that effectively removed the cap on campaign spending, and who now, as the deputy campaign manager, is in the office next to Bannon's.) And then to the Breitbart News Network, which with digital acumen and a mind-meld with the anger and the passion of the new alt-right (a liberal designation Bannon derides) he pushes to the inner circle of conservative media from Breitbart's base on the Westside of liberal Los Angeles.

What he seems to have carried from a boyhood in a blue-collar, union and Democratic family in Norfolk, Va., and through his tour of the American establishment, is an unreconstructed sense of class awareness, or bitterness — or betrayal. The Democratic Party betrayed its working-man roots, just as Hillary Clinton betrayed the longtime Clinton connection — Bill Clinton's connection — to the working man. "The Clinton strength," he says, "was to play to people without a college education. High school people. That's how you win elections." And, likewise, the Republican party would come to betray its working-man constituency forged under Reagan. In sum, the working man was betrayed by the establishment, or what he dismisses as the "donor class."

To say that he sees this donor class — which in his telling is also "ascendant America," e.g. the elites, as well as "the metrosexual bubble" that encompasses cosmopolitan sensibilities to be found as far and wide as Shanghai, London's Chelsea, Hollywood and the Upper West Side — as a world apart, is an understatement.

In his view, there's hardly a connection between this world and its opposite — fly-over America, left-behind America, downwardly mobile America — hardly a common language. This is partly why he regards the liberal characterization of himself as socially vile, as the politically incorrect devil incarnate, as laughable — and why he is stoutly unapologetic. They — liberals and media — don't understand what he is saying, or why, or to whom. Breitbart, with its casual provocations — lists of its varied incitements (among them: the conservative writer David Horowitz referred to conservative pundit Brill Kristol as a "renegade Jew," and the site delighting in headlines the likes of "Trannies 49Xs Higher HIV Rate" and "Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy") were in hot exchange after the election among appalled Democrats — is as opaque to the liberal-donor-globalist class as Lena Dunham might be to the out-of-work workingman class. And this, in the Bannon view, is all part of the profound misunderstanding that led liberals to believe that Donald Trump's mouth would doom him, instead of elect him.

Bannon, arguably, is one of the people most at the battle line of the great American divide — and one of the people to have most clearly seen it.

He absolutely — mockingly — rejects the idea that this is a racial line. "I'm not a white nationalist, I'm a nationalist. I'm an economic nationalist," he tells me. "The globalists gutted the American working class and created a middle class in Asia. The issue now is about Americans looking to not get f—ed over. If we deliver" — by "we" he means the Trump White House — "we'll get 60 percent of the white vote, and 40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote and we'll govern for 50 years. That's what the Democrats missed. They were talking to these people with companies with a $9 billion market cap employing nine people. It's not reality....

Unless the donor class, like Soros, can grab policy-making back, and MAKE globalism a reality. This is a power struggle.
Quote:

... They lost sight of what the world is about."

In a nascent administration that seems, at best, random in its beliefs, Bannon can seem to be not just a focused voice, but almost a messianic one:

"Like [Andrew] Jackson's populism, we're going to build an entirely new political movement," he says. "It's everything related to jobs. The conservatives are going to go crazy. I'm the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks. It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution — conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement."

Bannon represents, he not unreasonably believes, the fall of the establishment. The self-satisfied, in-bred and homogenous views of the establishment are both what he is against and what has provided the opening for the Trump revolution.

"The media bubble is the ultimate symbol of what's wrong with this country," he continues. "It's just a circle of people talking to themselves who have no f—ing idea what's going on. If The New York Times didn't exist, CNN and MSNBC would be a test pattern. The Huffington Post and everything else is predicated on The New York Times. It's a closed circle of information from which Hillary Clinton got all her information — and her confidence. That was our opening."

At that moment, as we talk, there's a knock on the door of Bannon's office, a temporary, impersonal, middle-level executive space with a hodgepodge of chairs for constant impromptu meetings. Sen. Ted Cruz, once the Republican firebrand, now quite a small and unassuming figure, has been waiting patiently for a chat and Bannon excuses himself for a short while. It is clear when we return to our conversation that it is not just the liberal establishment that Bannon feels he has triumphed over, but the conservative one too

The key word there is not "liberal" or "conservative" but "establishment" ...

Quote:

- not least of all Fox News and its owners, the Murdochs. "They got it more wrong than anybody," he says. "Rupert is a globalist and never understood Trump. To him, Trump is a radical. Now they'll go centrist and build the network around Megyn Kelly." Bannon recounts, with no small irony, that when Breitbart attacked Kelly after her challenges to Trump in the initial Republican debate, Fox News chief Roger Ailes — whom Bannon describes as an important mentor, and who Kelly's accusations of sexual harassment would help topple in July — called to defend her. Bannon says he warned Ailes that Kelly would be out to get him too.

It is less than obvious how Bannon, now the official strategic brains of the Trump operation, syncs with his boss, famously not too strategic. When Bannon took over the campaign from Paul Manafort, there were many in the Trump circle who had resigned themselves to the inevitability of the candidate listening to no one. But here too was a Bannon insight: When the campaign seemed most in free fall or disarray, it was perhaps most on target. While Clinton was largely absent from the campaign trail and concentrating on courting her donors, Trump — even after the leak of the grab-them-by-the-pussy audio — was speaking to ever-growing crowds of 35,000 or 40,000. "He gets it; he gets it intuitively," says Bannon, perhaps still surprised he has found such an ideal vessel. "You have probably the greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan, coupled with an economic populist message and two political parties that are so owned by the donors that they don't speak to their audience. But he speaks in a non-political vernacular, he communicates with these people in a very visceral way. Nobody in the Democratic party listened to his speeches, so they had no idea he was delivering such a compelling and powerful economic message. He shows up 3.5 hours late in Michigan at 1 in the morning and has 35,000 people waiting in the cold. When they got [Clinton] off the donor circuit she went to Temple University and they drew 300 or 400 kids."

Indeed, during the worst days of the campaign, even down to the last day when most in Trumpland thought only a miracle would save them, "I knew that she couldn't close. They out-spent us 10 to one, had 10 times more people and had all the media with them, but I kept saying it doesn't matter, they got it all wrong, we've got this locked."

Bannon now becomes part of a two-headed White House political structure, with Reince Priebus — in and out of Bannon's office as we talk — as chief of staff, in charge of making the trains run on time, reporting to the president, and Bannon as chief strategist, in charge of vision, goals, narrative and plan of attack, reporting to the president too. Add to this the ambitions and whims of the president himself, and the novel circumstance of one who has never held elective office, the agenda of his highly influential family and the end-runs of a party significant parts of which were opposed to him, and you have quite a complex court that Bannon will have to finesse to realize his reign of the working man and a trillion dollars in new spending.

"I am," he says, with relish, "Thomas Cromwell in the court of the Tudors."



So, Bannon (according to himself) is not a conservative and not a racist. What now?

----

A comment about the NYT and other so-called liberal media: I have heard the liberal media thump things that I knew were just out-and-out wrong, like the big sympathetic coverage they gave the Libyan "rebels":

"We are reporting from the front lines of the rebel forces.." breathlessly and endlessly reporting on the "rebels'" string of victories and setbacks, and all I could think was ... If these rebels are so fucking popular, why is the war taking so long?

In any case, I can't believe that the editors and contributors of the NYT were as stupid as to believe their own rigged polls, especially when people "out there" were reporting quite consistently on the Democratic "oversampling" which led to skewed results. I know I posted here more than once about the oversampling, and referenced the one poll that was more honest, MORE THAN ONCE, which was TBD/TIPP poll. Should anyone REALLY be shocked by the election results?

I think some of the liberal media put those bad polls "out there" on purpose, just like with Brexit, to discourage the opposition voter. I'll bet they did their own more honest internal polling. The shock came in, not because their deliberately skewed public polls were wrong (How COULD they be correct?) but because they didn't have the impact they usually do. The "alt right" and the internet SUDDENLY was discovered to be a much bigger purveyor of news and opinion than the "trusted media".

So now we have the mainstream globalist/liberaloid bastions, like google and the NYT and FB, suddenly concerned about FAKE NEWS (i.e. news it doesn't like).

You guys: SECOND, G, KPO ... are as ridiculous as the people who were insisting that Obama wasn't born in the USA. You're grasping at irrelevant and meaningless moments, and not seeing the big picture. If you want to have an intelligent discussion, I'll be happy to discuss with you. But if you continue to think and feel in your comfy "bubble", where all you hear is what you want to hear, you won't be able to find REALITY with two hands and a flashlight.

Here's a hint: STOP CHERRY-PICKING THE LIBERAL NEWS FOR POINTS YOU AGREE WITH. REGULARLY READ... I MEAN, LIKE EVERY DAY... AT LEAST FIVE SOURCES THAT YOU'RE PRETTY SURE YOU'LL DISAGREE WITH. IN TEN YEARS, YOU WILL HAVE A MORE REALISTIC VIEW OF THE WORLD.


-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 3:25 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Maybe your deep thinking is too subtle? Or simply slippery?

Nope, it's just that you're a pathological liar.

I've posted many things that 'people' have against hitlery. But I've been VERY CLEAR what MY POV is, and has always been. And I've stated it over a dozen times, and corrected you almost as many times.

And you still haven't gotten it right. Not even once.

That's beyond mere error or misunderstanding.

So, from now on, unless I have some special reason, I'm not going to respond to you. I'm simply going to get out the big red font and put a spotlight on your lies.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 3:28 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


lie
Originally posted by second:
In other words, let someone he doesn't know sell all his old assets and buy new ones for him without telling him what they are.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:02 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


OPINION Originally posted AS FACT by SECOND:
list from MarketWatch:

No, it seems he’s not going to cancel Obamacare on Day One.

He’s not going to build a wall along the entire Mexican border.

No, he’s not going to deport all the illegal immigrants.

He’s not going to stick it to Wall Street “elites” and big investment banks like Goldman Sachs. On the contrary, they’re already making out like bandits.

No, he’s not going to stick it to the Republican establishment either. He just made RNC boss Reince Priebus his chief of staff.

We can pretty much forget any pledge to wall off his financial interests. (Memo to fellow journalists: If Trump knows what is in his blind trust, it is not a blind trust)

And we can write-off Trump’s promise to release his tax returns when the “audit” is complete.

Oh, but it looks like privatizing Medicare might be on the table after all. Oops! Sorry seniors.







How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:05 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


lie originally posted by SECOND:
Four years ago, Rick Perry said in a debate that he wanted to eliminate three agencies of government, but he could only remember two. The third agency was the Department of Energy. Now he's being considered to lead that agency. Who says irony is dead?
www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-team-makes-overtures-to-democrats-as-trans
ition-push-ramps-up-1479343438 color = #FF0000>





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:10 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, there is SECOND, cherry-picking again.

SECOND, instead of picking out one sentence in an entire interview, why not post the whole thing? (Well, I know why- it has to do with your predilection to ... ahem ... lie).

The entire interview, which I saw elsewhere, is quite interesting and even positive.

Quote:

"I'm not a white nationalist, I'm a nationalist. I'm an economic nationalist," Bannon tells THR media columnist Michael Wolff as the controversial Breitbart News chief turned White House advisor unleashes on Hillary Clinton, Fox News and his critics.
So Steve Bannon doesn't see this as a "white" issue, and neither do I.

Hey, Signym you could have read the interview by clicking the link I included. I hide nothing from you. Here it is again: www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trum
ps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747


I am not hiding this tidbit from the interview:

Bannon said, "I'm not a white nationalist, I'm a nationalist. I'm an economic nationalist." Bannon wants to claim he is not a white nationalist, but then Bannon picked a white racist is be Attorney General.
http://fortune.com/2016/11/19/jeff-sessions-race-civil-rights/

Then Signym goes off on an argument that anybody in Texas knows is a load of crap:
Quote:

So mainstream media - which couldn't find the Trump electorate with two hands and a flashlight - had this available to them. Instead of looking into this unwelcome news objectively, they were busy pumping out FAKE NEWS, thumping Hillary, and you were busy sucking it up. As a consequence of continuing to live in your bubble, YOU WERE ALL WRONG.
I heard continuously what an awful man Obama is for NINE long years. "He will destroy the nation. He is from Kenya and can't be President. He is working with the terrorists." When Hillary came along, they just added her to the list of people that would destroy the nation. It wasn't true about Obama, but that didn't stop them saying it anyway. Obama has two more months to destroy America according to these people. They will be so thankful when someone they trust, Trump, finally takes the country back.

The news people noticed but they were never mean enough about these people who predicted for NINE long years that Obama would destroy the country. The news papers should have done continuous stories, coming back every 6 months, about the millions of psychologically deranged citizens that predicted the end is here because Obama is President. I remember Signym predicting the end is here if Hillary is President. Same old deranged storytelling about Hillary as about Obama.

It is of zero surprise that these deranged citizens vote for the white guy. It is also unsurprising that they say they are not racists. I live with them. They are racists. They are liars. They are just like Bannon, but they can't talk as fast.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:10 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


It is second, never SECOND.

Thanks for the tip. I'll remember that.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:18 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


And HERE is SECOND disparaging millions of Americans because it disagrees politically with them.
originally posted by SECOND:

Then Signym goes off on an argument that anybody in Texas knows is a load of crap.
It is of zero surprise that these deranged citizens vote for the white guy. It is also unsurprising that they say they are not racists. I live with them. They are racists. They are liars. They are just like Bannon, but they can't talk as fast.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:20 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


SPECULATION originally posted as fact by SECOND:
The Senate will have to take a standFor his Cabinet and his independent regulatory agencies, Trump should be held to a higher standard than that. Obama’s top-tier Cabinet posts included a secretary of state who ran against him in the primary, a secretary of defense who was a lifelong Republican, and a Treasury secretary who was a largely apolitical technocrat. Attempting to hold Trump to that bar of independence and integrity may sound like a fool’s errand. But it’s of course precisely because Trump does not seem like the kind of high-minded individual who would value independence and integrity in public officials that the Senate must insist on it.

Even with an absolutely first-rate group of Senate-confirmable executive branch appointees, the practical problems with having elected a president with no knowledge of or interest in public policy will be considerable.

But if he’s allowed to stack the Cabinet with yes-men, cronies, and sycophants, then the danger becomes severe.

The main thing that names currently floating around as potential Cabinet picks — Steven Mnuchin, Newt Gingrich, John Bolton, Sarah Palin, Rudy Giuliani — have in common is that they backed Trump. We cannot allow personal loyalty to Donald Trump to be the decisive factor in staffing the executive branch. Personnel is policy, and if fealty to Trump determines the personnel, then fealty to Trump will also be the policy.

I don’t want to live in a world where personal loyalty to Donald Trump is the sine qua non of every policy decision. And my guess is that, if they think about it, neither do Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz or Lisa Murkowski or any number of other Republicans from outside the Trumposphere who will be inevitably ground down if he is able to make his will prevail.

Above all, senators from both parties who know in their hearts that we are living through a dangerous moment need to avoid falling prey to wishful thinking. Because Trump is a vengeful and irrational man, picking a fight with him over an SEC commissioner or an assistant attorney general feels unpleasant, and many would simply rather duck the issue. But that vengeful and irrational nature is precisely why the fights must be picked and must be picked now.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:25 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


more total huffing and puffing posted as fact by SECOND, along with mindless parroting of comforting myths, like the myth the media is free and independent:
Trump can serve himself better in the White House than in retirement. He will not retire early.

Many American administrations have featured acts of venal corruption, from the self-serving, and Trump’s will likely feature more than most. The larger risk, however, is that Trump’s lack of grounding in ideological principles or party networks will create a systemically corrupt government. Such governments operate by limiting access to markets and resources in order to create rents that bind the interests of the ruling coalition together.

This is how Vladimir Putin governs Russia, and how the Mubarak and Sisi regimes rule Egypt. To be a successful businessman in a systemically corrupt regime and to be a close supporter of the regime are one and the same thing.

Those who support the regime will receive favorable treatment from Trump's regulators and those who oppose it will not. Because businesses do business with each other, the network becomes self-reinforcing. Regime-friendly banks receive a light regulatory touch while their rivals are crushed. In exchange, they offer friendly lending terms to regime-friendly businesses while choking capital to rivals. Such a system, once in place, is extremely difficult to dislodge precisely because, unlike a fascist or communist regime, it is glued together by no ideology beyond basic human greed, insecurity, and love of family.

It is entirely possible that eight years from now we’ll be looking at an entrenched kleptocracy preparing to install a chosen successor whose only real mission is to preserve the web of parasitical oligarchy that has replaced the federal government as we know it. One can, of course, always hope that the worst does not come to pass. While the impulse to “wait and see” what really happens is understandable, the cold hard reality is that the most crucial decisions will be the early ones.

If the President wishes to pursue vendettas, the regulatory state would be the most direct and simplest way for him to do so. The usual presumption of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ does not hold in many regulatory matters, nor are there always the usual protections of due process.

And Trump is certainly a vengeful man. As he wrote in his 2007 book, Think Big And Kick Ass, “When someone intentionally harms you or your reputation, how do you react? I strike back, doing the same thing to them only ten times worse.”

Trump is not going to crush the free media in one fell swoop. But big corporate media does face enough regulatory matters that even a single exemplary case would suffice to induce large-scale self-censorship. AT&T, for example, is currently seeking permission from anti-trust authorities to buy Time Warner — permission that Time Warner executives might plausible fear is contingent on Trump believing that CNN has covered him “fairly.” A Federal Trade Commission investigation charging Amazon with predatory pricing would be viewed favorably by many competing retailers, but would also be seen in other quarters as Trump making good on his promise to punish Jeff Bezos for critical coverage in the Washington Post.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:30 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


and here's SECOND hypocritically advocating that the US ignore the Constitution regarding the vote, and break the law of the land, because a democracy didn't hand SECOND the desired outcome (though it would have been abhorrent if Trump had done what SECOND is advocating):

It is not looking good for Trump and his chances of winning. Hillary is ahead by more than a million votes




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:33 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


and here is SECOND lying about Bernie Sanders

Bernie is for co-operating with Trump’s infrastructure plan, which actually has nothing in common with liberal ideas on infrastructure. What the hell is Bernie thinking? Rather than spend new money on important priorities that only the public sector can execute, Trump is proposing tax cuts for private companies that are already investing in profitable private infrastructure schemes.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/16/13628382/donald-trump-infra
structure-plan color = #FF0000>





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:34 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


here SECOND lies about my position
Is this what 1kiki had in mind for Trump bringing peace in the Mideast?





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:39 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


and here SECOND recaps the history of the Electoral College, as if that somehow removes it from the Constitution and makes it OK to advocate breaking th law of the land
Hamilton was talking about demagogues.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:43 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


and here's SECOND lying about my posts AGAIN, with a side of snark, while trying to shift the blame for its own lack of integrity and honesty
Maybe your deep thinking is too subtle?Maybe your deep thinking is too subtle?




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:45 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Well, I believe I'm caught up on the last two pages, SECOND.

Carry on.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 19, 2016 6:00 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


SECOND, you are, as usual, full of your typical trailer-load of cow-dung. Something you should be familiar with, seeing as you live in Texas.

In response to my comment
Quote:

So mainstream media - which couldn't find the Trump electorate with two hands and a flashlight - had this available to them. Instead of looking into this unwelcome news objectively, they were busy pumping out FAKE NEWS, thumping Hillary, and you were busy sucking it up. As a consequence of continuing to live in your bubble, YOU WERE ALL WRONG. - SIGNY

you responded with what I can only describe as a NON-SEQUITUR:

Quote:

Then Signym goes off on an argument that anybody in Texas knows is a load of crap.... I heard continuously what an awful man Obama is for NINE long years.
I'm sorry but what the hell does that have to do with my argument, which is about the MSM getting the polling and election results WRONG? That was my point; I don't know what YOU'RE posting about.

Quote:

"He will destroy the nation. He is from Kenya and can't be President. He is working with the terrorists." When Hillary came along, they just added her to the list of people that would destroy the nation. It wasn't true about Obama, but that didn't stop them saying it anyway. Obama has two more months to destroy America according to these people. They will be so thankful when someone they trust, Trump, finally takes the country back. ... I remember Signym predicting the end is here if Hillary is President. Same old deranged storytelling about Hillary as about Obama.


Yeah but- what does this have to do with what I posted?

I don't know if you noticed ... maybe not, because you're so color- and sex-blind and age-blind ... but HILLARY IS NOT OBAMA and I AM NOT A TEXAN. So, now that you know, maybe you won't continue to conflate things.

Quote:

It is of zero surprise that these deranged citizens vote for the white guy. It is also unsurprising that they say they are not racists. I live with them. They are racists. They are liars. They are just like Bannon, but they can't talk as fast
Yes but again: WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ME? I'm not one of those "deranged citizens". I argued vehemently that Obama was NOT a foreign-born Muslim socialist, and I'm not a racist.

SECOND, you're either lying or you're talking to the voices in your head (again). Instead of arguing with me as if I was one of your deranged fellow Texans, why don't you either
a) respond to my posts or
b) argue with one of your deranged neighbors?

Because, like I said, you replied with what I can only call a non-sequitur.




-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 20, 2016 7:18 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Foreign diplomats are booking rooms at Donald Trump’s hotel in Washington, DC because they believe that directly putting money in the pocket of the President-elect of the United States will serve as a bribe that helps them curry favor with him and influence foreign policy.
www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/2016/11/18/9da9c572-ad
18-11e6-977a-1030f822fc35_story.html


But a foreign government can also cut Trump sweetheart deals on acquiring land to build golf courses.

For that matter, Trump currently owes money to a bank that is owned by the Chinese government. That bank could renegotiate its loan on terms that are friendlier to Trump. Similarly, any bank in the United States can start offering loans to Trump-controlled businesses on generous terms. Trump wouldn’t need to explicitly threaten regulatory retaliation to make a prudent bank CEO decide that the balance of risks favors the sweetheart deal.

The Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has an expansive legislative agenda that he would like to pass, heavily featuring tax cuts, reduced social services for the poor, deregulation of the banking industry, and possibly the privatization of Medicare. The calculation of Republican leaders in congress right now seems to be that they will agree to turn a blind eye to Trump’s corruption and in exchange he will sign their bills.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 20, 2016 7:55 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


http://doonesbury.washingtonpost.com/strip/archive/2016/11/20


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 20, 2016 8:51 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Three common arguments for preserving the Electoral College – and why they're wrong
Robert Speel
www.newsweek.com/arguments-favor-electoral-college-wrong-522439

In November 2000, newly elected New York Senator Hillary Clinton promised that when she took office in 2001, she would introduce a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College, the 18th-century, state-by-state, winner-take-all system for selecting the president.

She never pursued her promise – a decision that must haunt her today. In this year’s election, she won at least 1,200,000 more votes than Donald Trump, but lost by a significant margin in the Electoral College.
www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president

In addition to 2016, there have been four other times in American history – 1824, 1876, 1888 and 2000 – when the candidate who won the Electoral College lost the national popular vote. Each time, a Democratic presidential candidate lost the election due to this system.

For that reason, views on the fairness of the Electoral College are often partisan. Not surprisingly, many Clinton supporters have called for its reform or abolition. But most recent polls indicate that supporters of both parties feel that this 18th-century system of choosing a president should be modified or abolished.

Nonetheless, others continue to make the case for preserving the Electoral College in its current form, usually using one of three arguments. In my course about American elections, we discuss these arguments – and how each has serious flaws.

The evolution of the Electoral College

During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, the delegates “distrusted the passions of the people” and particularly distrusted the ability of average voters to choose a president in a national election.

The result was the Electoral College, a system that gave each state a number of electors based on its number of members in Congress. On a date set by Congress, state legislatures would choose a set of electors who would later convene in their respective state capitals to cast votes for president. Because there were no political parties back then, it was assumed that electors would use their best judgment to choose a president.

With the rise of the two-party system, the modern Electoral College continued to evolve. By the 1820s, most states began to pass laws allowing voters, not state legislatures, to choose electors on a winner-take-all basis.

Today, in every state except Nebraska and Maine, whichever candidate wins the most votes in a state wins all the electors from that state, no matter what the margin of victory. Just look at the impact this system had on the 2016 race: Donald Trump won Pennsylvania and Florida by a combined margin of about 200,000 votes to earn 49 electoral votes. Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, won Massachusetts by almost a million votes but earned only 11 electoral votes.

The winner-take-all electoral system explains why one candidate can get more votes nationwide while a different candidate wins in the Electoral College. (Some legal scholars have pointed out that the Electoral College was also created to protect southern slaveholder interests that are irrelevant today.)

Despite these issues, many continue to defend the system. Here’s why they’re wrong.

Myth #1: Electors filter the passions of the people

College students first learning about the Electoral College will often defend the system by citing its original purpose: to provide a check on the public in case they make a poor choice for president.

But electors no longer work as independent agents nor as agents of the state legislature. They’re chosen for their party loyalty by party conventions or party leaders.

In presidential elections between 1992 and 2012, over 99 percent of electors kept their pledges to a candidate, and there were only two “faithless electors.” One Gore elector from Washington, D.C. cast a blank ballot in 2000 to protest a lack of congressional representation for District of Columbia residents. And one Kerry elector in Minnesota in 2004 voted for vice presidential candidate John Edwards for both president and vice president – an apparent mistake, since none of Minnesota’s electors admitted to the action afterward.

There have been scattered faithless electors in past elections, but they’ve never influenced the outcome of a presidential election. Since winner-take-all laws began in the 1820s, electors have rarely acted independently or against the wishes of the party that chose them. A majority of states even have laws requiring the partisan electors to keep their pledges when voting.

Yes, some of this year’s Republican electors may not have been big supporters of Donald Trump’s candidacy. But despite the best efforts of some Clinton voters to get them to switch sides, there’s no evidence that some electors may consider voting for someone like Paul Ryan to prevent a Trump majority and throw the election into the U.S. House of Representatives.

Myth #2: Rural areas would get ignored

Since 2000, a popular argument for the electoral college made on conservative websites and talk radio is that without the Electoral College, candidates would spend all their time campaigning in big cities and would ignore low-population areas.

Other than this odd view of democracy, which advocates spending as much campaign time in areas where few people live as in areas where most Americans live, the argument is simply false. The Electoral College causes candidates to spend all their campaign time in cities in 10 or 12 states rather than in 30, 40 or 50 states.

Presidential candidates don’t campaign in rural areas no matter what system is used, simply because there are not a lot of votes to be gained in those areas. Data from the 2016 campaign indicate that 53 percent of campaign events for Trump, Hillary Clinton, Mike Pence and Tim Kaine in the two months before the November election were in only four states: Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio. During that time, 87 percent of campaign visits by the four candidates were in 12 battleground states, and none of the four candidates ever went to 27 states, which includes almost all of rural America.

Even in the swing states where they do campaign, the candidates focus on urban areas where most voters live. In Pennsylvania, for example, 72 percent of Pennsylvania campaign visits by Clinton and Trump in the final two months of their campaigns were to the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh areas.

In Michigan, all eight campaign visits by Clinton and Trump in the final two months of their campaigns were to the Detroit and Grand Rapids areas, with neither candidate visiting the rural parts of the state.

The Electoral College does not create a national campaign inclusive of rural areas. In fact, it does just the opposite.

Myth #3: It creates a mandate to lead

Some have advocated continuation of the Electoral College because its winner-take-all nature at the state level causes the media and the public to see many close elections as landslides, thereby giving a stronger mandate to govern for the winning candidate.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan won 51 percent of the national popular vote but 91 percent of the electoral vote, giving the impression of a landslide victory and allowing him to convince Congress to approve parts of his agenda. In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton twice won comfortable majorities in the Electoral College while winning less than half of the national popular vote. (In both years, third party candidate Ross Perot had run.)

In 2016, Trump won by a large margin in the Electoral College, while winning fewer popular votes than Clinton nationwide. Nonetheless, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani announced that Trump’s Electoral College victory gives him a mandate to govern.

Perhaps for incoming presidents, this artificial perception of landslide support is a good thing. It helps them enact their agenda.

But it can also lead to backlash and resentment in the majority or near-majority of the population whose expressed preferences get ignored. Look no farther than the anti-Trump protests that have erupted across the country since Nov. 8.

A way out?

Some advocate that all 50 states adopt Maine and Nebraska’s system of dividing up electoral votes by congressional district. Yet such a system in larger states would likely lead to increased political conflict and even more claims of rigging due to the extreme gerrymandering often used to create the districts.

Abolishing the Electoral College completely would require a constitutional amendment, involving two-thirds approval from both houses of Congress and approval by 38 states – a process very unlikely to happen in today’s partisan environment.

One way to create a national popular vote election for president without amending the Constitution is a plan called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Created by Stanford University computer science professor John Koza, the idea is to award each state’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote instead of the winner of the state popular vote. The proposal has received support in 10 states and the District of Columbia. But these states are all strongly Democratic, and there seems to be no support for the change yet among the majority of states controlled by Republicans.

Because Republicans won the two recent presidential elections where the electoral college winner differed from the national popular vote winner, many party supporters have defended the Electoral College as a way to preserve the role of rural (usually Republican) voters in presidential elections.

Rural states do get a slight boost from the two electoral votes awarded to states due to their two Senate seats. But as stated earlier, the Electoral College does not lead to rural areas getting more attention.

And there is no legitimate reason why a rural vote should count more than an urban vote in a 21st-century national election.

Robert Speel is an associate professor of political science, Erie campus, Pennsylvania State University.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 20, 2016 2:26 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


OOOH LOOK! SECOND posts innuendo and speculation like it's fact!
But a foreign government can also ... That bank could renegotiate ... any bank in the United States can start ... Trump wouldn’t need to ... The calculation of Republican leaders in congress right now seems to be ...




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 20, 2016 2:30 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


And SECOND posts a long screed about the electoral College (which I will diligently scroll past) in support of its idea we should ignore the law of the land today!
Three common arguments for preserving the Electoral College – and why they're wrong
Robert Speel





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 6:29 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Nepotism Is the New Black
www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/so-many-options-yet-donald-t
rump-picks-the-ugly.html


The announcement that Trump has recruited Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser is particularly alarming....Flynn had a brilliant military career....Then President Obama nominated Flynn to become director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and he began to unravel....Flynn’s former fans have been bewildered at his raging denunciation of Islam, including calling it a “cancer.” In February, Flynn also tweeted and asked others to forward a viciously bigoted video that argued that there could be no such thing as Islamophobia.

....For his chief of staff, Flynn chose his son, who is a looney on social media, calling President Obama a communist and fascist, tweeting racially insensitive comments and sharing absurd conspiracy theories.

The chief of staff for the National Security Council will be Flynn's son? Well, why not? Donald Trump has set the tone on nepotism from the top, and it's obvious that he not only tolerates it, but positively revels in it.

Early signs of what the Trump administration may look like: A man associated with white supremacy and misogyny will be White House chief strategist; a man rejected for a judgeship because of alleged racism will be attorney general; and an Islamophobe who has taken money from Moscow will be national security adviser.

No, this is not satire.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 12:43 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/21/1601860/-Cartoon-Thanksgiving


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 1:30 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.




http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/11/16/not-game-sanders-inspired-
movement-mobilizes-against-trump


Long a fierce critic of Trump, Sanders is giving a speech at 7pm EST Wednesday in which he will discuss the path forward for progressives.


https://go.ourrevolution.com/page/s/bernie-speech




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 1:51 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Why Jared Kushner is Trump's truest heir and most trusted adviser

Two rich kids out for revenge on a cultural elite that mocked them.

Like Trump himself, Kushner is a rich kid with a chip on his shoulder. A hyper-privileged member of the New York overclass who could not win or buy the respect of his peers. But now, Kushner has the last laugh — a direct line to a White House controlled by a father-in-law who obtained the most powerful office on the planet, in part because of the very taste and persona that excluded him in the past. Now he’ll have a chance to turn the tables, and humiliate the culture and intellectual elites who’ve humiliated him for years.

While Trump never managed to ingratiate himself with his peers, his very failure to do so became part of his electoral appeal to voters looking to stick a thumb in the eye of their social betters. But Trump isn’t going to actually staff his administration with members of his white working-class fan base. Kushner, who “sees himself as an outsider who, despite his Ivy League pedigree, scoffs at intellectual and cultural elites” is the next best thing. Trump, at the end of the day, doesn’t actually have much of anything in common with the Southern Evangelicals, Rust Belt populists, and working-class rural voters who put him in office. But he and Kushner — rich kids who tried to make it in Manhattan — are two peas in a pod.

Trump and Kushner have a unique bond

The vast majority of New Yorkers live in Brooklyn and Queens which makes owning and operating apartment buildings in Brooklyn and Queens a very sensible way to make money. That’s what Fred Trump, Donald’s dad, did, and he made himself a fortune that way.

But perceptions of New York as an iconic global city are dominated by Manhattan, and what Donald wanted to do with daddy’s money was move into Manhattan and join America’s social and cultural elite. It never worked out for him, basically because he has terrible taste. Trump’s gold-plated condo and other ostentatious ticks are considered horrifically gauche by his fellow Manhattanites and have been ever since the 1980s. People laughed at him — constantly — because he was ridiculous.

The very-hip-at-the-time Spy magazine relentlessly trolled him as a “short-fingered vulgarian” and it truly bothered him.
www.vox.com/2016/3/2/11148356/donald-trump-short-fingers-small-hands-v
ulgarian


As comedian John Mulaney put it, “Donald Trump is like what a hobo imagines a rich man to be.”
http://ijr.com/2015/11/477679-comedian-john-mulaney-hilariously-jabs-h
obo-donald-trump
/

What you’re supposed to do is be subtly snobbish about various things — not just slap gold on everything.

Kushner, by the same token, took all the appropriate steps to become a pillar of Northeastern society — Harvard degree, own a small-but-beloved media outlet, donate to local Democratic Party elected officials, marry a society wife — but ended up being a laughingstock, with his intelligence publicly mocked and his dad in jail and humiliated for a particularly sleazy crime.

People have made fun of Jared Kushner a lot

Back in 2011 when Trump was getting into birtherism, he also attacked Barack Obama’s educational credentials. “I heard he was a terrible student, terrible,” Trump told the AP. “How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard?”

Naturally Gawker, the New Republic, and others brought up the fact that we know exactly how Jared Kushner got into Harvard despite being a bad student.

More at www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/21/13651942/jared-kushner-dona
ld-trump


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 2:06 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


don't want this information to get lost in the mindless obsession:


http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/11/16/not-game-sanders-inspired-
movement-mobilizes-against-trump


Long a fierce critic of Trump, Sanders is giving a speech at 7pm EST Wednesday in which he will discuss the path forward for progressives.


https://go.ourrevolution.com/page/s/bernie-speech




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 8:00 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
don't want this information to get lost in the mindless obsession:


http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/11/16/not-game-sanders-inspired-
movement-mobilizes-against-trump


Long a fierce critic of Trump, Sanders is giving a speech at 7pm EST Wednesday in which he will discuss the path forward for progressives.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that Bernie is a crappy strategist. He did not want Trump to win, but before you start taking Bernie's advice on what to do about Trump, look what Bernie did to help Trump:

Relative to 2012, Hillary Clinton did worse among millennials by a considerable amount. They turned out to vote in their usual numbers, but a lot of them abandoned Clinton for third-party candidates. All told, I'd say this cost Clinton about 5 percent of the millennial vote, which amounts to 1-2 percent of the total vote. Trump, meanwhile, did as well with millennials as Romney did in 2012.

Why? I realize we're all supposed to move on from this, but I blame Bernie Sanders. He started out fine, but after his campaign took off and he realized he could actually win this thing, he turned harshly negative. Over and over, his audience of passionate millennials heard him trash Clinton as a corrupt, warmongering, corporate shill. After he lost, he endorsed Clinton only slowly and grudgingly, and by the time he started campaigning for her with any enthusiasm, it was too late. I understand that Bernie fans want to deny this obvious reality, but honestly, is it any wonder that Clinton lost a big chunk of the millennial vote?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 8:30 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

a lot of millennials abandoned Clinton for third-party candidates. All told, I'd say this cost Clinton about 5 percent of the millennial vote ... Bernie Sanders ... turned harshly negative. Over and over, his audience of passionate millennials heard him trash Clinton as a corrupt, warmongering, corporate shill.
Was he wrong? The answer is no.
The problem was Hillary's. She was on the wrong side of history. And the problem was the DNC's and even yours, for thinking that the same-old-same-old was going to work in a popular sentiment that demanded different.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 8:42 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Quote:

a lot of millennials abandoned Clinton for third-party candidates. All told, I'd say this cost Clinton about 5 percent of the millennial vote ... Bernie Sanders ... turned harshly negative. Over and over, his audience of passionate millennials heard him trash Clinton as a corrupt, warmongering, corporate shill.
Was he wrong? The answer is no.
The problem was Hillary's. She was on the wrong side of history. And the problem was the DNC's and even yours, for thinking that the same-old-same-old was going to work in a popular sentiment that demanded different.

This is another piece of your thinking that Hillary is a completely incorrigible criminal, that there was no way Bernie could turn her even a little away from being totally evil, while Trump, on the other hand, could be guided by the beauty and awesome majesty of Bernie and Bernie's philosophy of governing. You, 1kiki, will say I overstated what you believe about Bernie's powers over Trump and Bernie's weak, almost nonexistent, influence over Democrats. Have it your way.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 9:36 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
[This is another piece of your thinking that Hillary is a completely incorrigible criminal, that there was no way Bernie could turn her even a little away from being totally evil, while Trump, on the other hand, could be guided by the beauty and awesome majesty of Bernie and Bernie's philosophy of governing. You, 1kiki, will say I overstated what you believe about Bernie's powers over Trump and (... so on).

You keep assuming that 1) my concerns are identical to most voters (they are not) and 2) you keep THINKING you know what I'm thinking despite being wrong at every turn.

1) So, despite the fact that I tried to CLEARLY distinguish between the concerns of others, and my own - since you seem perpetually confused and frankly lost - I'll try to be even more exact, and even redundant.

My PERSONAL SPECIFIC concerns were about Hillary escalating US antagonism of Russia. I could find no good way it could end. The only possible end - if continued to its logical conclusion - was global thermonuclear war. My problem with her was that she was a completely incorrigible ... warmonger.



2) So instead of you pretending to read my mind (which you are VERY bad at) let me continue with a summary of my actual posts.

-MY- concerns about Hillary didn't keep me from talking about Hillary's other problems as perceived by other voters.
Quote:

... that there was no way Bernie could turn her even a little away from being totally evil.
I said more than once that Hillary wasn't going to change her position unless and until she lost support - from people like YOU. I REPEATEDLY tried to get you to understand that the problem wasn't Donald (and that you needed to get over your stupid obsession with him). The problem was that Hillary wasn't going to change direction unless she lost support and got a different mandate from people like YOU

And was I right?

Of course I was. The polls told her comforting (though wrong) statistics about her support, and as a result of the idiotic blind loyalty of people like YOU, SHE DIDN'T CHANGE. Well, that was her mistake, and yours.

Leave me and Bernie out of your delusions.




How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 9:53 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60840&p=3

And btw, how DID your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

During the primaries I said Bernie was the stronger candidate. For the whole campaign, I was telling people that Hillary was a weak candidate, that she had many faults - which I enumerated often - that people 'out there' weren't going to forgive her for, come election time. I said that Donald was succeeding for a reason that had nothing to do with racism and everything to do with people feeling abused and unheard. I said that Hillary needed to enthusiastically and vocally adopt Bernie's strong 'pro-worker' stance - or Donald's - in order to compete. I urged people to forget about Donald and try to figure out ways to make Hillary stronger. For all the good it did. People were stuck in their mindless, uncritical support for Hillary; and obsessed with flinging poo at Donald. And how did THAT turn out?

Unless you come to grips with the notion that Hillary lost due to her own mistakes, you won't understand what to do to better next time.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 10:01 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60433

Hillary's record as Sec State is replete with serious judgment errors (private server, bombing Libya), claimed lack of information (re the US running arms out of the US embassy annex in Benghazi through Turkey to ISIS - she claimed she didn't know arms were being shipped, and then that she didn't know they were going to ISIS), and support for neo-con action (Victoria "fuck the EU" Nuland, who was taped selecting the US pick for the next Ukrainian PM after the coup). And she voted for the Iraq war.
Along with her vote for the US Patriot Act, and her support of so-called 'free -trade' agreements, her record is full of indications she'd be an interventionist hawk, escalate confrontations with Russia and China, use and expand spying on ordinary people, and support corporations at the expense of us, the people of this country.


Democrats, you can’t vote for Hillary: The case for writing in Bernie Sanders If Hillary Clinton is the nominee
We need structural change: Clinton as president would merge GOPers and Dems into one party on war & foreign policy

Hillary Clinton doesn’t get it: Paul Krugman, Bernie Sanders and the truth about the free trade scam

Does this sound like she learned anything from Libya and Ukraine?

It seems to me that she wants to continue provoking Russia, under the assumption that Russia won't respond directly militarily, especially not with nuclear weapons. She's going to presume on Putin having endless restraint

I have a question for all you Hillaryphiles.
You've thrown a lot of snark. You really dislike Bernie's age. You've discussed politics. Numbers. Trump.
But none of you have discussed Hillary's voting record, her warmongering record as Secy of State, her collusion with neocons, her support of prison corporations, her profitable relationship with international corporatists, support of 'free' trade agreements (all of them) or her stated policies like for example her support of Israel no matter what. You seem to think she''l sail past her ~55% unfavorability rating. You seem to think simply having a 'D' after her name is enough of a reason to vote for her.



And that was just page 1






How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 10:54 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=60840&p=3

And btw, how DID your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

During the primaries I said Bernie was the stronger candidate. For the whole campaign, I was telling people that Hillary was a weak candidate, that she had many faults - which I enumerated often - that people 'out there' weren't going to forgive her for, come election time. I said that Donald was succeeding for a reason that had nothing to do with racism and everything to do with people feeling abused and unheard. I said that Hillary needed to enthusiastically and vocally adopt Bernie's strong 'pro-worker' stance - or Donald's - in order to compete. I urged people to forget about Donald and try to figure out ways to make Hillary stronger. For all the good it did. People were stuck in their mindless, uncritical support for Hillary; and obsessed with flinging poo at Donald. And how did THAT turn out?

Unless you come to grips with the notion that Hillary lost due to her own mistakes, you won't understand what to do to better next time.

You are deluded if you think voters make a candidate "stronger". There is no way to lend our strength to somebody. They either have it or don't.

And your notion that it was people feeling abused and unheard caused Hillary to lose is more of your bullshit. They have been bitching about that for centuries. Where I live in Texas it was just flat out racism, plus a smear campaign against all Democrats, including Hillary, that goes back decades. Remember James Comey of the FBI shoving a knife into Hillary's back just before the election? That has never happened before, until this election. Do you remember he is a Republican? Do you remember the Benghazi investigation for thousands of days? Republicans, again. It was not Bernie or Democrats running the Benghazi Inquisition, trying to find "truth". It was a straight ahead smear job.

Bernie, not being a tactical genius, was not going to save this election from the Republicans. He could not even get past step one in becoming President: win a primary in any party. Didn't have to be the Democrats. He could have run as a Republican, Green Party, Independent, or Write In. And Hillary did not steal the primary election from Bernie with trickery involving super delegates. She won the popular vote in the primary by 4 million. And I did NOT vote for her in the primary.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 11:07 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:

You keep assuming that 1) my concerns are identical to most voters (they are not) and 2) you keep THINKING you know what I'm thinking despite being wrong at every turn.

1) So, despite the fact that I tried to CLEARLY distinguish between the concerns of others, and my own - since you seem perpetually confused and frankly lost - I'll try to be even more exact, and even redundant.

My PERSONAL SPECIFIC concerns were about Hillary escalating US antagonism of Russia. I could find no good way it could end. The only possible end - if continued to its logical conclusion - was global thermonuclear war. My problem with her was that she was a completely incorrigible ... warmonger.

2) So instead of you pretending to read my mind (which you are VERY bad at) let me continue with a summary of my actual posts.

-MY- concerns about Hillary didn't keep me from talking about Hillary's other problems as perceived by other voters.
Quote:

... that there was no way Bernie could turn her even a little away from being totally evil.
I said more than once that Hillary wasn't going to change her position unless and until she lost support - from people like YOU. I REPEATEDLY tried to get you to understand that the problem wasn't Donald (and that you needed to get over your stupid obsession with him). The problem was that Hillary wasn't going to change direction unless she lost support and got a different mandate from people like YOU

And was I right?

Of course I was. The polls told her comforting (though wrong) statistics about her support, and as a result of the idiotic blind loyalty of people like YOU, SHE DIDN'T CHANGE. Well, that was her mistake, and yours.

Leave me and Bernie out of your delusions.

You go on and on about the Russians. No Americans outside the State Department and the Slavic Language Departments at Universities give a shit about Russia. The reverse is not true. Russia is always worried about what the rest of the world thinks of them and is worried somebody will steal a sliver of Russian land. Those Russians have mental problems. But nobody cares about Russia. They are the great big dumbasses of the North with an inferiority complex going back centuries. And just because Andrei Sakharov got a Nobel Peace Prize and a H-bomb for Russia, the average Russian is still a nonentity in the rest of the world.

Those idiots in Russia even cheated on their drug tests at the Olympics. What a bunch of mental cases they must to cheat at the games for the glory of the Motherland. A nation of wackos.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 21, 2016 11:07 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

You are deluded if you think voters make a candidate "stronger". There is no way to lend our strength to somebody. They either have it or don't.
And yet - that's not what I posted in total. It seems a train of logic more than one step long is far too long for you.

I said more than once that Hillary wasn't going to change her position unless and until she lost support - from people like YOU. I REPEATEDLY tried to get you to understand that the problem wasn't Donald (and that you needed to get over your stupid obsession with him). The problem was that Hillary wasn't going to change direction unless she lost support and got a different mandate from people like YOU.





How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Tue, December 17, 2024 23:41 - 4881 posts
Is Elon Musk Nuts?
Tue, December 17, 2024 23:19 - 434 posts
Jesus christ... Can we outlaw the fuckin' drones already?
Tue, December 17, 2024 23:17 - 17 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Tue, December 17, 2024 23:09 - 659 posts
RFK is a sick man
Tue, December 17, 2024 20:19 - 22 posts
three very different views
Tue, December 17, 2024 20:02 - 23 posts
Macron proposes new law against fake news in France
Tue, December 17, 2024 19:58 - 43 posts
The State of Freedom in Russia
Tue, December 17, 2024 19:58 - 80 posts
Iran's nuclear intentions?
Tue, December 17, 2024 19:49 - 25 posts
United Healthcare CEO RIP: The class war comes home
Tue, December 17, 2024 18:50 - 7 posts
Elections; 2024
Tue, December 17, 2024 18:48 - 4962 posts
Japanese Whalers.....
Tue, December 17, 2024 17:51 - 229 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL