QatzelOk wrote:Reality: Trump has appointed CEOs and banksters to all the important places in his cabinet.
This is a semantic argument. Most of Trump's cabinent is not part of the Washington establishment. I'm not in opposition to capitalism, but to a political elite that has lost touch with the country it intends to rule.
QatzelOk wrote:I'm starting to realize that Trump's fabricated "maverick" image is just what the establishment needed to stay in power long enough to destroy any semblance of a popular democracy in the USA.
The US has rarely exhibited the traits of a popular democracy. A regular feature of it, even in the age of mass suffrage, is that nearly half of the people do not vote.
QatzelOk wrote:Meryll Streep isn't the establishment. She's a well-paid Hollywood actor. She doesn't believe anything she says in public.
She serves a political class that has depended upon brainwash, sentiment and solidarity for as its political lifeblood. Donald Trump single-handedly took that to the woodshed in this election cycle. Keep in mind, Trump spent about 1/10th of what Hillary spent. They are reeling from this loss.
jimjam wrote:Can you possibly grasp the concept that people actually disagree?
Go back and look how I started this thread. I never said, "Wow! Trump is really super awesome and a really great guy. Let's all get behind him." I said he had the potential to really fuck things up for the establishment. Is he an asshole? Sure. What politician isn't? If you are in politics, you are somebody's asshole. The Washington elite has run things for themselves and a very narrow group of interests for a very long time, because nobody would challenge them. What makes Trump interesting is that he challenges all assumptions. Think about it. People like George W. Bush and Barack Obama were able to get re-elected, because people liked them even though they didn't like their policies. Isn't it weird to you that they both had such painful goodbyes? Isn't it obvious to you that people "like" Barack Obama, but they hate his policies? Isn't that kind of a weird disconnect?
colliric wrote:Yet she likes Margret Thatcher enough to give her a positive acting portrayal..... Go figure!
That was done to make Thatcher look like she was nuts. They've done the same thing to Reagan. Even Bill O'Reilly's "Killing Reagan" is meant to do more or less the same thing.
SpecialOlympian wrote:Obviously, we should hold the actor to higher standards.
For decades, politicians simply took it on the chin. However, that's because the corporations that own the media titans also funded the politicians. They haven't yet learned that Trump does not owe any of them for his position. So the more he counter attacks, the weaker they get.
colliric wrote:She portrayed "the Bitch" as a feminist hero, then proceeds to critize Trump despite the fact he is clearly not as far right-wing as Maggie was.
The irony is that politically, he's a mid-20th Century American Democrat who is utterly despised by what constitutes the Democratic Party today. One of the left's favorite games to play is "Eisenhower couldn't be elected today." "Reagan is too far left for today's right" and so on. Put the shoe on the other foot. Lyndon Johnson would be a war criminal to today's Democratic Party, and Carter stopping visas and immigration from Iran would be a racist xenophobe. Heck, even Bill Clinton's crime policy would be nothing more than a war on black people.
Hong Wu wrote:I don't see why people care what they have to say about fields outside their own.
Most people don't care. People like entertainment to take them away from their problems, not to be reminded of them. That's why the NFL is losing market share now too. The NFL has finally seen the light on "breast cancer awareness" and all the pink they were making football players wear. I guess that 13% market share loss is worth billions more than they were raising for breast cancer, since football is an overwhelmingly male audience and men get breast cancer at about 1/10th the rate of women.
quetzlcoatl wrote:Trump acknowledged himself that his deportation policy was the same as Obama's - just more forceful.
Obama deliberately pushed the dreamer policy and got parents in Central America to hand their kids over to human traffickers for delivery into exploitation in the United States. Trump will probably do none of that sort of thing.
SpecialOlympian wrote:Good on her for trolling the fuck out of the people in Trump's cult of personality.
I think it's great too, because Trump always hits back.
SpecialOlympian wrote:#1 The Individual Mandate: Everyone has to buy in.
Totally wrong. It's very unpopular. Young kids don't get sick. They don't want to buy it as it cuts into their budget for hallucinogens.
SpecialOlympian wrote:#2 You can not be denied for pre-existing conditions. Fairly obvious. This is what the younger people who fall under #1 help fund by buying into the insurance program.
If you get rid of #1, the people with pre-existing conditions have their premiums shoot up. If you get rid of #2, it's not really universal healthcare.
It didn't matter about #1, because the kiddies didn't drink the Kool-Aid. So premiums shot up. I have a buddy that just got his new bill, and it's $900 a month. He's semi-disabled, and will have to sell his house to make provisions for his health insurance. When people get the explanation that this is because of ObamaCare, they hate ObamaCare even if they still like Obama.
SpecialOlympian wrote:If you remove either the program doesn't work, and it's not ACA.
The program doesn't work even with the individual mandate, because it's an option to pay a tax. If you have high youth unemployment, why would they buy it?
One Degree wrote:It is okay to mock old people and over weight people, but not retarded people (which he never did)? Could you put out a daily update so we can keep track of what is currently politically correct? I hope you realize your sense of humor and Trumps are very similar.
It's okay to be racist, sexist and homophobic too, if the people you are trashing happen to be conservative.
Here's one that really cracks me up:
Donald Trump’s ‘first attempt to ignore the law’An establishment that gave us Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton(Senate)-Clinton(SecState) and tried to give us Clinton v. Bush as a presidentical race is now suddenly concerned about nepotism, because Jared Kushner isn't Donald Trump's son. These people are pathetic. I'm glad Trump is there to thrash them mercilessly.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
Trump's the healthiest man alive. How can you argue otherwise??
- By Tainari88