DOTA
wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy
Pfft. You see everything as proof of confirmation bias.You don't say confirmation bias has been a thing since the beginning of Facebook and Twitter and it's going to get so so worse.
Pfft. You see everything as proof of confirmation bias.You don't say confirmation bias has been a thing since the beginning of Facebook and Twitter and it's going to get so so worse.
Oh ok... Well here's my response to another poster.To be honest I'm just confused and wanted to know what you meant. I'm not reading the thread regularly, no.
...I think you have it all wrong, you have a regressive viewpoint through which you look at a given thing and interpret it a certain way... You read media and websites that are inline with this view, and ignore others, strengthening your beliefs...
Oh ok... Well here's my response to another poster.
Can be applied to posters on both sides of the argument, basically I tend to look at things critically and also try and find the sources for any information I get. If I don't find satisfactory sources I don't take it as fact and I definitely don't pass it off as fact.
To bring back the discussion to the Russian hacking.
But in any other case they should vote per how the voters voted.
I agree. I hate being on the losing side - but the people have *sort of* spoken. Trump won where he had to and that's all that matters. If some of these electors feel they can't carry out their duties, they should resign - otherwise, do what you are supposed to do.
I know if Hillary had won, and there was talk like this, I would be irate.
People Trump met today -
Kanye - weirdo
Ray Lewis - murderer
Jim Brown - LEGEND.
If all the fake news was what decided the election, why wasn't it the main topic of discussion before the election? The mainstream media has been going on and on about fake news for a month. If they genuinely believe that there was a lot of fake news which was crucial to the election outcome, they should have paid more attention and given more coverage to it. Instead they started covering it after the election.
It seems like the fake news is just an excuse for the election loss. The Dems ran a bad candidate who had so much history of being disliked by the electorate and had so much history of corruption, untrustworthiness and being in the pocket of corporate interests and lobbyists. She had the email case and was under investigation. They still ran her and sabotaged a genuinely well liked candidate in Sanders.
Now after the election, the Dems still refuse to recognise the reason for their loss. They, along with the mainstream media, have made the issue of "fake news" the main reason for their loss. Not their horrible candidate, not the fact that they didn't run Bernie Sanders, not the reason of the DNC leaks, not the email scandal, not the paid speeches by their candidate, not Clinton's failure to convey a clear message to the middle and working class, not her vague campaign slogans like "I'm with her" and "Stronger together".
If all the fake news was what decided the election, why wasn't it the main topic of discussion before the election? The mainstream media has been going on and on about fake news for a month. If they genuinely believe that there was a lot of fake news which was crucial to the election outcome, they should have paid more attention and given more coverage to it. Instead they started covering it after the election.
It seems like the fake news is just an excuse for the election loss. The Dems ran a bad candidate who had so much history of being disliked by the electorate and had so much history of corruption, untrustworthiness and being in the pocket of corporate interests and lobbyists. She had the email case and was under investigation. They still ran her and sabotaged a genuinely well liked candidate in Sanders.
Now after the election, the Dems still refuse to recognise the reason for their loss. They, along with the mainstream media, have made the issue of "fake news" the main reason for their loss. Not their horrible candidate, not the fact that they didn't run Bernie Sanders, not the reason of the DNC leaks, not the email scandal, not the paid speeches by their candidate, not Clinton's failure to convey a clear message to the middle and working class, not her vague campaign slogans like "I'm with her" and "Stronger together".
Pretty sure I heard them do that again last night (e.g. they could have campaigned harder in the close states and their internal numbers were badly wrong). It is possible for more than one input impacting a result.what you say involes taking responsibility.
Do you think the DNC and Hillary especially have ever done that?
So the economy was not the driver. Making a new swamp is just fine and cheered at the thank you rallies. Goldman Sachs execs being involved is now fine. Not locking her up is now OK. Conflict of interest is now fine. Pay to play is now fine. What is left that his campaign was about?Meanwhile, people that cited the economy as their number 1 concern voted for Clinton by 10 points. Ho hum.
So the economy was not the driver. Making a new swamp is just fine and cheered at the thank you rallies. Goldman Sachs execs being involved is now fine. Not locking her up is now OK. Conflict of interest is now fine. Pay to play is now fine. What is left that his campaign was about?
And Keith Ellison is favourite to become the DNC chair. But who cares about reality when there's an agenda to push.Pretty sure I heard them do that again last night (e.g. they could have campaigned harder in the close states and their internal numbers were badly wrong). It is possible for more than one input impacting a result.
There was a bit about a wall that he's not gonna build and some stuff about Muslims that isn't possible.So the economy was not the driver. Making a new swamp is just fine and cheered at the thank you rallies. Goldman Sachs execs being involved is now fine. Not locking her up is now OK. Conflict of interest is now fine. Pay to play is now fine. What is left that his campaign was about?
I agree. I hate being on the losing side - but the people have *sort of* spoken. Trump won where he had to and that's all that matters. If some of these electors feel they can't carry out their duties, they should resign - otherwise, do what you are supposed to do.
I know if Hillary had won, and there was talk like this, I would be irate.
Fancy a side of irony with your corporate hypocrisy? Last night on MSNBC, Nation Editor-at-Large Chris Hayes profiled ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson, a vocal proponent of hydraulic fracking, who is suing to prevent the construction of a water tower near his eighty-three-acre, $5 million horse ranch in Bartonville, Texas. The purpose of the tower? Storing water for fracking. Tillerson and his super-wealthy neighbors are concerned, the lawsuit states, that the fracking tower might “devalue their properties and adversely impact the rural lifestyle they sought to enjoy.” As Hayes put it, “Rex Tillerson is leading the fracking revolution, just not in his backyard.”
Pretty sure I heard them do that again last night (e.g. they could have campaigned harder in the close states and their internal numbers were badly wrong). It is possible for more than one input impacting a result.
From a newbie:
That's some awful amount of guff there. If the poster really wants, I'd be happy to elaborate but I'd rather not have to.
It really is a load of shite. I sincerely hope he's not promoted anytime soon, we have more than enough self-righteous, holier than thou, aggressive types as it is.
I am 100% confident Trump will watch the Kim sex tape this evening and Kanye will scream at the kardashians that trump told him he wasn't fecking crazy and he could win the 2024 election. I'm also sure Steve Bannon will have a few words about that handshake and shoulder tap.Sup dawg...
I disagree, promote him immediately to stimulate discussion.
Could do with some more alternative points of view in here.
However he needs to show more eloquence ironically and use more expressive and visceral language to illustrate his points.
That is fine by me as long as the Democrates obstruct him as much as republicans obstructed Obama.Agreed. There is nothing I would like more than to find a way for him not to take the Presidency. But the integrity of the system has to be maintained. It's democracy. fecked up democracy, but democracy nonetheless.
I was being sarca..... Never mind.
More poor people voted for Clinton than Von Clownstick.
Yeah, 'I'm so poor and desperate I'm gonna vote Trump' doesn't really wash as the only motivation.
Ever post you make in this thread is dripping with condescension.
You entitled prick.
And people like you wonder why he won.
Obama said:I’m careful not to attribute any particular resistance or slight or opposition to race. But what I do believe is that if somebody didn’t have a problem with their daddy being employed by the federal government, and didn’t have a problem with the Tennessee Valley Authority electrifying certain communities, and didn’t have a problem with the interstate highway system being built, and didn’t have a problem with the GI Bill, and didn’t have a problem with the [Federal Housing Administration] subsidizing the suburbanization of America, and that all helped you build wealth and create a middle class — and then suddenly as soon as African Americans or Latinos are interested in availing themselves of those same mechanisms as ladders into the middle class, you now have a violent opposition to them — then I think you at least have to ask yourself the question of how consistent you are, and what’s different, and what’s changed.
Yeah, it was the overall swing among those groups that was the big thing, rather than the headline figures.Clinton certainly won a huge majority among minorities and that gave her a majority among the poor overall...Poor whites I don't know about, and I'm sure Trump won a lot moe of them than Romney and mcCain.
The others who voted for him are the Republican base (the real basket of deplorables :P )
Yeah I think it was vague campaign slogans that really hurt this Election. MAGA!
what you say involes taking responsibility.
Do you think the DNC and Hillary especially have ever done that?