Trump for President. Who's hopping on the bandwagon? Who's digging a bunker?
- Thread starter PuntMeister
- Start date
True, given the fact that the election has never changed from being set on an inconvenient date and the backing need to fund all the campaigns, its all a glorified show....but still u got to vote to bish about the election.
Also, Immigration Canada website is completely KO'd....looks like we gonna get a wave of americans coming over in the next few weeks.
Also, Immigration Canada website is completely KO'd....looks like we gonna get a wave of americans coming over in the next few weeks.
You begin to wonder what legitimacy polling has...Liberals win the BC election despite polling results showing otherwise. Likewise with Brexit....now completely off base on Trump. A few days ago all the media talking heads on CNN were virtually laughing at the thought of any possibility of a Trump victory and were pointing out how narrow his path to victory was. How completely out of touch can you get or.... was it a deliberate attempt to mislead the voting public?
Political correctness is now official dead. 'Bout time I say. Let us pray that its successor is good. The banter is over. The decision made. Live well my friends.
-Punt.
-Punt.
Personally I refuse to participate in polls, phone surveys, etc. It's got me thinking that those who want to rebel are less likely to cooperate with pollsters, so their data is always going to underestimate their numbers.
A bigger question is how much influence does the media have in the message it portrays to the people. I heard that only one media outlet even suggested that Trump had a remote chance. How can every single one of them be so wrong unless they either a) have no connection to the people, or b) they have an agenda
Four years of rampant corruption and cronyism is incoming.I mean corporations still run America so nothing will really change
Unless the midterms returns a democratic senate or house to keep a check on Trump. Otherwise America is going to become his personal toy to do with as he pleases.
The polls show what people are thinking and who they support (as long as you have enough data it is fairly accurate).
It doesn't mean that everyone will come out to vote however, and if one side is more motivated than the other to do that, then they will win even though the other side actually has more support.
In yesterdays election more people supported Clinton, but proportionally fewer of them went to vote. Trump's supporters on the other hand were highly motivated. As a result of that he won. As they say, you can't win a race if you don't show up for it.
It's really hard to poll these days compared to how it used to be.
That being said, I think often the media & political establishment just fails to ask the right questions, or understand how "the street" reacts to what it sees.
Both Brexit and the HST referendum for example, there was a lot of this "Project Fear" type of stuff - smug dismissal of opposition, then intellectual rationalization, then bargaining, then hysterical fear, and then finally threats. None of it worked - the more The Street saw fear in the ranks of the Establisment, that more that's what the public wanted. They were voting to spite the people who pissed them off or betrayed their trust. All the lecturing by well-connected insiders won't stop it, and unleashing a parade of fashionable celebs only convinces The Street that the Establishment has no interest in taking their concerns seriously. Hence, the Establishment flailing away at Brexit or HST or Charlottetown, then losing, and then a lot of sour grapes in the media afterwards.
That's one sort of failure, and here's another kind: With Christy Clark vs. Adrian Dix, that was a case where a "coronation" was expected, and the public hates those. Adrian Dix was known as what, prior to it - as Glen Clark's right hand man, so the first chink in the armour was that he was seen by The Street as a slick political operator with questionable past ethics. The second chink in the armour was when he tired to run a positive / sunny campaign, Jack Layton style. Well the situation was just not the same because: A) nobody expected one, since this is BC and BC politics are always a knife fight; B) To defeat the BC Liberals, really all they needed to do was bring up all that scandal and so on - run on the BC Liberals' crooked record and remind the people why the Liberals (Campbell, Christy Clark) had pissed everyone off. Dix and his gang of advisors had I guess thought they could just coast to victory, looking past Christy to the inclusive blah blah blah government they would be. Not to mention that they assumed the NDP had enough environmental credibility to draw support from what would otherwise be Green voters - they don't, but you'll never convince an NDPer of that. So basically the NDP ran a less-than-popular candidate, then put away their best weapons and ran a campaign of gimmicks. It was weak stuff and they got their ass handed to them.
As this relates to Clinton's team, well, they made a lot of the same mistakes - they misunderstood the public's volatile mood; they coasted rather arrogantly through not just the main elections but the primaries before that; they took a lecturing tone and responded to difficulties with scripted hysteria. T
Seriously - they made a terrible mistake in making the campaign about personality rather than policies and governing ideals. On that front, Clinton could have wiped the floor with Trump; instead it got reduced to "Trump's a jerk, and it's somehow Russia's fault when we embarrass ourselves."
Yes, the Dems could have won, they perhaps should have won - but they approached the contest all wrong and lost.
I don't like Trump or believe in most of his policies, and it seems a serious chunk of his own supporters don't either. But he's a torpedo into the side of the US elite, and that's honestly all the voters want. He speaks the language of the street, and promises to slay all the sacred cows of the Establishment. Godzilla comes to DC. Does he actually mean it? I doubt it. Seems like a putz, and a guy with an ego that big will only serve himself.
The Democrats should ask themselves how they managed to alienate the US working class so badly that a billionaire egomaniac scooped up all their blue collar voters. I do not think it is a matter of policy - if you look, there is support for public health care, higher wages, more taxes on the wealthy, dealing with climate change. So policy is not the problem, it's political culture - they do not know how to relate to ordinary working class people anymore. I think their party brass did a lot to alienate their own grassroots by actively taking sides against Sanders, freaking out about Wikileaks, etc.
Bernie Sanders would have been able to defeat Trump - bet your ass on it - because he is a balls-out street fighter who attacks the elite, instead of relying on them.
Well, if you supported the Clintons then clearly you won't be bothered by rampant corruption and cronyism. You couldn't even bring yourself to admit what clearly the US electorate is getting sick and tired of seeing.
Oh wait...maybe I should get my tin foil hat on again and pretend that it hasn't been happening like the rest of y'all.
If Donald Trump used the word "chink" like you did in this passage, the US media would have raked him over the coals. And the US electorate has started to see right through the media bias and are getting sick and tired of being force fed their agenda. Donald Trump was made out to be far worse than he really is by the media. Seriously, what is worse for human rights - taking hundreds of millions from the governments of nations with abysmal human rights, or a guy who had a taped conversation of his locker room talk from 20 years ago released to the public? Every guy out here has talked like that at some point in their lives (and I know many women who talk like that about men with their female friends too) - so to jump all over him as if he raped these women was bullshit.
I say the woman who's taking backdoor payments from Saudi Arabia and the UAE (you know - places that stone women and gays to death) is far more of an indictment of her human rights position than the guy who talks like most guys do in private.
And there's one other element that no one has even touched on in their analysis of these two. Donald Trump is far more a leader of people whereas Hillary has shown to have absolutely no leadership qualities about her. There was nothing about her that struck me that she was the type of person who could lead anything, never mind a country of 300,000,000 people.
lol...only you could spin it that way. hahaha!! Whatever bro - if it will help you get through this then feel free to keep thinking that.
