Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)
-   -   What Did President Trump Do Now? (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/87986-what-did-president-trump-do-now.html)

Tristan_Geoff 01-06-2017 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1792172)
wanted to embed a tweet here

Just screencap it you lazy ****

Chula Vista 01-06-2017 09:54 PM

http://i.imgur.com/3CpVvk9.gif

https://66.media.tumblr.com/eb5e904a...sjh1ps_500.gif

Neapolitan 01-06-2017 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riseagainstrocks (Post 1792088)
Yay, political threads!

As a left-leaning centrist, Trump's election was shocking and disappointing. Personality flaws aside, I was bothered by his campaign's unwillingness to discuss issues or policy, outside of purposefully inflammatory anti-immigrant rhetoric and heavily distorted allegations against Hilary Clinton. There was a lot of "I will do" not "I will lead us to" or "I will work with" - I think he fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the job. Trumo voters effectively elected Mike Pence as president. I hope they knew that going in to the voting booth.

Trying to maintain a positive attitude on this whole thing, I think Trump's election will force discussion on many issues that have been deemed political third rails. Social Security and the retirement age, our relationships with other countries (Russia has been a political enemy, but not engaging out of "tradition" is just as stupid as not engaging with Cuba for 70 years), and First Amendment issues surrounding Speech, the Press, and Public Religion. Trump causes friction on all these issues. It forces all sides to sharpen arguments and work to convince the public. For instance, I'd like to see UK-style libel laws implemented here. Intentional falsehoods, disguised as fact are poison to a republic. How this would look or work or if it's even desirable, I don't know. But the 'fake news' issues that dogged this election will force some kind of reaction and, in the aggregate, I think that's a good thing.

We're not as stupid as our comedians and the world at large things we are. Just over 50% of eligible voters participated in the 2016 race. Apathy is not the same as stupidity. Trump's outrages will inspire greater political participation. As others have said in this thread, he's not a dictator, he's not a king, the Constitution has not been supplanted. This will likely be a test of our system, but the what became the Imperial Presidency began under a Progressive (FDR) and was expanded by Obama (somewhat due to congressional intransigence, but that's another story), so liberals have little moral high ground to protest against executive orders.

I do have to say to whoever put the 'milo <3' tag in this thread, you should really re-evaluate this sentiment. He hides behind the mantle of 'free speech' when he rants about feminism and Islam, but he's inciting hatred through misinformation, hyperbole, and what can only be called 'memeism'. The dumb-ing down of culture starts when guys like him.

People being weary of drug gang members or islamic terrorists entering the country is not "anti-immigrant" nor "anti-islamic." But that is how they are portrayed by the left-wing media as "anti-immigrant" and "anti-islamic."

What Trump said on the campaign trail is nothing that hasn't been brought up before within Conservative talk shows dynamic about real issues, real events. There is a whole backstory to them. Trump blurts fragments of those issues and gets picked up by the media twisted. And maybe he can be faulted for not articulating his position more clearly. But I am certain the media will demonize him on soundbites anyway.

Quote:

but he's inciting hatred through misinformation, hyperbole,
That goes both ways. If Trump said "beware of wolves in sheep's clothing" he would be accused of being "anti-sheep" by CNN.

Whoever tagged "milo <3" kudos to you for having a mind of your own, and for not being stuck in the far-left's "echo chamber."

Anteater 01-06-2017 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan (Post 1792188)
People being weary of drug gang members or islamic terrorists entering the country is not "anti-immigrant" nor "anti-islamic." But that is how they are portrayed by the left-wing media as "anti-immigrant" and "anti-islamic."

What Trump said on the campaign trail is nothing that hasn't been brought up before within Conservative talk shows dynamic about real issues, real events. There is a whole backstory to them. Trump blurts fragments of those issues and gets picked up by the media twisted. And maybe he can be faulted for not articulating his position more clearly. But I am certain the media will demonize him on soundbites anyway.


That goes both ways. If Trump said "beware of wolves in sheep's clothing" he would be accused of being "anti-sheep" by CNN.

Whoever tagged "milo <3" kudos to you for having a mind of your own, and for not being stuck in the far-left's "echo chamber."

Absolutely correct. The left don't seem to understand that despite the problems on the right, THEY are the ones who played into Trump's hands, fueled perceptions that got him elected, plus they won't take responsibility for the last eight years' underlying issues (the failure of the ACA, the fact most of the jobs Obama created are low end service jobs, the Obama administration's various foreign policy failures, etc.)

I'd like to hope that at some point the real liberals in the the U.S. will stand up and constructively try to better the country instead of writing stupid half-assed hit pieces in the Huffington Post that only contribute to the noise and uncertainty of the coming four years. We used to have media in the U.S. that provided balanced viewpoints and that analyzed events from multiple angles: now everything both online and offline is so blatantly biased / polarized and ratings hungry that you can't take any of it at face value.

elphenor 01-06-2017 11:51 PM

Oh I see you guys missed the "Well somebody's doing the raping" comment or the actual position of wanting to ban ALL Muslims from entering the country

It's like you guys think you don't become an official racist until your first lynching

djchameleon 01-07-2017 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater (Post 1792189)
We used to have media in the U.S. that provided balanced viewpoints and that analyzed events from multiple angles: now everything both online and offline is so blatantly biased / polarized and ratings hungry that you can't take any of it at face value.

When was this exactly? In the 50s? Please, I'm so tired of hearing about how the big bad media is twisting things. People are acting like this is a new thing and even when facts are presented in a balanced manner, if it says something negative that they don't agree with. The whines continue about the media.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lq...otu4o1_400.jpg

Frownland 01-07-2017 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djchameleon (Post 1792198)
When was this exactly? In the 50s? Please, I'm so tired of hearing about how the big bad media is twisting things. People are acting like this is a new thing and even when facts are presented in a balanced manner, if it says something negative that they don't agree with. The whines continue about the media.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lq...otu4o1_400.jpg

You have to be incredibly naive to believe that journalism hasn't gone downhill when it began focusing on (1) entertainment and (2) internet grade timeliness (publishing doesn't have to wait until the morning anymore) as opposed to actual reporting. That's also not to mention that objective, sensible reporting does not garner as high of a click rate than National Enquirer rate ridiculous headlines.

Bias in the media has always been present, obviously. Actually, early American journalism was even more biased then today. However, it has become infinitely more prevalent and easier to spot (due to resources and such). It is true that people shout bias where there is one, but come on dude.

Goofle 01-07-2017 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 1792151)
Almost certainly not

I already explained this to you though

I'm sorry that it really gets under your skin that your guy was rejected by Americans as a whole

I remember we discussed states like California etc., where voters would actually make the effort to go to the polls because of the different criteria. Also Trump would have ran a different campaign. He's just a winner, with a far more appealing personality than Hillary Clinton. Maybe I'd be wrong, maybe he would have lost. But since he relatively comfortably won the electoral college, it makes hardly no sense to think he wouldn't win a popular vote.

djchameleon 01-07-2017 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1792200)

Bias in the media has always been present, obviously. Actually, early American journalism was even more biased then today. However, it has become infinitely more prevalent and easier to spot (due to resources and such). It is true that people shout bias where there is one, but come on dude.

This is pretty much my point though. The media has always been there but people that lean on Trump's side of the spectrum ended up taking up that mantle/talking point and running with it when he started screaming about how the media was portraying him. Everything that the media reported helped him out based off of the bad news is even good news as long as his name is constantly out there. He was feeding off of it.

grindy 01-07-2017 04:32 AM

It's funny how the people bitching the most about deceitful media are usually the ones getting their news from the most partisan sources.
Apparently only the media bias against their respective ideologies is the kind worth fighting.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:39 PM.


© 2003-2021 Advameg, Inc.