First of all, you're making a general assumption without any proof. That right there should have disqualified your statement.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
First of all, you're making a general assumption without any proof. That right there should have disqualified your statement.
Maybe his staff diverted his attention by saying they were protesting someone or something else.
All he said was that he hadn't seen the protests. He didn't say there weren't any protests. They were expecting 250,000 people. It doesn't seem like they've gotten near that many.
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019...p-state-visit-police-officers-protest-rallies
I read an article that the people weren't going to be able to protest outside of Buckingham Palace and were pissed off about it. They were going to be relegated to some park down the road. I'm currently looking for the article again, but this could explain why he hadn't seen any protests.
They are protesting in freaking Trafalgar Square and Trump said if they found them it's "fake news."
You're a sheep.
The AP article would coincide with my thoughts as well. There are protests, but they aren't close to what was expected. That's a far cry from what was originally claimed in the first post about this. I appreciate the links @dadika13 and @tarheel0910.
It should have, but, it didn't. Dude... that's all you're doing. You're assuming that every leader is some evil despot who was placed in power by some secret cabal that wants the world enslaved in some paranoid Orwellian scenario. If a political figure is not some pure-blood-only dickhead like Farage, then you must be a globalist, NPC, SJW who your mini- Robin Leach can try and mock.
Read the AP article that Tarheel0910 posted, and read the article I posted. They were expecting 250,000 and it doesn't sound like they are even close. That would coincided with Trump's remarks that there are protests, but they aren't anywhere near what the media had reported would show up.
Last edited:
Who said anything about an evil cabal? This is corporatism at its finest. CEOs want to drive down costs in order to increase profits and therefore stocks. What's the easiest cost to control? Why labor of course!
Soooo... these protests didn't really happen because they didn't achieve a 250,000 turnout as the media was expecting.
Trump's quote in the AP article was that he had seen protests but that the media was reporting that more were supposed to show up, which was the part about the fake news. Read the AP article that tarheel0910 posted.
And, you think Donald Trump is going to thwart THAT from happening??? That's the same business model that he has pursued his entire life. Except he often stiffs the labor entirely and never pays, or hopes to win in court through attrition.
Okay, you're starting to fall into the fallacy that was leveled at Ron Paul because he brought in more tax money than his constituents paid out. People tried to use that against him like he was some closeted big government goon when he was just doing his job.
Trump wants to succeed. In order to succeed you have to play the game by the rules. You may not like the rules, you may not think they're fair, but they're still the rules.
I call balls and strikes. The way you contort yourself in order to try and clear his name is amazing.
This is going to sound rude, but it isn't really hard to defend against baseless accusations and fits of rage.
The protests are in plain sight from the press bldg where he gave the interview. Lol.
Yep. Foreign leaders hate him because he’s an anti-globalist... It’s got nothing do with him doing shit like calling the one American royal “nasty.”
He’s a moron, and an embarrassment. The main reasons people hate him have nothing to do with politics. He’s an solipsistic, whiny little bitch that is so immature that it’s almost incomprehensible. And his supporters fall right into line, no matter how stupid he acts.
He’s a moron, and an embarrassment. The main reasons people hate him have nothing to do with politics. He’s an solipsistic, whiny little bitch that is so immature that it’s almost incomprehensible. And his supporters fall right into line, no matter how stupid he acts.
I'm sorry. Should I go all CNN and start talking about Trump's penis?
Judging from the last page, you could tell everyone what it tastes like.
Okay... now, you really taped-together a hodge-podge of of what ammounts to more assumptions. "You could say the UN is globalist." Well, are they or not?The EU is globalist. Giving up national sovereignty in order to join some larger governing body. You could say that the UN is globalist, or the changes in the US post Civil War were globalist. It's the concentration of power. It also is often referred to as a supply chain tactic in order to deal with the inflation of the 70's. Due to massive overspending, the economic community has put more of an effort on keeping costs down as opposed to employment and wages. It's what has led to bills like GATT, NAFTA, and the TPP. It's also what has driven mass immigration and open borders. It's also a big reason why we have a massive pay gap in the US. See graph below:
These institutions may have an outcome, or objective that you don't want. But, the individuals elected to represent people within them are still individuals. I don't know what exactly they like or dislike. I don't have time to keep up with US politicians, let alone international politicians.
What's funny to me is how people like you have exalted Donald Trump as being some sort of leader that embodies the average person, working-class, etc.. He doesn't embody them at all. He never has. He never wanted to and never will. He's a hack. He's a caricature. He's spent his life selling a brand, a veneer, an exterior of something, in hopes that people would buy it. There's not a damned thing about him that is inspiring or advantageous to average, working-class Americans... except to make fun of him and troll/laugh at others doing the same. The people who have embraced him as some nationalist figure are grasping for ANYONE to do that, apparently. And, fortunately for him, and them, it was perfect timing. All of the behaviors, attitudes and rhetoric lined-up all at the right time... AND, Trump needed some publicity and backed-into this whole center-ring-circus show he's now stuck in and forced to pretend he has some kind of clue as to WTF he's doing.
Only snowflakes care about unimportant stuff like that. Most of us care about policies. His Twitter account doesn't affect my life, his policies do.
That's actually not what he said. He said he was sure "Fake News" would be looking for them. Not that if they found them it would be Fake News.
You realize that I got a lot of that from a professor of political economics at Brown University, right? It isn't like I just came up with that out of thin air. Keep fighting for the elites, buddy, and then keep complaining about them.
As for whether or not the UN is a globalist organization, I figured my view would have been pretty clear. The use of "you could say" was put there so that I didn't put words in anyone's mouth, because whether you are right or wrong, you're still entitled to your opinion.
The rest of your post is just a TDS rant, and...
Exactly. So much of his comments have been taken out of context. Imagine that.
Ahh, this is why I come here. A doctoral candidate reduced to dick sucking jokes.
So, why do they hate Farage, Salvini, and Orban? Is it because of their Twitter presence? Your argument makes no sense, dude.
Oh, okay. A political economics professor at Brown? Great. Shi-hit, that's all you had to say, knee-grow!You realize that I got a lot of that from a professor of political economics at Brown University, right? It isn't like I just came up with that out of thin air. Keep fighting for the elites, buddy, and then keep complaining about them.
As for whether or not the UN is a globalist organization, I figured my view would have been pretty clear. The use of "you could say" was put there so that I didn't put words in anyone's mouth, because whether you are right or wrong, you're still entitled to your opinion.
The rest of your post is just a TDS rant, and...
No one is letting you speak for them, I assure you. No need to be careful.
Yes, it does appear that he was misquoted there. And, he was misquoted about the "nasty" comment regarding Meghan Markle, I think it was. Someone said they were going to leave the country if he was elected and he used the "nasty" comment to refer to them. For him, someone who doesn't support him is "nasty"... like a catch-all reference. He cannot understand how anyone could possibly be opposed to the deal he's offering America. And, especially if it's a woman who shows disdain. The nasty term is used quite often when it's a woman who has expressed some dislike for him.
He wasn’t misquoted. Markle said she would move to Canada if he was elected. He said “I didn’t know she was nasty.”
Right... but, he didn't mean she was "dirty"/nasty, as in unclean. He just meant that she showed contempt towards him and his presence/candidacy, whatever.
My point is that this theory just didn't sprout up from nowhere, and therefore has no relevance, which is what you're trying to claim. Only the most ardent TDSers haven't come to the realization that this populist movement, not contained to just the US, is a direct result of decades of globalist policies. Whether or not people agree with the populist policies, most people now understand why it happened. There's only a few of you left out there.
Does anyone have the actual quote and its context?
Edit: Updated with audio of the conversation. It doesn't sound like a big deal to me, but I'm sure this will set some people off.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...t-donald-trumps-nasty-comment-about-meghan-m/
Look, dude... if you expect me to take anything you offer seriously when you slap your "TDS" label on a coherent summation I offer, then you can GFY. 10-4?
I think I've posted about Mark Blyth before on this board, but he gives a pretty good explanation of what is going on.
