| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45252 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:11 xDaunt wrote: .... and you people on the left wonder why we on the right ceaselessly complain about media bias. That scripted, repeated rhetoric happens on both sides. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5860 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I try to look on the bright side. I'm rewarding the GOP for electing a socially liberal candidate, dropping the anti-gay bullshit, and toning down the christian rhetoric from the frontrunner, while punishing the DNC for rigging the election and media. In 2020 if Trump is doing a bad job, we can see a healthy DNC primary competition for a viable competitor - from the speakers at the DNC there should be no shortage of these. If Trump does a mediocre or great job, then all the better. No matter how Trump does, the Democrats will have to start coming up with candidates again because these two won't be fit to run again. They're a whole cycle late doing that. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45252 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:20 oBlade wrote: No matter how Trump does, the Democrats will have to start coming up with candidates again because these two won't be fit to run again. They're a whole cycle late doing that. Warren/ Booker '20. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12386 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:00 NukeD wrote: What does it have you endorse? Do people still consider him racist? Thats so shortsighted. Off the top of my head, even less corporate taxes, killing the families of terrorists, banning muslims, possibly leaving WTO, worsening the situation on climate change since he (pretends to) believes it's a chinese conspiracy... It is a problem that the basic defense of Trump's policies is generally "he has said so little coherent stuff that you don't really know what he's going to do." But hey sure, we're really worried about "racism", we're very shallow like that. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:19 IgnE wrote: It's kind of silly, isn't it, to complain that private corporations aren't public institutions? the market will of course correct this problem in due time! After all if the news are bad the people will stop buying it, right? | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10842 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:11 xDaunt wrote: .... and you people on the left wonder why we on the right ceaselessly complain about media bias. The entire Republican Convention was just endless fearmongering. "Dark" is a pretty accurate description for the picture it painted of the US. Trumps speech seemed to talk about Mad Max style gangs (of immigrants/mexicans) roaming america... That all went with "dark" and not even worse adjectives is kinda astonishing. edit: One day i will Smash this computer for constantly autoswitching between english and german wordcorrections... | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:37 Velr wrote: Well, the entire Republican Convention was just endless fearmongering. "Dark" is a pretty accurate description for the picture it painted of the US. Trumps speech seemed to be include Mad Max style gangs (of immigrants/mexicans) roaming america... But well, that all went with "dark" and not even worse adjectives is kinda astonishing. If you're wondering why they didn't use other adjectives Clinton Uses “Dark” Magic Posted July 24th, 2016 @ 7:16pm in #Trump #Clinton #Inluence If you are following the media coverage after the GOP convention, you know that Democrats and their surrogates are describing Trump’s speech as “dark.” The first ten times I heard the word, I thought it might be a situation in which someone clever used the term once and others copied it. That is not the case. “Dark” is a linguistic kill shot from the left. I assume all the TV pundits on Clinton’s team got the message to use the word “dark” right out of the gate. I confess that at first I didn’t recognize how good it is. It’s designed, Trump-style, and it didn’t come from an amateur. The Clinton team is playing some serious 3D chess now. Do you remember all of those policy details Clinton talked about this week? Me neither. She’s done with that uselessness now. She went full-Voldemort on Trump this week and unleashed a “dark” spell. It’s a good one. Let me tell you why “dark” is so good. 1. It’s unique. That’s a Trump trick. You haven’t heard “dark” used before in a political context. That makes it memorable and sticky. And it brings no baggage with it to this domain because no other politician has been so labelled. 2. Dark makes you think of black, and black makes you think of racism (in the political season anyway), and that makes you reflexively pair Trump with racism even though it makes no sense. 3. Dark can describe anything scary. It invites the listener to fill in the nightmare with whatever scares them the most about Trump. That’s a hypnosis trick. Leave out the details and let people fill in the story that persuades them the most. 4. Repetition. Dark is the kind of word that pundits can work into almost any answer when talking about Trump. That means you’ll hear it a lot. I don’t think this one word will change the election by much. But it’s a sign that Clinton has at least one world-class persuader/advisor on the team. I have a feeling I know who. This linguistic kill shot has a partial fingerprint. If I’m right, Godzilla just got into the game. Source | ||
|
oBlade
United States5860 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OmJt4BD.png) Direct democracy is here at your fingertips with the smartphone, vote now! | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On July 27 2016 12:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Seth Meyers is spot-on with this, imo. I'm also curious as to GH's opinion of this: Is it that impossible to understand the bernie or bust people ? I mean, a big part of the extreme left believe the mainstream politics to be neoliberal (which is true), they believe the DNC basically cheated (if it is only partially true) and they believe that now, today, with Bernie Sanders, they might be in a situation to create a party or a movement that reflect their ideas. There might be an error in judgement somewhere, but all in all their position is quite reasonable. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23617 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:41 CorsairHero wrote: If you're wondering why they didn't use other adjectives Source Yeah the whole "Dark" thing wreaks of Luntz. And the overlap in media outlets are the ones we know as the usual suspects. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45252 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:50 WhiteDog wrote: Is it that impossible to understand the bernie or bust people ? I mean, a big part of the extreme left believe the mainstream politics to be neoliberal, they believe the DNC basically cheated (even if it is only partially true) and they believe that now, today, with Bernie Sanders, they might be in a situation to create a party or a movement that reflect their ideas. There might be an error in judgement somewhere, but all in all their position is quite reasonable. My primary issue is if they decide to not vote at all, vote third-party, or vote for Trump, because that completely undermines all the work that Bernie has been fighting for and his endorsement of Hillary to get a decent amount of progressive reforms done. None of those voting choices help Hillary or Bernie win, helping the Republicans win guarantees the unraveling of the ideal policies that Bernie supporters want, and there's nothing wrong with voting for the Democratic party today and then shaking things up again 4 years from now. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
I don't buy it as a correct reason in this specific election, but it's a valid viewpoint. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45252 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: My primary issue is if they decide to not vote at all, vote third-party, or vote for Trump, because that completely undermines all the work that Bernie has been fighting for and his endorsement of Hillary to get a decent amount of progressive reforms done. None of those voting choices help Hillary or Bernie win, helping the Republicans win guarantees the unraveling of the ideal policies that Bernie supporters want, and there's nothing wrong with voting for the Democratic party today and then shaking things up again 4 years from now. Yes but creating a party or a movement is an extremly hard thing to do nowadays. A long time ago, you could do it with just five people and then roll, nowadays you need a ton of momentum to attract the news and get people to know you. This is what the rule of the game did to our politics : defending non mainstream ideas in this kind of politics without any kind of popular support is useless, as the media never calls you, which leads you into talking to a small cult of followers and that's it. It is not unfounded to believe that, if creating a movement reflecting extreme left ideas is the goal, now was a good time to try. And by the way, america needs it : those young hardcore stupid kids in the BLM and in modern feminism would gain a lot from having an institution in which they can be part of. | ||
|
Shingi11
290 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6336 Posts
| ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:33 Nebuchad wrote: Off the top of my head, even less corporate taxes, killing the families of terrorists, banning muslims, possibly leaving WTO, worsening the situation on climate change since he (pretends to) believes it's a chinese conspiracy... It is a problem that the basic defense of Trump's policies is generally "he has said so little coherent stuff that you don't really know what he's going to do." But hey sure, we're really worried about "racism", we're very shallow like that. Oh okay, haven't really been following the scene latelly. I just assumed its the old narative of him being racist. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23617 Posts
| ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10137 Posts
On July 27 2016 15:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: My primary issue is if they decide to not vote at all, vote third-party, or vote for Trump, because that completely undermines all the work that Bernie has been fighting for and his endorsement of Hillary to get a decent amount of progressive reforms done. None of those voting choices help Hillary or Bernie win, helping the Republicans win guarantees the unraveling of the ideal policies that Bernie supporters want, and there's nothing wrong with voting for the Democratic party today and then shaking things up again 4 years from now. That's democrat's fault if they expect their vote on a blank check just because Trump is the opponent. If you want to shake up things you need to have something to bargain with, otherwise the whole danger adverse / status quo will block you anyways. Now is the time, in a few years you will lose the momentum to do anything. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6336 Posts
On July 27 2016 17:25 GreenHorizons wrote: Good lord the propaganda team is strong, and you guys are worried about an idiotic Trump administration. https://twitter.com/NomikiKonst/status/758137430180524032 Mainstream media talking about how peaceful and quiet day 2 is compared to day 1, no mention of everyone leaving. The more they try to spin this and bury it the angrier people will become. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
|
|
|
EPT
