|
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. |
On September 22 2017 23:31 LegalLord wrote:
In her book, Hillary talked a bit about the way she went to small towns. She went in, generally to unfriendly crowds, barely did anything, and went away with a mindset of "they don't understand how good I am for them." That's a message that I suspect our European folk are particularly sympathetic towards but that won't, and shouldn't, get you elected.
Possibly. She thought a lukewarm presentation of an economic message, identity politics, and demonization of Trump would be enough. You have to convince the American people. You can't just ascend the throne.
|
|
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 23 2017 00:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2017 00:24 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:07 Yurie wrote:On September 23 2017 00:06 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On September 22 2017 23:58 LegalLord wrote:On September 22 2017 23:51 Velr wrote:On September 22 2017 23:31 LegalLord wrote:
In her book, Hillary talked a bit about the way she went to small towns. She went in, generally to unfriendly crowds, barely did anything, and went away with a mindset of "they don't understand how good I am for them." That's a message that I suspect our European folk are particularly sympathetic towards but that won't, and shouldn't, get you elected. Why would exactly would europeans be sympathetic towards this? The Europeans who frequent this thread, specifically. That's an answer to who, not why. And second the question. I would love to hear why. Dunno. The hard-on for big cities and catastrophic demographics among our specific crop of Europeans is a head-scratcher to me. I suspect 70%+ of y'all live in megacities and think everyone should (megacity worship by its inhabitants is a worldwide phenomenon). But I don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity#Largest_citiesThe US has much more of them than the EU does, at least large ones. So going to them for votes would seem more reasonable in the US than here. The same divide between rural and big city life happens everywhere. Different problems, more people in cities, easier to tackle their problems in many cases due to higher tax base connected to it and so on. I would assume a maximum of 2/10 of European posters on this site live in megacities. Personally I live in a city with below 100k population. That assumes a fairly representative sample of Europeans in our midst, which is very likely not the case. I suppose I use "megacity" too loosely if you want to define it as >10m. Throw in some European capitals and second/third largest cities. Why is it very likely not the case? Like, is Oslo a megacity in your view? Birmingham? Cologne?
Dunno, never been to those. It's less a question of how big it is than a mentality. LA, SF, NY, Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Paris, London, Berlin, all have that mentality. Mid-size cities such as Denver and Philadelphia are borderline. Cities like Phoenix and Houston are not despite being significantly larger than previously mentioned cities. And I mention it because a lot of folk here have the same mentality I see among those who are obsessed with staying in "the center of culture and innovation" and for example would never dream of moving to Texas or Siberia or some random ass European country. I am aware I'm playing fast and loose with definitions here.
It might be that everything tends to be much closer in Europe than in the US, it might be a more leftward bend, it might be the language barrier (I've noticed that most conservatives come from English-native countries on this board), and it might be any number of things that I have not considered. But it's quite clear that among the Europeans who post on this board, people tend not to understand what people hate so strongly about Hillary. And that manner is very akin to the precise lack of understanding I see from people from NY/LA/SF and the like.
|
On September 23 2017 00:50 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2017 00:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 23 2017 00:24 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:07 Yurie wrote:On September 23 2017 00:06 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On September 22 2017 23:58 LegalLord wrote:On September 22 2017 23:51 Velr wrote:On September 22 2017 23:31 LegalLord wrote:
In her book, Hillary talked a bit about the way she went to small towns. She went in, generally to unfriendly crowds, barely did anything, and went away with a mindset of "they don't understand how good I am for them." That's a message that I suspect our European folk are particularly sympathetic towards but that won't, and shouldn't, get you elected. Why would exactly would europeans be sympathetic towards this? The Europeans who frequent this thread, specifically. That's an answer to who, not why. And second the question. I would love to hear why. Dunno. The hard-on for big cities and catastrophic demographics among our specific crop of Europeans is a head-scratcher to me. I suspect 70%+ of y'all live in megacities and think everyone should (megacity worship by its inhabitants is a worldwide phenomenon). But I don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity#Largest_citiesThe US has much more of them than the EU does, at least large ones. So going to them for votes would seem more reasonable in the US than here. The same divide between rural and big city life happens everywhere. Different problems, more people in cities, easier to tackle their problems in many cases due to higher tax base connected to it and so on. I would assume a maximum of 2/10 of European posters on this site live in megacities. Personally I live in a city with below 100k population. That assumes a fairly representative sample of Europeans in our midst, which is very likely not the case. I suppose I use "megacity" too loosely if you want to define it as >10m. Throw in some European capitals and second/third largest cities. Why is it very likely not the case? Like, is Oslo a megacity in your view? Birmingham? Cologne? Dunno, never been to those. It's less a question of how big it is than a mentality. LA, SF, NY, Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Paris, London, Berlin, all have that mentality. Mid-size cities such as Denver and Philadelphia are borderline. Cities like Phoenix and Houston are not despite being significantly larger than previously mentioned cities. And I mention it because a lot of folk here have the same mentality I see among those who are obsessed with staying in "the center of culture and innovation" and for example would never dream of moving to Texas or Siberia or some random ass European country. I am aware I'm playing fast and loose with definitions here. It might be that everything tends to be much closer in Europe than in the US, it might be a more leftward bend, it might be the language barrier (I've noticed that most conservatives come from English-native countries on this board), and it might be any number of things that I have not considered. But it's quite clear that among the Europeans who post on this board, people tend not to understand what people hate so strongly about Hillary. And that manner is very akin to the precise lack of understanding I see from people from NY/LA/SF and the like.
It's less that i don't understand why people dislike Hillary, she isn't my favorite politician either. What i don't understand is how people can vote for Trump over basically anyone. I'd vote for a donkey over Trump.
|
On September 23 2017 00:19 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Danglars, fake news originally meant the eastern european literally completely fabricated news stories. It wasn't a description used towards biased media. Trump and his supporters were the ones who used it in a different context from this, and Trump's supporters are the ones who seemingly don't understand this.
I'm not saying you can't come up with an example of a leftist describing fox or breitbart as fake news, but these were a very, very small minority.
That's why I mentioned its start. I also think people who fail to see how the definition was expanded and changed are a small minority. The news media that missed the election, doubled down on the reasons why, and tripled down on its legitimacy insisted "We named it. Future attempts to change it will not succeed because we are the arbiters of the English language. We are its gatekeepers."
You want the misuse to be the minority, but now left and right uses it to describe mostly false and deliberately misleading news stories. And I'm at a loss for people that didn't see it backfire in the surrounding atmosphere of a polled-untrustworthy news media and a basic understanding of how often it's used in its current definition by both parties (obviously disagreeing with which outlets are publishing fake news). I linked the CNN panel because it had both, and maybe you should rewatch it. The anchor clearly thinks her panel believes fake news (actual videos) without knowing the source, and the panel obviously thinks her network has been publishing fake news about who was at the rally and the rest. Language changes, and your belief that x is a minority is currently laughable.
Yougov did a generic "when people use fake news, do they mean the story is false or they don't like what's in the story." Majorities/pluralities said it was because someone didn't like the story, vs it is factually wrong. How it's used today is clearly a value judgement, and most people think it's generally used in a partisan manner.
|
The biggest city in Switzerland barely hits 500k... And yes, the inhabitants see it as awesome but i don't know what this has to do with anything LL brought up.
Distance wise you might also see Switzerland as 3-4 population areas (megacities?) and the Alps for leisure...
Legallord just has no friggin clue about europe.
Btw: Agree with Simberto, I understand the dislike for Hillary but Trump? Really? W T F that opioid crysis must be huuuge in the US to vote him in over anything.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 23 2017 00:55 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2017 00:50 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 23 2017 00:24 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:07 Yurie wrote:On September 23 2017 00:06 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On September 22 2017 23:58 LegalLord wrote:On September 22 2017 23:51 Velr wrote:On September 22 2017 23:31 LegalLord wrote:
In her book, Hillary talked a bit about the way she went to small towns. She went in, generally to unfriendly crowds, barely did anything, and went away with a mindset of "they don't understand how good I am for them." That's a message that I suspect our European folk are particularly sympathetic towards but that won't, and shouldn't, get you elected. Why would exactly would europeans be sympathetic towards this? The Europeans who frequent this thread, specifically. That's an answer to who, not why. And second the question. I would love to hear why. Dunno. The hard-on for big cities and catastrophic demographics among our specific crop of Europeans is a head-scratcher to me. I suspect 70%+ of y'all live in megacities and think everyone should (megacity worship by its inhabitants is a worldwide phenomenon). But I don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity#Largest_citiesThe US has much more of them than the EU does, at least large ones. So going to them for votes would seem more reasonable in the US than here. The same divide between rural and big city life happens everywhere. Different problems, more people in cities, easier to tackle their problems in many cases due to higher tax base connected to it and so on. I would assume a maximum of 2/10 of European posters on this site live in megacities. Personally I live in a city with below 100k population. That assumes a fairly representative sample of Europeans in our midst, which is very likely not the case. I suppose I use "megacity" too loosely if you want to define it as >10m. Throw in some European capitals and second/third largest cities. Why is it very likely not the case? Like, is Oslo a megacity in your view? Birmingham? Cologne? Dunno, never been to those. It's less a question of how big it is than a mentality. LA, SF, NY, Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Paris, London, Berlin, all have that mentality. Mid-size cities such as Denver and Philadelphia are borderline. Cities like Phoenix and Houston are not despite being significantly larger than previously mentioned cities. And I mention it because a lot of folk here have the same mentality I see among those who are obsessed with staying in "the center of culture and innovation" and for example would never dream of moving to Texas or Siberia or some random ass European country. I am aware I'm playing fast and loose with definitions here. It might be that everything tends to be much closer in Europe than in the US, it might be a more leftward bend, it might be the language barrier (I've noticed that most conservatives come from English-native countries on this board), and it might be any number of things that I have not considered. But it's quite clear that among the Europeans who post on this board, people tend not to understand what people hate so strongly about Hillary. And that manner is very akin to the precise lack of understanding I see from people from NY/LA/SF and the like. It's less that i don't understand why people dislike Hillary, she isn't my favorite politician either. What i don't understand is how people can vote for Trump over basically anyone. I'd vote for a donkey over Trump.
I suppose I could understand that, even if I myself could easily understand why people would vote Trump. I guess an issue is that a lot of the things that make Trump completely and utterly taboo in Europe are not as taboo in the US - for good and bad reasons alike.
|
These things are? Please enlighten us some more about europeans, their feelings and ideally where they life.
|
On September 23 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
The biggest city in Switzerland barely hits 500k... And yes, the inhabitants see it as awesome but i don't know what this has to do with anything LL brought up.
Distance wise you might also see Switzerland as 3-4 population areas (megacities?) and the Alps for leisure...
Legallord just has no friggin clue about europe.
Btw: Agree with Simberto, I understand the dislike for Hillary but Trump? Really? W T F that opioid crysis must be huuuge in the US to vote him in over anything.
Opioids are currently the leading cause of death in under 45-year olds. It's huge.
EDIT: The middle part of your post hit the nail on the head.
|
On September 23 2017 01:22 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2017 00:55 Simberto wrote:On September 23 2017 00:50 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 23 2017 00:24 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:07 Yurie wrote:On September 23 2017 00:06 LegalLord wrote:On September 23 2017 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On September 22 2017 23:58 LegalLord wrote:On September 22 2017 23:51 Velr wrote:
[quote]
Why would exactly would europeans be sympathetic towards this? The Europeans who frequent this thread, specifically. That's an answer to who, not why. And second the question. I would love to hear why. Dunno. The hard-on for big cities and catastrophic demographics among our specific crop of Europeans is a head-scratcher to me. I suspect 70%+ of y'all live in megacities and think everyone should (megacity worship by its inhabitants is a worldwide phenomenon). But I don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity#Largest_citiesThe US has much more of them than the EU does, at least large ones. So going to them for votes would seem more reasonable in the US than here. The same divide between rural and big city life happens everywhere. Different problems, more people in cities, easier to tackle their problems in many cases due to higher tax base connected to it and so on. I would assume a maximum of 2/10 of European posters on this site live in megacities. Personally I live in a city with below 100k population. That assumes a fairly representative sample of Europeans in our midst, which is very likely not the case. I suppose I use "megacity" too loosely if you want to define it as >10m. Throw in some European capitals and second/third largest cities. Why is it very likely not the case? Like, is Oslo a megacity in your view? Birmingham? Cologne? Dunno, never been to those. It's less a question of how big it is than a mentality. LA, SF, NY, Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Paris, London, Berlin, all have that mentality. Mid-size cities such as Denver and Philadelphia are borderline. Cities like Phoenix and Houston are not despite being significantly larger than previously mentioned cities. And I mention it because a lot of folk here have the same mentality I see among those who are obsessed with staying in "the center of culture and innovation" and for example would never dream of moving to Texas or Siberia or some random ass European country. I am aware I'm playing fast and loose with definitions here. It might be that everything tends to be much closer in Europe than in the US, it might be a more leftward bend, it might be the language barrier (I've noticed that most conservatives come from English-native countries on this board), and it might be any number of things that I have not considered. But it's quite clear that among the Europeans who post on this board, people tend not to understand what people hate so strongly about Hillary. And that manner is very akin to the precise lack of understanding I see from people from NY/LA/SF and the like. It's less that i don't understand why people dislike Hillary, she isn't my favorite politician either. What i don't understand is how people can vote for Trump over basically anyone. I'd vote for a donkey over Trump. I suppose I could understand that, even if I myself could easily understand why people would vote Trump. I guess an issue is that a lot of the things that make Trump completely and utterly taboo in Europe are not as taboo in the US - for good and bad reasons alike.
Pretty self evident given the variety of reasons cited when given a 'Trump did X, which should've immediately caused every voter to immediately vote for the other one." It is easily confirmed in polls about his favorabilities--people that voted grudgingly voted because they didn't like him. That and turnout ... if it was huge taboo like apparently, from this thread, Europeans presume applies internationally, more should've shown up to actually oppose.
|
Imho its more that facebook/google/whatever and fucking twitter(! Wtf, you were the guys that didnt use sms) aren't really seen as places to get news from in europe. Aside from the left/right conspiracy guys because our newschannels/magazins aren't yet that advertisement driven so we still see the diffrence (atm, its changing fast)
|
to be fair, I don't think anyone actually reads Trumps tweets aside from 3 groups of people:
a) his cult
b) his anti-cult
c) reporters reporting on tweets
So you have people that really hate him and people who really love him that read his tweets as well as reporters who need to sell a story. The 95% of the "normal" population probably doesn't use it for news like you said or just isn't invested enough in politics to begin with. So I'd personally assume it's the same over there.
|
On September 23 2017 01:49 Velr wrote:
Imho its more that facebook/google/whatever and fucking twitter(! Wtf, you were the guys that didnt use sms) aren't really seen as places to get news from in europe. Aside from the left/right conspiracy guys because our newschannels/magazins aren't yet that advertisement driven so we still see the diffrence (atm, its changing fast)
I'm odd regarding politics, even by European measures. I tend to read the party programs ~2weeks before election or take one of the tests that measure you against their stated programs and then check the parties that were closest. I don't even know who the current party leader/speaker for them is in most cases.
I think that the actual program being more important is the biggest different. The leaders and their presentation of them matter for most people but it hasn't really devolved into slogans. Having multiple parties, even if they form blocks, allows for multiple strong personalities to show at once and then their messages start mattering more.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I used to read Trump's tweets for the laughs but he eventually got stale.
|
On September 23 2017 01:49 Velr wrote:
Imho its more that facebook/google/whatever and fucking twitter(! Wtf, you were the guys that didnt use sms) aren't really seen as places to get news from in europe. Aside from the left/right conspiracy guys because our newschannels/magazins aren't yet that advertisement driven so we still see the diffrence (atm, its changing fast)
Well you folks regulate your media like rational nations. Entire networks are not created to run 24/7 propaganda for one political party. We let political coverage be turned into pro-wrestling for profit.
|
On September 23 2017 02:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2017 01:49 Velr wrote:
Imho its more that facebook/google/whatever and fucking twitter(! Wtf, you were the guys that didnt use sms) aren't really seen as places to get news from in europe. Aside from the left/right conspiracy guys because our newschannels/magazins aren't yet that advertisement driven so we still see the diffrence (atm, its changing fast) Well you folks regulate your media like rational nations. Entire networks are not created to run 24/7 propaganda for one political party. We let political coverage be turned into pro-wrestling for profit.
I'm not sure it's a regulation thing. I mean, UK has a lot stricter defamation laws which probably has an effect, but I don't think that applies for most of the EU.
But I think it was mentioned at some point that the US watches a shitload more TV than any other country.
|
McCain says he'll vote no on the Graham-Cassidy shitbill 
|
On September 23 2017 02:58 farvacola wrote:McCain says he'll vote no on the Graham-Cassidy shitbill
That means it is dead, there is no way someone else does not jump ship
|
graham must be like "john y u betray me"
|
Rand Paul has been slamming it everywhere and he's obviously not going to reverse himself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
