Quantcast
Late shows on Trump's first solo press conference

Forums - Politics Discussion - Late shows on Trump's first solo press conference

naruball said:
Slimebeast said:

On purpose. And I explained why. The tone of the videos in the OP does not make good grounds for a serious discussion.

Well, if it was on purpose, it makes so much sense. Perfect way to argue.

Their tone has nothing to do with facts. I asked you 3 simple questions that you are unable to answer. Obviously, the problem here is your bias against them because when it comes to arguments against the actual points they raise, you got none. All you do is reject everything anyone says when they don't praise Trump and you defend Trump no matter the topic of the thread.

But thanks for this kind of response. I know not to bother any more. There is no debate or discussion.

Sorry, but I don't feel the need to prove anything to you.

I prefer to be asked nice and easy questions.



Around the Network
Slimebeast said:
Scoobes said:

How? What are any of his policies actually going to achieve?

1. Hopefully control on immigration in America, but more importantly he opens up for a new type of wide-scale attitude of scepticism all over the West towards immigration and multiculturalism.

2. His talk about fake news is brilliant. It doesn't matter if Trump doesn't always handle the truth in an optimal way as long as he is raising awareness among the masses that traditional media has a leftist agenda and always lie about facts and they smear their opponents.

3. He will change the international landscape, by questioning Nato and the EU. Hopefully it's a threat against the Soros-Hollande-Merkel hegemony, and against all the media who support that globalist ideology and system. Hopefully Trump will withdraw USA away from meaningless foreign conflicts, and that will change the leftist narrative that USA is causing all the conflicts in the third world, conflicts that are put on the shoulders of the Western man to solve, even on the shoulders of schoolchildren in my country Swedistan!

These are quite general rather than concrete policies but:

1. The US already has some of the strictest immigration controls in the Western world and there has been no evidence that further controls were neccessary. The wide-scale scepticism of immigration was already on the rise even in areas where it didn't warrant it (places with the lowest levels of immigration). 

2. His talk on fake news is hypocritical when he regularly cites fake news or makes up facts as long as it confirms his own biases. I also disagree that traditional media has a leftist agenda. All media has an agenda, but it's not neccessarily leftist. In the UK, the publications that have the widest circulation are pre-dominantly right-wing (ironically, one of them recently got banned from wikipedia for being inaccurate). Fox news has huge coverage in the US and is also pre-dominantly right-wing. I know in Sweden it's likely the opposite as it's generally a left-leaning country but by no means is traditional media pre-dominantly leftist. 

I would also argue that if he's that worried about media agenda that he should introduce education policies that would favour greater and analytical scrutiny of the media in schools, colleges and also training courses for adults. Instead he peddles his own lies instead of creating concrete policy proposals to change the situation. 

3. I don't see any evidence of Trump pulling away from conflicts and a lot of his rhetoric is helping fuel ISIS propaganda which will only extend the conflicts the US is already involved in. He's a businessman first and if there are resources that can be secured via conflict then I think he would jump straight in.  

His bullying tactics with Nato are also unlikely to work as many of the countries already had timetables to increase Nato spending. I also don't see him having much influence in the EU. Any further breakdown in the EU will only really happen because of the EU itself. 



Scoobes said:
Slimebeast said:

1. Hopefully control on immigration in America, but more importantly he opens up for a new type of wide-scale attitude of scepticism all over the West towards immigration and multiculturalism.

2. His talk about fake news is brilliant. It doesn't matter if Trump doesn't always handle the truth in an optimal way as long as he is raising awareness among the masses that traditional media has a leftist agenda and always lie about facts and they smear their opponents.

3. He will change the international landscape, by questioning Nato and the EU. Hopefully it's a threat against the Soros-Hollande-Merkel hegemony, and against all the media who support that globalist ideology and system. Hopefully Trump will withdraw USA away from meaningless foreign conflicts, and that will change the leftist narrative that USA is causing all the conflicts in the third world, conflicts that are put on the shoulders of the Western man to solve, even on the shoulders of schoolchildren in my country Swedistan!

These are quite general rather than concrete policies but:

1. The US already has some of the strictest immigration controls in the Western world and there has been no evidence that further controls were neccessary. The wide-scale scepticism of immigration was already on the rise even in areas where it didn't warrant it (places with the lowest levels of immigration). 

2. His talk on fake news is hypocritical when he regularly cites fake news or makes up facts as long as it confirms his own biases. I also disagree that traditional media has a leftist agenda. All media has an agenda, but it's not neccessarily leftist. In the UK, the publications that have the widest circulation are pre-dominantly right-wing (ironically, one of them recently got banned from wikipedia for being inaccurate). Fox news has huge coverage in the US and is also pre-dominantly right-wing. I know in Sweden it's likely the opposite as it's generally a left-leaning country but by no means is traditional media pre-dominantly leftist. 

I would also argue that if he's that worried about media agenda that he should introduce education policies that would favour greater and analytical scrutiny of the media in schools, colleges and also training courses for adults. Instead he peddles his own lies instead of creating concrete policy proposals to change the situation. 

3. I don't see any evidence of Trump pulling away from conflicts and a lot of his rhetoric is helping fuel ISIS propaganda which will only extend the conflicts the US is already involved in. He's a businessman first and if there are resources that can be secured via conflict then I think he would jump straight in.  

His bullying tactics with Nato are also unlikely to work as many of the countries already had timetables to increase Nato spending. I also don't see him having much influence in the EU. Any further breakdown in the EU will only really happen because of the EU itself. 

1. This can't be serious. Why is the left outraged by the building of a wall then? The outrage all over the world about Trump's racist policies.

The truth is that Trump has brought up immigration on a completely new level in the public debate, all over the West. Without even actually changing any concrete policy yet.

2. Give me a break. Fox news alone against CNN, NBC, New York Times, Washington post, Hollywood.

And it would be hard to reform the school system like you propose. Schools and universities are infiltrated by leftist propaganda since the 1960's, not just in America but all over the West. The education system is the main outlet for socialist brainwash.

3. We will see what happenes, but I'm hoping for a more dynamic landscape in world politics thanks to Trump. I'd rather at least have the chance, than a guaranteed status quo.



So being the least racist and anti-semitic person on earth, does that mean racism and anti semitism starts with the D?



Slimebeast said:
Scoobes said:

These are quite general rather than concrete policies but:

1. The US already has some of the strictest immigration controls in the Western world and there has been no evidence that further controls were neccessary. The wide-scale scepticism of immigration was already on the rise even in areas where it didn't warrant it (places with the lowest levels of immigration). 

2. His talk on fake news is hypocritical when he regularly cites fake news or makes up facts as long as it confirms his own biases. I also disagree that traditional media has a leftist agenda. All media has an agenda, but it's not neccessarily leftist. In the UK, the publications that have the widest circulation are pre-dominantly right-wing (ironically, one of them recently got banned from wikipedia for being inaccurate). Fox news has huge coverage in the US and is also pre-dominantly right-wing. I know in Sweden it's likely the opposite as it's generally a left-leaning country but by no means is traditional media pre-dominantly leftist. 

I would also argue that if he's that worried about media agenda that he should introduce education policies that would favour greater and analytical scrutiny of the media in schools, colleges and also training courses for adults. Instead he peddles his own lies instead of creating concrete policy proposals to change the situation. 

3. I don't see any evidence of Trump pulling away from conflicts and a lot of his rhetoric is helping fuel ISIS propaganda which will only extend the conflicts the US is already involved in. He's a businessman first and if there are resources that can be secured via conflict then I think he would jump straight in.  

His bullying tactics with Nato are also unlikely to work as many of the countries already had timetables to increase Nato spending. I also don't see him having much influence in the EU. Any further breakdown in the EU will only really happen because of the EU itself. 

1. This can't be serious. Why is the left outraged by the building of a wall then? The outrage all over the world about Trump's racist policies.

The truth is that Trump has brought up immigration on a completely new level in the public debate, all over the West. Without even actually changing any concrete policy yet.

2. Give me a break. Fox news alone against CNN, NBC, New York Times, Washington post, Hollywood.

And it would be hard to reform the school system like you propose. Schools and universities are infiltrated by leftist propaganda since the 1960's, not just in America but all over the West. The education system is the main outlet for socialist brainwash.

3. We will see what happenes, but I'm hoping for a more dynamic landscape in world politics thanks to Trump. I'd rather at least have the chance, than a guaranteed status quo.

1. Compare the US vetting procedures compared to other Western democracies. It's easy enough to check.

And you don't have to be on the left to be against the wall. There are plenty of things wrong with the wall regardless of political affiliation (e.g. expensive, unlikely to be effective as evidenced by the walls that are currently in place on the border, private landowners refusing to sell land for wall building, expensive geographical challenges, alienation of a neighbouring ally etc.).

The outrage over the blanket ban was because there was no evidence that current vetting procedures weren't working (unless you can provide any evidence). The vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 were from people that were US citizens or had been living in the US for a prolonged period of time (and the 9/11 terrorists were nearly all from Countries not on the list). There is no evidence they had come through US immigration. Secondly, the blanket ban was actually illegal, so of course people were angry about it. Finally, what was the blanket ban actually going to achieve? It kept out academics and prevented companies from getting in their own skilled employees. If it was purely about security then a number of countries in Europe (Britain, France, Belgium) should also have been listed as the terrorists that have attacked the West have been citizens of those countries.  

2. Fox has huge coverage though. Plus you're forgetting the New York Post. 

And for the education system it doesn't have to be political. Analytical thinking and the ability to critique isn't by its nature subject to political bias.

And what do you mean by leftist propaganda?

3. What do you mean by dynamic landscape in world politics? I just see the US becoming more isolationist and speeding up China's desire to become a superpower. 



Around the Network
Scoobes said:
Slimebeast said:

1. This can't be serious. Why is the left outraged by the building of a wall then? The outrage all over the world about Trump's racist policies.

The truth is that Trump has brought up immigration on a completely new level in the public debate, all over the West. Without even actually changing any concrete policy yet.

2. Give me a break. Fox news alone against CNN, NBC, New York Times, Washington post, Hollywood.

And it would be hard to reform the school system like you propose. Schools and universities are infiltrated by leftist propaganda since the 1960's, not just in America but all over the West. The education system is the main outlet for socialist brainwash.

3. We will see what happenes, but I'm hoping for a more dynamic landscape in world politics thanks to Trump. I'd rather at least have the chance, than a guaranteed status quo.

1. Compare the US vetting procedures compared to other Western democracies. It's easy enough to check.

And you don't have to be on the left to be against the wall. There are plenty of things wrong with the wall regardless of political affiliation (e.g. expensive, unlikely to be effective as evidenced by the walls that are currently in place on the border, private landowners refusing to sell land for wall building, expensive geographical challenges, alienation of a neighbouring ally etc.).

The outrage over the blanket ban was because there was no evidence that current vetting procedures weren't working (unless you can provide any evidence). The vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 were from people that were US citizens or had been living in the US for a prolonged period of time (and the 9/11 terrorists were nearly all from Countries not on the list). There is no evidence they had come through US immigration. Secondly, the blanket ban was actually illegal, so of course people were angry about it. Finally, what was the blanket ban actually going to achieve? It kept out academics and prevented companies from getting in their own skilled employees. If it was purely about security then a number of countries in Europe (Britain, France, Belgium) should also have been listed as the terrorists that have attacked the West have been citizens of those countries.  

2. Fox has huge coverage though. Plus you're forgetting the New York Post. 

And for the education system it doesn't have to be political. Analytical thinking and the ability to critique isn't by its nature subject to political bias.

And what do you mean by leftist propaganda?

3. What do you mean by dynamic landscape in world politics? I just see the US becoming more isolationist and speeding up China's desire to become a superpower. 

I'm not gonna comment anymore if you spin things.

1. Vetting procuders are beside this point. It's a non issue to my argument. It's as if you deny the whole massive flood of criticism against Trump based on him being against immigration and being isolationist. By people who are "antiracist", "tolerant", "multicultural" etc etc etc. It's the single biggest thing that leftists are upset about with Trump, his agenda against immigration.

2. "Fox has huge coverage though". Fox is just one channel. Media as a whole is dominated by the left.

Don't lecture me on how the education system should be. I am saying that right now, the education systems are spewing leftist propaganda to young people all over the world. Of course at the same time, they are able to convey some understanding of critical thinking in general in many topics. It's not a contradiction. They still brainwash people on political and social issues.

"Leftist propaganda". Sorry, but I'm too tired to give a definition now. I have argued about this at length on this forum for years and written pages of texts about it.

3. Yes, the rise of China, despite its evil, as a counter-balance against "Merkel" (Merkel as a symbol of the current world order) is a good example of the new world order I am hoping for.



Slimebeast said:
Scoobes said:

1. Compare the US vetting procedures compared to other Western democracies. It's easy enough to check.

And you don't have to be on the left to be against the wall. There are plenty of things wrong with the wall regardless of political affiliation (e.g. expensive, unlikely to be effective as evidenced by the walls that are currently in place on the border, private landowners refusing to sell land for wall building, expensive geographical challenges, alienation of a neighbouring ally etc.).

The outrage over the blanket ban was because there was no evidence that current vetting procedures weren't working (unless you can provide any evidence). The vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11 were from people that were US citizens or had been living in the US for a prolonged period of time (and the 9/11 terrorists were nearly all from Countries not on the list). There is no evidence they had come through US immigration. Secondly, the blanket ban was actually illegal, so of course people were angry about it. Finally, what was the blanket ban actually going to achieve? It kept out academics and prevented companies from getting in their own skilled employees. If it was purely about security then a number of countries in Europe (Britain, France, Belgium) should also have been listed as the terrorists that have attacked the West have been citizens of those countries.  

2. Fox has huge coverage though. Plus you're forgetting the New York Post. 

And for the education system it doesn't have to be political. Analytical thinking and the ability to critique isn't by its nature subject to political bias.

And what do you mean by leftist propaganda?

3. What do you mean by dynamic landscape in world politics? I just see the US becoming more isolationist and speeding up China's desire to become a superpower. 

I'm not gonna comment anymore if you spin things.

1. Vetting procuders are beside this point. It's a non issue to my argument. It's as if you deny the whole massive flood of criticism against Trump based on him being against immigration and being isolationist. By people who are "antiracist", "tolerant", "multicultural" etc etc etc. It's the single biggest thing that leftists are upset about with Trump, his agenda against immigration.

2. "Fox has huge coverage though". Fox is just one channel. Media as a whole is dominated by the left.

Don't lecture me on how the education system should be. I am saying that right now, the education systems are spewing leftist propaganda to young people all over the world. Of course at the same time, they are able to convey some understanding of critical thinking in general in many topics. It's not a contradiction. They still brainwash people on political and social issues.

"Leftist propaganda". Sorry, but I'm too tired to give a definition now. I have argued about this at length on this forum for years and written pages of texts about it.

3. Yes, the rise of China, despite its evil, as a counter-balance against "Merkel" (Merkel as a symbol of the current world order) is a good example of the new world order I am hoping for.

I'm not spinning anything.

1. I'm basing this on what the outcomes will be of the policies he puts forth and proper vetting procedures absolutely should be part of his immigration policies. They actually are/were as the ban was supposed to be temporary whilst his cabinet came up with more extreme vetting, but as I've said there was no evidence current vetting wasn't working. 

@ bolded: Forget the politics of the situation, you always get the name calling and upsetting people on the opposite side (Obama had it in his term, Bush in his etc.). That's part of democracy. The big issue is his competency in formulating his ideas into proper real-world policies. He makes it far too easy for media outlets to pick up on his many blatant mistakes. The blanket immigration ban was illegal yet he put it through anyway (he should have advisors that would have known this was a likely outcome and formulated alternatives). His fabrication of stats that don't exist everytime he speaks to the public; yesterday he made up a terrorist attack in your country. This isn't how to build faith in your competence if a simple google search can tell if you're lying. 

If you're already Left/democrat then it just confirms your beliefs and if you're centrist then you're left wondering if he's really up to the job. 

2. I can't really comment on this unless you give me your examples so I'll leave it. Feel free to add to this when you're more awake!

3. I think you're making a similar mistake to the UK government and seriously overestimating Merkels ability. China are just as likely to strike up trade deals and ally with Germany/EU because of the US' isolationism as anything else. 



Scoobes said:
Locknuts said:
Go trump! He's doing a great job so far. Hopefully these lefties get a reality check at some stage and see that he's actually good for America.

Yeah he looks funny, talks funny and hasn't got much (any?) class, but his policies are just what America needs and he's doing exactly what he was voted in to do.

How? What are any of his policies actually going to achieve?

Stopping criminal illegal immigrants (those who can't be vetted before coming in via Mexico), incentivising corporations to keep jobs in the US, keeping businesses in the US, recognising the current biggest threat to western civilisation (Islamic terrorism) so that it can be eradicated, and bypassing the MSM so that he can speak straight to the people who elected him.

It should result in the people of the US regaining trust in the establishment and a safer, more prosperous America.

I see the man doing nothing but good, and he is being crucified for it. Yes he's a blowhard, but let him do what he was voted in to do and then hold him to account if and when he fucks it up. The MSM are getting outraged over everything he says, when as far as I can tell the only thing he has really fucked up was the handling of the travel ban. Not that I could have done it better, but surely it could have been done better. 



Slimebeast said:

I'm not gonna comment anymore if you spin things.

1. Vetting procuders are beside this point. It's a non issue to my argument. It's as if you deny the whole massive flood of criticism against Trump based on him being against immigration and being isolationist. By people who are "antiracist", "tolerant", "multicultural" etc etc etc. It's the single biggest thing that leftists are upset about with Trump, his agenda against immigration.

2. "Fox has huge coverage though". Fox is just one channel. Media as a whole is dominated by the left.

Don't lecture me on how the education system should be. I am saying that right now, the education systems are spewing leftist propaganda to young people all over the world. Of course at the same time, they are able to convey some understanding of critical thinking in general in many topics. It's not a contradiction. They still brainwash people on political and social issues.

"Leftist propaganda". Sorry, but I'm too tired to give a definition now. I have argued about this at length on this forum for years and written pages of texts about it.

3. Yes, the rise of China, despite its evil, as a counter-balance against "Merkel" (Merkel as a symbol of the current world order) is a good example of the new world order I am hoping for.

1. People aren't being necesarily angry at Trump for wanting to be strict with immigration, but his obvious poor handling of a delicate situation, stranding thousands of people in uncertainty and still planning on building a border wall with Mexico which I don't know if I should find it funny or outright scary any sane person could perceive such a preposterous plan as a good idea.

2. No it's not, most Anglo-Saxon media outlests are quite centrists.

Left wing groups in universities are generally better organized then right wing ones, we can't help that our cause seems to fire up people more. But saying that official education sources are spewing left-wing "propaganda" is nonsense.

I've seen your writings over the years. It's not because you build a giant house of a foundation of nothing but air that collapses as soon as you blink at it that you're a good filosopher.

3. Do you even understand geopolitics? Merkel is a chief point of power for the centrists in the EU, but her power doesn't really stretches much further and her term is nearly done anyway. "China, despite it's evil". What evil? Human right violations? Please, the US has a larger incarcerated population then China, and I don't mean it in a proportional, but in a total sense.



Locknuts said:
Go trump! He's doing a great job so far. Hopefully these lefties get a reality check at some stage and see that he's actually good for America.

Yeah he looks funny, talks funny and hasn't got much (any?) class, but his policies are just what America needs and he's doing exactly what he was voted in to do.

Make America great Again! I love it. The media isn't believed because they lie, lie, lie. Comedians are comedians of course they will make jokes, who cares. Trump is doing exactly what I wanted when I voted for him, put America first, and not give a shit what the world or the media thinks. People have more faith in our economy now than under Obama because they know he will do whats needed, not what the media wants. That stock market just goes up and up, the people have so much confidence in the economy. Than to top it all off the left is showing exactly who they are, intolerant, whiny, closed minded, selfish people. Obama may have started the creation of a new generation of conservatives, but the media and the left are feeding it so much more.