Didn't think he would. First politician since albert to stick to election promises. Impressive.
Feel bad for beaner buddies tho.
Didn't think he would. First politician since albert to stick to election promises. Impressive.
Feel bad for beaner buddies tho.
i really didnt think would happen.
After he put ban on people from blacklisted countries, he's now claiming how someone in administration fucked up and those with green card or visa will be allowed to USA. Which could be true or not, but is reasonable. Now his choice of countries to blacklist could be discussed but that's something that doesn't interest me at all. Wish he would treat other muslim majority countries the same, especially rich kingdoms where human slavery is common thing.
He wants to change America and that's okay. Majority voted for it. It's not like he started waging wars and killing people. He just won't let people illegally come into USA. He has four years to reach levels of former presidents, each of them did some nasty shit around the world in the name of 'democracy' and 'liberty'. If he somehow manage to avoid doing that, he'll be remembered as greatest USA president in my lifetime. Of course citizens of USA have different expectations from him, but rest of the world just want a little bit of peace :wink:
What I like the most is how he's treating those in important positions, who were put there by former administration. Many of them think they are big shots and he treats them as his employees. If they disobey his orders, they are fired. That's kinda awesome and about time countries start operating like corporations. Because they threat us equally, like shit most of the time.
His ideas on war will be interesting, he doesnt seem to be so willing to fight anything, though he has mentioned nuking Iran a while back. And if he does go to war, id like to hope he would do it because he deemed it to be the right thing to do, and not for money or corruption. But that is yet to be seen.he also mentioned nuking Europe what I can remember, that wouldn´t be cool
His ideas on war will be interesting, he doesnt seem to be so willing to fight anything, though he has mentioned nuking Iran a while back. And if he does go to war, id like to hope he would do it because he deemed it to be the right thing to do, and not for money or corruption. But that is yet to be seen.
Right thing to do would be to go in war with Mexican drug cartels that rule northern regions of Mexico right next to Mexican-American border. But that's too close to USA and too dangerous. USA is already fighting them, but I'm talking about serious military operation, to roflstomp those sonsofabitches who flay people as daily routine of inducing terror into local population.
Edit: Damn, Donald is already considering to do what I wrote above (http://time.com/4657474/donald-trump-enrique-pena-nieto-mexico-bad-hombres/). True madman :lol:
He brought up Sweden now, and the eyes are on us. This is what ive been hoping for, maybe finally something will happen here. We've got the liberal propaganda machine too https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/688999781193117696
I feel like I blinked and internet definitions changed again.
Is 'liberal' still a descriptor for particular sensibilities/the dictionary definition of being 'open to new ideas' (opposite to dictionary definition of 'conservative', adverse to change, holds traditional values), or is it just someone that doesn't like Trump now? Like those Republicans that denounced Trump during his campaign, damn liberals.
Don't like Trump---->Liberal?
Liberal sensibilities---->Don't like Trump?
Conservatives all like Trump?
I guess so, otherwise they'd be 'liberal' under this new definition.
That's what I don't understand lol, when did 'liberal' become the most offensive word to describe the other part?
It just feels like so much effort to both try and make it an ugly word, and brand all Trump haters with it at the same time. Wouldn't it be easier just to use a word that was already insulting?
I guess it's just my distance from American politics, historically always more polarised (feels like we've caught up though) and 'liberal' has a more political 'left-leaning' connotations, probably seen as an insult to Republicans. Over here the 'Liberal Democrats' party were always trying and often failing to be the 3rd party alternative to left-leaning and right-leaning, so politically I don't see the word as an 'anti-right' insult. Over here, unless you lived on the internet 'liberal' always meant the political party or the dictionary meaning - being open to new shit/relaxed (eg. "My parents are quite liberal, you can stay over"). The difficulty I guess in having political parties named after ideologies, that people later try to redefine to mean something totally different - just like the extremely 'Conservative' (party-wise) county I live in that voted 70% against Brexit and still largely consider Trump to be a lunatic, what a liberal Conservative place I live in.
"I guess you can still dislike Trump as a conservative without being called a liberal"
I'll have to disagree with that. I think a conservative can dislike Trump (see inner-party conflicts), but I don't believe you can dislike Trump without being called a liberal. Well... only in certain corners of the internet, as above I live in a very anti-Trump place. For anyone else who's entire 'real life' of family, friends, work still sees Trump-baddie as a forgone conclusion, the difference you observe between 'real world' and 'internet world' makes the debate hard to engage with seriously.
As for liberals being fans of Trump, someone who's actually the genuine definition of liberal (not just someone who identifies as one, or is labelled as one for convenience) is someone that's open to new ideas. Semantically, whether or not a true liberal should be naturally pro-Trump or anti-Trump comes down to whether you believe he counts as 'new' or 'old' in his approach. I think he's something new, but I'm not a fan.
Half the population?
Take a leaf out of 2016's book, that's more than enough to decide important matters for the entirety of the population.
Sweden Democrats has at least risen to 20%, maybe even more. Which would double their % compared to 2014. By the next election they will probably soak up a majority. With Peter Springare coming out and admitting that people should not go out alone during the nights because of the risks, Trump calling us out followed by riots, general increases in crime and "feminist" government looking like fools going to Iran and subjecting themselves to their opression by covering themselves with hijabs or whatever theyre called. It wont hold for ever, no matter how hard people try to stop Swedish Democrats from holding meeting (hotel stopped them from being able use their locale here in my town, protestors have been banging windows and starting fire alarms in other locations theyve tried to hold meetings in etc) they will still only rise, maybe even faster due to it.
edit: Oh yeah, and the liberals want bulletproof vests to be banned now because they encourage violence somehow. Some guy in Malmö wore one and survived a gun encounter due to it, and somehow people want it to be illegal.
identity politics and labels are so much fun!!!11!1!
There'll be a new coalition including the Moderate party and the christian democrats with the Sweden Democrats leading it with atleast 55% of the votes, I believe.
tldr(click to show/hide)
There seems to be no responsibility at all in politics in Sweden or Europe in general for what is going on. It's a respectable notion to help people that need it, but flat out lying to the public about the extremity of the situation is unfair and dangerous. These migrants and refugees come from countries where you get your hand chopped off for stealing, women get stoned and beaten to death for minor marital disputes and gang rape is acceptable, because a lone women out at night is either assumed to be a prostitute or inviting sex. Their cultural values do not coincide with western values at all and it will take generations, not years for them to adapt, if it all.
Absolutely fantastic thread. But it's fake. It's a fake thread.
And you're all losers. Total losers. It's fantastic.
If I go with the internet to answer your question, then the people are protesting cos liberal, cos soft sensibilities (should spend a year in some random part of Africa, then they can pretend to feel worldly) + the time of the downtrodden man is at hand (led by the man born with the silver spoon in his mouth). If I go with the debates and opinions I've heard IRL, then it's frankly strange to me why you would even ask why there are anti Trump protests in London. There are anti Trump protests everywhere.
Personally, meh, what are protests over here going to accomplish? The next 4-years of narrative have already been written by the 2 opposing sides and each will cherry-pick the stats to prove them, there will never be a single dependable version of the truth. The 'truth' will be decided years from now when the next upstart decides to ask the average American if they are still vaguely concerned about the global state of affairs, possess a distant sense of nostalgia for yesteryear, or are vaguely unhappy without knowing why. When the answer is still 'yes' everyone will slam the former administration, which this time will be Trump.
As for my internet vs irl experience tangent. The world's a big place and the view out my window will likely be different from the view outside someone else's (they're different windows!). From that perspective the internet's great for sharing info. But on the other hand if only 20 people in the world believed something, that's still enough people to dominate a small forum or comment's section with their opinion and present it is established 'fact' or common sense. So I'm wary of any dominant opinion when it's presented on a corner of the internet that only attracts a certain type of person - eg. medieval fighting game (young, male, historical nostalgia). Sometimes I do wonder how fun life would be if the view outside my window was exactly as many people online insist it must be, I imagine the streets would be positively running with blood and I couldn't walk to the corner shop without being stabbed or blown-up (but never by a native, they all respect western values and never steal, maim or kill).
Anyway, back to evil that is Donald Trump. There was anti Trump protest in London. Why?
All the smart and strong-willed Europeans left 100's of years ago to make their own way in the United States, it was a purely alpha decision because they knew they deserved better. Now you are left with only betas and this is why Europe is such a stronghold for weak-minded fools who settle for less and think appeasement is an acceptable solution to all problems. Europe can't get anything right without the US making a strong precedent first.For your sake, I hope your kidding. You can't be serious with this statement... :lol:
For your sake, I hope your kidding. You can't be serious with this statement... :lol:
mfw molly thinks that there are still alpha males in EU
All the smart and strong-willed Europeans left 100's of years ago to make their own way in the United States, it was a purely alpha decision because they knew they deserved better. Now you are left with only betas and this is why Europe is such a stronghold for weak-minded fools who settle for less and think appeasement is an acceptable solution to all problems. Europe can't get anything right without the US making a strong precedent first.
The migrants will never integrate to European standards because people never conform to weakness and frailness, there is absolutely nothing to respect about the pseudo commie European welfare Union.
So plenty of alpha males in Norway and Switzerland, then?
everything is perfect in Switzerland (https://www.youtube.com/user/Nervli)yes is
http://www.abbottsimulator.com/
If Trump must go to war, then I want him to invade Germany. That would be fucking awesome. If he wins, EU become part of USA :lol:
10/10 pretty great would defend Australia again.
If Trump must go to war, then I want him to invade Germany. That would be fucking awesome. If he wins, EU become part of USA :lol:This ain't Total War :P
Blame Brexit for that.
This ain't Total War :P
In a democracy, an elected person is generally expected to talk to the press and not just some of it that he/she likes.
Oh man he's stopping CNN, buzzfeed and some others from joining the press conferences now. Not entirely sure what to think of it, but they should know they are not entitled to joining him, as should all journalists. That way maybe they will stop lying so much. Either way, him speaking at rallys is a way better and more personal way to reach the people with his ideas and progresses, thats much better imo.
People going crazy over "free speech", yeah no, they are not entitled to be there, he has the right to kick them out if they are speaking a bunch of lies. But on the other side if Hillary did the same thing if she had won, then i would probably be against it more so i guess im biased. I think the information still gets out to the people, i hope it will stop the questions asked during the conferences wont be so loaded now, and not just the same ones repeated.
Donald is the real man, not modern cuck shit. He reminds me of Joseph Vissarionovich, who also had strong character and was extremely vindictive person.
What's with all these massive cucks spamming comments under his tweets?
What's with all these massive cucks spamming comments under his tweets?
Twitter actually removes pro-trump replies, they disappear from the chain so even if you scroll down you cannot find them. People have made youtube videos about this afaik. Its not the first time a social media platform censors pro-trumpers, facebook and reddit does it too.That's bullshit. There is an official statement about it. It's a software bug related to the huge amount of replies to a single tweet. They're working on a fix. That bug has been there for years but nobody bothered with it cuz it didn't affect anyone.
That's bullshit. There is an official statement about it. It's a software bug related to the huge amount of replies to a single tweet. They're working on a fix. That bug has been there for years but nobody bothered with it cuz it didn't affect anyone.i wonder who could be behind this post
...but ofc, evil conspiracy is more likely and therefore obviously the way to go. Blame the Jews! Soros did it!!1
God loves wealthy people, not scum like Panos.
That's bullshit. There is an official statement about it. It's a software bug related to the huge amount of replies to a single tweet. They're working on a fix. That bug has been there for years but nobody bothered with it cuz it didn't affect anyone.
...but ofc, evil conspiracy is more likely and therefore obviously the way to go. Blame the Jews! Soros did it!!1
Well, if you'd bother to actually spent some time on research into it instead of believing the single first line you obviously read about it, you'd find out that anti-Trump people were actually the first to complain about disappearing tweets.
Turns out they don't even disappear cuz they are just limited to the timeline of the poster and are basically only disconnected from the Trump timeline.
But that would take actual effort and therefore isn't done. Way easier to just believe the first crap thrown at you, right?
Back to blaming the Jews for you it is then... Have fun.
Why do I even bother?
It's like talking to a wall.
Either way, literally every single tweet ive seen from donald and have scrolled down through has had 0 positive feedback comments, when something is so one sided i do believe i have the right to be suspicious. Combine that with the posts that have proved that tweets get sneak removed from the timelines and you get my opinion, not completely baseless i would say. They banned Milo, suspended Sargon_of_Akkad multiple times for petty reasons. At this point ill assume anything, if only to get more investigation into it and to make them sweat if any info would get out (if there is any), or theyll simply have more reason to fix their bug. Not that i use twitter anyways, people seem to be switching to minds.com instead anyways. #DemExit oh wait wrong hashtag, #TwitExit
...but ofc, evil conspiracy is more likely and therefore obviously the way to go. Blame the Jews! Soros did it!!1
90% of his tweets are him talking shit to people and riling people up, so it's not surprising that 90% of the comments are pissed off people replying.
Yeah, Trump is a top tier shitposter. But even then if half the voters voted for him, then shouldnt there at least be a hint of them in the comments? Theres definitely plenty on r/the_donald so its a surprise how they arent represented at all on twitter.
Not so sure about that, /r/The_Donald is by far the biggest subreddit. Trump voters are definitely capable of using personal computer.
I think they are boycotting twitter, because honestly, it is shit social network. I don't have an account there, for example.
People who created reddit are liberal cucks, each one of them, but thankfully they made it in such a way where you're dictator of your own subreddit. Twitter has more traditional moderation, which is why you see tweets being deleted all the time. On reddit, just make sure you don't give mod powers to liberals and you're good to go.
Edit: If you're person working in tech/hardware/software industry and you waste time following or writing tweets, you're doing it wrong. Evan Williams, man behind twitter has created Medium which is perfect for tech guys to waste their free time on reading and commenting on cool articles instead of fighting stupid wars about politics, social inequality and the likes. Every time I see "big" tech name on twitter writing stupid shit, I want to puke.
Hey, at least you didnt pull out anti-semitism in that comment. And dont be surprised if you cant convince someone to take your stance on something initially, ill let you know that at least im aware that its possibly software bug now, though i havent put effort into looking it up yet to confirm.I am not presenting a personal opinion nor stance tho but simple officially released facts.
Aaand if the person Trump itself wasn't already enough of a joke, now he adds all this press bashing on top. :D
>claims that real information is leaked
>sees conspiracy cuz real information is leaked
>press reports about leaked information
>press reports are fake news
Anyone sees the problem here? :lol:
Anyway... I wouldn't give a shit if his position weren't as powerful as it is. A freaking insecure ape-puppet is POTUS. Just wow...
Edit: /rant
(click to show/hide)
Aaaaaaaand the presidency goes to..."Oh, I'm sorry, there's been a mistake... Warren, what did you do?!" :lol:
Open envelope (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5pjZXOU0AA7Yyo.jpg)