This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Alternative Facts
Pages: 1 ... 171819 2021 ... 306
541
« on: January 22, 2017, 04:50:42 PM »
Sounds like a good statement to me.
In what universe is it a good statement to lie, from your first time behind the podium, 4 times in under 5 minutes?
Not a lie. He said it had a record number of people watching in person and across the globe. Just because there weren't as many people actually there doesn't mean anything.
....About 31 million people watched Donald Trump be sworn in as president on Friday, about average for first-term presidents in recent history.
Per Nielsen, 30.64 million people tuned in across 12 networks’ inauguration day coverage. The ratings service measured ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, HLN, Fox Business, CNBC, Univision, Telemundo and Galavision.
That’s the fifth largest audience for an inuagural since 1969, as far back as Nielsen’s figures go. Ronald Reagan in 1981 holds the record with 41.8 million viewers, followed by Barack Obama’s first swearing in in 2009 at 37.79 million.
542
« on: January 22, 2017, 04:42:19 PM »
Sounds like a good statement to me.
In what universe is it a good statement to lie, from your first time behind the podium, 4 times in under 5 minutes?
543
« on: January 22, 2017, 12:43:43 PM »
These people are sad.
Why?
544
« on: January 22, 2017, 11:29:32 AM »
So please explain the perspective distortion in the gigapixel image
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/
1 - You can literally see plenty of white space in front of the media tent (The large, white tent at the far right of the picture), along with two sections back from the reflecting pond. There are also numerous splotches of white space throughout the image - implying that the gatherers are not densely packed at all. There is also standing area behind the media tent (Between it and the Washington monument) that would show the speech on monitors - assuming that areas in front of the tent are open as the image shows, the area behind the tent would fail to meet capacity as well. 2 - You're still attempting to argue that a level shot from the stands will show better estimates of the crowds than an aerial shot from above. It really doesn't, as any reputable photography or cinematographer would argue.
545
« on: January 22, 2017, 10:25:55 AM »
What do these protesters hope to achieve exactly?
"Ah sorry Donald mate, people are smashing windows n screaming in the streets n that. Doesn't look like you can be president anymore lad, we've had a good run see ya later then yeah? You know the way out xx"
There were no windows smashed or arrests, at least from what I've seen at the major protests (DC, Chicago, etc). They were largely peaceful gatherings.
And no, the protests did not aim at ousting Trump. No one ever claimed that was the goal
I'm just talking about the protests and riots in general. Seems a bit pointless protesting a democratic verdict especially in overseas countries when it doesn't even affect them.
I can't speak for the protests outside of the United States, but I don't imagine they gathered simply to protest Trump (Though as the US is seen as the leader of the free world, I imagine some did) - but to protest for their rights in that country, mirroring what we were doing here.
546
« on: January 22, 2017, 09:36:32 AM »
They were largely peaceful gatherings.
There was some smashed corporate property.
Judging by the clothes/tactics/flags, it was black-bloc anarchists who inserted themselves into the protests.
I know of smashed stuff from Friday, but nothing Saturday. DC police even reported 0 arrests.
547
« on: January 22, 2017, 09:27:51 AM »
What do these protesters hope to achieve exactly?
"Ah sorry Donald mate, people are smashing windows n screaming in the streets n that. Doesn't look like you can be president anymore lad, we've had a good run see ya later then yeah? You know the way out xx"
There were no windows smashed or arrests, at least from what I've seen at the major protests (DC, Chicago, etc). They were largely peaceful gatherings. And no, the protests did not aim at ousting Trump. No one ever claimed that was the goal
548
« on: January 22, 2017, 08:04:13 AM »
So, yesterday was the Womens March on Washington - which turned into marches spanning the globe, on every continent. By most accounts, it's one of the largest unified protest in modern history. Below area couple images from various cities. A more complete list can be found hereDC:  Chicago  Nairobi, Kenya  Boston  Vancouver  Auckland, New Zealand  Any thoughts on yesterday? Where do you see the movement going from here? Is it a one-off protest, or does it grow to something more?
549
« on: January 22, 2017, 07:43:59 AM »
Is it surprising that Soros has ties to Democratic and left-leaning organizations? Not at all.
Doesn't relegate that this is the largest protest of a President inauguration in modern history, and spawned sister protests across the globe.
I'm not sure what to tell them if they think Trump and the Republican majority in congress are going to care though. If they want to resist trump they need to get active in politics.
To be fair, I'd argue that the same could have been said about the environmental protests back in 1970 - no one expected Nixon and the Republicans to care, but they gave us the EPA and other acts that still stand today. I'm sure that Trump and Congress won't listen today. But if anything, it unifies the people against Trump and the policies under one name - at least for today. Now we wait and see if they actually can keep that unity.
550
« on: January 21, 2017, 09:02:22 PM »
I more so meant Trump can never just admit he's wrong ever and will somehow blame the media.
Glad he's calling out the media on things though. Mainstream media fucking sucks. We all know it. But yeah, Trump doesn't like to be wrong.
Literally shouting lies at the media isn't calling them out - it only makes you look stupid in the end. Nothing Spicer said in his tiny tirade had any basis in facts based on live images or DC Metro figures. The only thing he had accurate was that the white tarp is much more visible.
It's gaslighting at it's worst, and Spicer is shit at even doing that.
Actually, he did have validation with the MLK Bust in the White House thing, and I can see why they'd get annoyed about that little tidbit.
To which that reporter in question already publicly apologized well before this conference and explained the discrepancy. Whether or not you believe his explanation is another story. That's like a teacher yelling at an entire class because one student plagiarized an essay. It lends nothing to your credibility as someone who is meant to bridge the gap between administrative figures and those you work with in the press
551
« on: January 21, 2017, 08:51:33 PM »
I more so meant Trump can never just admit he's wrong ever and will somehow blame the media.
Glad he's calling out the media on things though. Mainstream media fucking sucks. We all know it. But yeah, Trump doesn't like to be wrong.
Literally shouting lies at the media isn't calling them out - it only makes you look stupid in the end. Nothing Spicer said in his tiny tirade had any basis in facts based on live images or DC Metro figures. The only thing he had accurate was that the white tarp is much more visible. It's gaslighting at it's worst, and Spicer is shit at even doing that.
552
« on: January 21, 2017, 05:50:09 PM »
That was the one they singled out. They said the tarp made it look worse, along with security issues, and that it was actually the largest ever. I'll be honest - the white tarp definitely stands out compared to the brown landscape. Problem is, had the inauguration actually been close to matching Obama's turnout in 09, you would have seen very little of said tarp. Not to mention that viewership of said inauguration on the big platforms (ABC, NBC, CBS) was ~30 million, down from 38 million for Obama in 2009. This was far from the largest ever, and the face that the President and White House opted to make their first statement to the press about size issues for their inauguration is laughable. It's arguably worse than Trump tweeting about the Apprentice ratings. Though it was clearly a way to get media coverage off of the Women's March.
553
« on: January 21, 2017, 05:41:08 PM »
 "This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period."
554
« on: January 21, 2017, 03:46:56 PM »
Is it surprising that Soros has ties to Democratic and left-leaning organizations? Not at all.
Doesn't relegate that this is the largest protest of a President inauguration in modern history, and spawned sister protests across the globe.
555
« on: January 20, 2017, 01:18:41 PM »
2 months on and people are still kicking and screaming over this election result huh?
Funny. It's almost like President Obama being described as illegitimate, or a Muslim. Or having his wife called an ape, a tranny, etc.
Let's not act like courtesy towards Obama has been a Conservative staple over the past 8 years, nor that this shit hasn't gone on in American history.
Let's also not pretend that there was somehow the same level of outrage directed at Obama during his lead up to the inauguration, because I certainly can't remember riots, protests and arrests from his detractors during that period.
People can have their misgivings and harsh opinions about Trump all they want, but destroying private property and throwing temper tantrums isn't going to change the democratic verdict.
I'm not saying the protests will change the verdict, remove Trump, etc. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy in people saying "Lol shut up snowflakes, you lost, get over it" after the past 8 years of comments above. Shit like that is why this country won't be united anything in the near future
556
« on: January 20, 2017, 01:07:13 PM »
2 months on and people are still kicking and screaming over this election result huh?
Funny. It's almost like President Obama being described as illegitimate, or a Muslim. Or having his wife called an ape, a tranny, etc. Let's not act like courtesy towards Obama has been a Conservative staple over the past 8 years, nor that this shit hasn't gone on in American history.
557
« on: January 20, 2017, 12:55:35 PM »
MSNBC is saying 95 protestors have been arrested in DC
558
« on: January 20, 2017, 12:40:59 PM »
Watching the post-speech
These memes don't, and never will, make sense and were never funny.
559
« on: January 20, 2017, 11:31:19 AM »
American politics might quiet down a little since this is now officially an off-year for us
Lol keep telling yourself that. The 2018 and 2020 elections have already started.
560
« on: January 20, 2017, 10:45:38 AM »
I look forward to the next four years.
561
« on: January 19, 2017, 11:19:06 AM »
Nothing surprising. Gonna miss him
562
« on: January 16, 2017, 12:23:38 AM »
Gimme Canada, I'll get the formal stuff up in a bit (or worst case, tomorrow morning)
563
« on: January 15, 2017, 09:52:52 PM »
Debating whether I want to do this again...
564
« on: January 14, 2017, 09:59:00 AM »
I wonder how they will resolve her story if she doesn't die in VIII.
Time jump a year ahead, have her die in the film somewhere in that jump.
565
« on: January 14, 2017, 09:55:51 AM »
Spoiler Weren't the parents dead in the books?
566
« on: January 13, 2017, 07:57:15 PM »
If Republicans leave millions in the cold, they'll for sure lose tons of house and senate seats.
You know, I've begun to question that notion the last couple weeks
Well Democrats lost this election because they've lost the white middle class workers. What better way to get them back by saying
"The party you just voted in did everything in their power to make you and your kids have no health insurance, so you can't be protected. We offered this to you, and yes it needed improvements, and we were willing to work with them to fix it, but what do they do? They gut the entire thing."
Because it isn't as easy as putting out a flashy ad saying that. Congress is already extremely hated - their approval ratings for the past 8+ years have been hovering in the teens and low twenties. The President Elect? He was elected with some of the lowest approval ratings in modern history and continues to have average approval ratings - at a time when Clinton/Bush/Obama had approval ratings of 20+ points. Obama had an 80-20 approval rating as he took office. Americans are well aware that they hate Congress and the people currently in power. But the fact is most Americans are unlikely to vote out their incumbent Representative and Senator, and gerrymandering has only strengthened that fact
567
« on: January 13, 2017, 07:03:28 PM »
If Republicans leave millions in the cold, they'll for sure lose tons of house and senate seats.
You know, I've begun to question that notion the last couple weeks
568
« on: January 13, 2017, 03:45:12 PM »
How much do you want to bet that there is no replacement plan?
Bet there is none now? Or none ever?
None ever.
I wouldn't go that far yet - I expect Republicans to put forward a plan sometime this year.
I don't see it going to the lengths that the ACA did to ensure protections for those with preexisting conditions. They seem to be pushing the idea that they want to make healthcare "accessible" to all. Problem is without those protections, the most vulnerable are going to pay the most.
I just feel like if they actually intended to replace it they would have come up with a replacement plan years ago. Repealing it now and then leaving the American public with nothing while they try to come up something else would/will be disastrous.
I don't disagree - the fact that there has been well over 50 repeal votes over six years without a single credible replacement offered is incredibly irresponsible. Congressional leadership is also coming at odds with Trump, who wants to see a replacement plan immediately - something that can't and won't happen. Healthcare policy is incredibly complex and is going to take several months (at the minimum) to formulate a credible plan that doesn't toss 20+ million out into the cold.
569
« on: January 13, 2017, 03:38:36 PM »
How much do you want to bet that there is no replacement plan?
Bet there is none now? Or none ever?
None ever.
I wouldn't go that far yet - I expect Republicans to put forward a plan sometime this year. I don't see it going to the lengths that the ACA did to ensure protections for those with preexisting conditions. They seem to be pushing the idea that they want to make healthcare "accessible" to all. Problem is without those protections, the most vulnerable are going to pay the most.
570
« on: January 13, 2017, 03:32:21 PM »
How much do you want to bet that there is no replacement plan?
Bet there is none now? Or none ever?
Pages: 1 ... 171819 2021 ... 306
|
Show Posts
