I have to say that I enjoy reading right-wing websites way more than the lefties. At least they have some sense of humour, in the left it is all whining.
EDIT: That only applies to stuff in the US/UK btw.
I have to say that I enjoy reading right-wing websites way more than the lefties. At least they have some sense of humour, in the left it is all whining.
EDIT: That only applies to stuff in the US/UK btw.
I too find them amusing, to look at.
Not doing a great job at the 'not coming off as an Alien dressed in human skin' look.
Bush went to 90% after 9/11 and got another big boost after he'd started the war. Other than that it was a slow decline. Point being that support can be lost. 40% is not any sort of bottom.Originally Posted by Mazuuurk
Eh? He's followed through on almost all of his promises and breakneck speed. He's incredible in this respect.
'Oh, Donald, you were incredible'
US politics is a farce? A 19 year old Syrian refugee raped a 13 year old child anally in vaginally in a school bathroom last week and it was covered up by your press and none of the politicians would touch it. You are DELUSIONAL.Yeah that was exactly my point
US politics is enough of a farce on it's own.
I think he would insist.
Are these the same polling companies that said there was a 99% chance Trump would lose the election? How many times do they need to be wrong before you stop believing them, and start recognizing them as tools by the establishment to try and shape public opinion? Trump's executive actions so far have been popular with a plurality of voters in every instance:
Do we need to point out the irony of that post?
He's packed his cabinet with Wall Street knob-heads and declared that he'd dismantle Dodd-Frank (and thereby the entire economy most likely) despite declaring that he'd get tough on the financial sector. He's also rowing back on his promises to repeal Obamacare.
Trump had a one-in-three chance according to the most prominent polling. This claim is another product of the echo-chamber.
I was only talking about US right now, not about Sweden. It's not really relevant to this discussion is it? This thread and discussion is about US politics. If you want we can have a separate thread for Swedish politics, or discuss them in the European politics one. So don't divert from the fact that the man you admire so much is a complete fucking joke of a person.
And by the way, the case I think you're referring to was written by most of Swedens largest newspapers, so not sure what you are on about?
And it wasn't last week, you mook, it was early January or so.
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kr...kolans-toalett
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/...t-mot-13-aring
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/man-...3-arig-flicka/
Polling isn't a prediction, it's a snapshot.
Why do I even bother?
Fair play to Mert for keeping up with the Swedish daily's and being able to lecture Maz on what is, and is not included in them.
This ladies' general strike sounds productive.
I would like to know what that is based on, given the ten/fifteen per cent rise in labour participation over the same peri... Wait. Was life better in the kitchen? Was Mert right? Anyway. Sorry, love. Go on.Women’s conditions of life, especially those of women of color and of working, unemployed and migrant women, have steadily deteriorated over the last 30 years, thanks to financialization and corporate globalization.
Maybe I'm a cynical racist, but I can't help thinking that open borders and barely any prisons would more than negate the absence of 'capitalist property relations' for most ladies.In embracing a feminism for the 99%, we take inspiration from the Argentinian coalition Ni Una Menos. Violence against women, as they define it, has many facets: it is domestic violence, but also the violence of the market, of debt, of capitalist property relations, and of the state; the violence of discriminatory policies against lesbian, trans and queer women; the violence of state criminalization of migratory movements; the violence of mass incarceration; and the institutional violence against women’s bodies through abortion bans and lack of access to free healthcare and free abortion.
jfcviolence of the market, of debt, of capitalist property relations
It's things like that which would have made it easier to vote for a Trump character than otherwise.
Lol. That was widely derided as an outlier in the face of an overwhelming consensus of polling experts claiming the contrary.
Cherry pick more breh; he campaigned on dismantling regulations to boost economic growth anyways so this is a poor example. He's followed through on taking action on nearly all of his promises, he's been absolutely unparalleled in his steadfastness on this front. In fact there were many articles written about how the "most surprising aspect of Trump's presidency is that he has follow through on his promises." You are talking out your ass. One example:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...paign-promise/
How long was he sent to prison again?I was only talking about US right now, not about Sweden. It's not really relevant to this discussion is it? This thread and discussion is about US politics. If you want we can have a separate thread for Swedish politics, or discuss them in the European politics one. So don't divert from the fact that the man you admire so much is a complete fucking joke of a person.
And by the way, the case I think you're referring to was written by most of Swedens largest newspapers, so not sure what you are on about?
And it wasn't last week, you mook, it was early January or so.
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kr...kolans-toalett
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/...t-mot-13-aring
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/man-...3-arig-flicka/
It's about exposing your complete lack of any authority on passing judgment on the "competence" of other governments / civil societies, much less with any tone of condescension.
That was a poll aggregator, mert. It included all polls.
Hey Mert, can I ask why doing everything through Executive Order when the Republicans control the House and the Senate is cool? You had very stringent issues with Obamas use of EOs.
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/1...e-probability/ (99% Clinton win)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0e80b02ca2498 (98% Clinton win)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN1322J1 (90% Clinton win)
etc.
You're talking out of your ass to try and minimize the absolute FAILURE and/or open COLLUSION between the pollsters and the establishment to shape public opinion.
Because you need to undo all the EOs that Obama did.
There's nothing wrong with EOs in principle, there are things wrong with unconstitutional EOs.
You just sign an EO to no longer apply. You don't write a new EO that does the opposite. I'm talking about the ones you're saying are polling really well above.
The border wall for instance, isn't an Obama EO being redirected. Yet he controls both the House and the Senate, do you agree with his need to rule by decree in these instances?
Those are the outliers. Why did Nate Silver give him a one-in-three chance based on aggregating polls if the polls were all saying Clinton by a landslide?
The way Americans (and Turks with no sense of identity) treat MUH CONSITOOSHUN as though it's literally a deity is beyond weird.
God I hope they've rushed that EO so badly that even a conservative bench on the Supreme Court won't pass it. The seethe on view
Should I continue?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN1322J1 (90% Clinton win)
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...cast.html?_r=0 (85% Clinton win)
http://predictwise.com/blog/2016/11/election-day-2016/ (90% Clinton win)
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/cry...al-2016-picks/ (Electoral College Prediction: 322 - 216 for Clinton)
Dude just shut up. You are embarrassing yourself.
Yeah I know rule of law and enshrining our basic freedoms, so LOL!
Yeah it's legal. Very very legal.God I hope they've rushed that EO so badly that even a conservative bench won't pass it. The seethe on view
Especially when you actually look at the bloody thing (I know I repeat myself.)
At least I can agree with mert about something: Polls are used to shape public opinion. More of a media thing than THE ESTABLISHMENT imo, but then again, they are one and the same.
Probably not, since all you're saying with those is that Clinton was the favourite. A one in ten chance is still a chance, and Trump's victory was based on three million fewer votes than his rival; a statistical anomaly.
If I was a right wing wanker, I am not sure I would be very happy with Trump's use of executive orders. Just seems the lazy way of doing things instead of using his congress majority. All it means is that they will all be undone in four years (eight init?)
Lol you just got exposed. Better luck next time.
Maybe you don't comprehend very well.
Racist. Reported.
Something can't be very legal. Your God Emperors way with words is rubbing off on you.
How do you still not understand that pointing out a shitty situation elsewhere isn't in any way a rebuttal to someone saying something is shitty about America? You're supposed to be a lawyer. Sweden could be forming an ersatz government made entirely of children with learning difficulties for all their situation matters when Maz correctly says that US politics is a circus.
Fake news!
[gyfcat]GloomyEachGalapagospenguin[/gyfcat]
That account is fantastic by the way.
Credibility of expert witness breh. It's very lawyer like.
It's constitutionality can be more or less clear-cut / debatable. Think a 9-0 SCOTUS ruling versus 5-4. It also affects the potential for overruling of a precedent.
He's not an expert witness, he's an outside observer. And if Swedish politics are also a mess that doesn't matter because he's not a Swedish politician.
What the fuck is he?I too find them amusing, to look at.
Not doing a great job at the 'not coming off as an Alien dressed in human skin' look.
He's part of the Swedish polity.
http://www.phillyvoice.com/pennsylva...-you-s-gibbon/
fascist, loofa-faced shit-gibbon
Maz, what do you think about this:
https://www.facebook.com/peter.springare
Reply With Quote
