So after reading this page I think some of you guys are saying Trump is the New Coke/CokeII of American Politics.
Or Pepsi Clear if you're a Pepsi person.
This metaphor works on so many levels. After all, all soda is bad for you, some is just worse than others. Different doesn't always mean better. And there isn't really that much difference between the two major powers in a lot of ways.
Not to mention, if RC Cola isn't Ted Cruz's spirit animal, it probably should be
if there is one thing america needs more of it's deadly creature attacks
Well, congrats. You just named next year's new reality TV show.
DEADLY CREATURE ATTACKS! Who will survive, and who will get the highest reconstructive surgery bill?
Find out next week!
if there is one thing america needs more of it's deadly creature attacks
Well, congrats. You just named next year's new reality TV show.
DEADLY CREATURE ATTACKS! Who will survive, and who will get the highest reconstructive surgery bill?
Find out next week!
Come to think of it, Steve Irwin is something America sorely needs.
*Imagines what Trumps campaign would be like with an Irwin running mate* --glorious.
if there is one thing america needs more of it's deadly creature attacks
Well, congrats. You just named next year's new reality TV show.
DEADLY CREATURE ATTACKS! Who will survive, and who will get the highest reconstructive surgery bill?
Find out next week!
Really, why should anyone give Trump the benefit of the doubt? Sanders has his pet projects. Clinton has her pet projects. What exactly is the Trump pet project to make America 'better' other than repeating it ad nauseum?
The pet projects are irrelevant. Do you really think the majority of people voting for Hillary Clinton are doing it for a bigger reason than the fact that she's Hillary Clinton? Her stances change constantly.
Yeah, Trump's talking points are a bit... out there. People aren't voting for him in spite of his comments, they're voting for them because of his comments. Is that scary? Perhaps. But if you haven't noticed, people support him because they're sick of the status quo, and if Trump were 100% PC then he probably wouldn't be where he's at today.
No, they aren't. Hillary is hinging her campaign on experience and continuing what Barack Obama started. The last president was good and I'll be more like that, in effect. The whole reason she gets flak is precisely because it'll be more status quo, don't rock the boat for 4 years. Her stances on the current issues to Americans in her mind amounts to usual whining.
Trumps talking points aren't just out there, he constantly waffles on what exactly his plan is to make America great again. It's got a great hook but unlike his ideological opposite, Sanders, he doesn't have like one rallying cry that could translate to legislation. We can talk about if Sanders college plan is feasible or not but it's there. We know what he wants to do. We can discuss it.
Really, why should anyone give Trump the benefit of the doubt? Sanders has his pet projects. Clinton has her pet projects. What exactly is the Trump pet project to make America 'better' other than repeating it ad nauseum?
The pet projects are irrelevant. Do you really think the majority of people voting for Hillary Clinton are doing it for a bigger reason than the fact that she's Hillary Clinton? Her stances change constantly.
Yeah, Trump's talking points are a bit... out there. People aren't voting for him in spite of his comments, they're voting for them because of his comments. Is that scary? Perhaps. But if you haven't noticed, people support him because they're sick of the status quo, and if Trump were 100% PC then he probably wouldn't be where he's at today.
No, they aren't. Hillary is hinging her campaign on experience and continuing what Barack Obama started. The last president was good and I'll be more like that, in effect. The whole reason she gets flak is precisely because it'll be more status quo, don't rock the boat for 4 years. Her stances on the current issues to Americans in her mind amounts to usual whining.
Trumps talking points aren't just out there, he constantly waffles on what exactly his plan is to make America great again. It's got a great hook but unlike his ideological opposite, Sanders, he doesn't have like one rallying cry that could translate to legislation. We can talk about if Sanders college plan is feasible or not but it's there. We know what he wants to do. We can discuss it.
Oh, I lied. Ted Cruz -- on paper -- is worse than Donald Trump. But the thing about Cruz is most of his crazy is tied up in religious rhetoric that he'd never get pushed through into law.
You think Ted is scary? Do you know about his father?
His father has said, in public, that Ted will lead America into a Pure Christian Theocracy. oh... wait... there is some kinda divinely preordained part in there somewhere.
Really, but I amn't going to search it right now. Feel free to.
As this dystopian election campaign has unfolded, my mind keeps being tugged by a passage in Plato’s Republic. It has unsettled — even surprised — me from the moment I first read it in graduate school. The passage is from the part of the dialogue where Socrates and his friends are talking about the nature of different political systems, how they change over time, and how one can slowly evolve into another. And Socrates seemed pretty clear on one sobering point: that “tyranny is probably established out of no other regime than democracy.” What did Plato mean by that? Democracy, for him, I discovered, was a political system of maximal freedom and equality, where every lifestyle is allowed and public offices are filled by a lottery. And the longer a democracy lasted, Plato argued, the more democratic it would become. Its freedoms would multiply; its equality spread. Deference to any sort of authority would wither; tolerance of any kind of inequality would come under intense threat; and multiculturalism and sexual freedom would create a city or a country like “a many-colored cloak decorated in all hues.”
This rainbow-flag polity, Plato argues, is, for many people, the fairest of regimes. The freedom in that democracy has to be experienced to be believed — with shame and privilege in particular emerging over time as anathema. But it is inherently unstable. As the authority of elites fades, as Establishment values cede to popular ones, views and identities can become so magnificently diverse as to be mutually uncomprehending. And when all the barriers to equality, formal and informal, have been removed; when everyone is equal; when elites are despised and full license is established to do “whatever one wants,” you arrive at what might be called late-stage democracy. There is no kowtowing to authority here, let alone to political experience or expertise.
The very rich come under attack, as inequality becomes increasingly intolerable. Patriarchy is also dismantled: “We almost forgot to mention the extent of the law of equality and of freedom in the relations of women with men and men with women.” Family hierarchies are inverted: “A father habituates himself to be like his child and fear his sons, and a son habituates himself to be like his father and to have no shame before or fear of his parents.” In classrooms, “as the teacher ... is frightened of the pupils and fawns on them, so the students make light of their teachers.” Animals are regarded as equal to humans; the rich mingle freely with the poor in the streets and try to blend in. The foreigner is equal to the citizen.
And it is when a democracy has ripened as fully as this, Plato argues, that a would-be tyrant will often seize his moment.
US TV network NBC is cutting ties with Donald Trump over "recent derogatory statements" that the veteran businessman made about immigrants.
NBC said the company would now not be airing the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants that are co-owned by Mr Trump.
Responding to the announcement, Mr Trump said he would consider suing NBC.
Earlier this month, he accused Mexicans of adding drugs and crime to the US as he announced he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination.
"They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some I assume are good people, but I speak to border guards, and they tell us what we are getting," he said in his speech on 16 June.
He also pledged to build a "great wall" on the US border with Mexico and insisted it would be paid for by Mexicans.
He later insisted he was criticising US lawmakers, not Mexican people.