The Trump Presidency

First topic message reminder :

Assault rifle.

That is not self-defence.

LionsV2 wrote:Complete and utter rubbish i'm afraid.

Excellent. Must be the case then. Thanks.

Ent wrote:Probably cancelled out by the people that would vote for her just because she was a woman.

Yeah, maybe. We'll never know.

navyblueshorts wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Complete and utter rubbish i'm afraid.

Excellent. Must be the case then. Thanks.

It's the case because you said so?

This is a country that elected Barack Obama twice, are you trying to suggest that women are more discriminated against than black people in America?

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:Probably cancelled out by the people that would vote for her just because she was a woman.

Yeah, maybe. We'll never know.

Just the way of the world at the minute, everyone thinks they know best and don't want to be told what to do by experts/establishments/media etc

Then they blame them anyway.

LionsV2 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Complete and utter rubbish i'm afraid.

Excellent. Must be the case then. Thanks.

It's the case because you said so?

You're misreading what I meant - my fault I guess. Never mind.

LionsV2 wrote:This is a country that elected Barack Obama twice, are you trying to suggest that women are more discriminated against than black people in America?

No, that's not what I'm suggesting, but clearly it's what you'd like to think I'm suggesting. I'm not sure that misogynisitic viewpoints and behaviours are directly linked to racism, although I'm sure there's plenty of people who exhibit both.

Hillary the Feminist that took money from Countries where they stone Women...

Using Foundation money for her Daughter's wedding.

Whitewater scandal.

Pay for Play

The feminist that poured puke on her Husband's victims.

The Anti Wall Street candidate that told Wall Street she had to slag them off in Public...Wink wink

Illegal servers... Deleted Emails

"I did not have sex with that Woman"

Three strikes and you're out...and Super predators..From the so called Black's right activist..

Dancing on stage and high fiving everyone the day after a poll came out saying Youngsters didn't find her hip..

Now I'd vote all day long for Elizabeth Warren if she was running for the Dems but I guess I'm another misogynist that would never vote for Hillary.

So you'd have voted for Donald Trump over her? Seriously?

On international women’s day, Hilary’s face is certainly not one that I picture.

Ah now I see it, misogyny is rife amongst the galactically stupid.

Never vote Republican..

I'd have voted for Jill Stein.

20 dead, 100 injured (potentially more) in a terror attack in Las Vegas - seems to have been a mass shooting at a concert

Scottrf wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Always interesting to see how men react to intelligent, ambitious and powerful women.

A bit of a non-sequitur.

Depends in what respect

navyblueshorts wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Always interesting to see how men react to intelligent, ambitious and powerful women.

What has that got to do with anything?

Ummm. Let me see....misogyny playing a part in the voting outcome and in the nastiness directed at Clinton?

And the misogyny that has been evident ever since. It is notable here with May, too.

At least 50 now stated dead, a local man (Stephen Paddock) has been named as the gunman.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Always interesting to see how men react to intelligent, ambitious and powerful women.

What has that got to do with anything?

Ummm. Let me see....misogyny playing a part in the voting outcome and in the nastiness directed at Clinton?

And the misogyny that has been evident ever since. It is notable here with May, too.

Nonsense; Theresa May saw her ratings plummet because she's unable to debate, absolutely nothing to do with being a women, it's just a convenient excuse because she like Hilary Clinton isn't well liked.

Depends what you think is nonsense. You seem to be arguing that her unpopularity is due to being female, whereas it is just one of many things. The fact her policies are abhorrent (in places) and she hasn't made an effort to connect doesn't help.

Some of it is very interesting, the way she's painted, mentions of how she looks much more notable.

It's nonsense that her unpopularity has anything to do with her being female; unless the misogynists are voting for the liberal 'for the many not the few' party.

Must be misogyny because neither Trump nor Corbyn has ever been criticised.

The most stupid thing is that Theresa May is in fact more popular with male voters than she is female voters.

The flaws in those arguments are obviously clear and the jump straight to defensive is telling too.

Not got anything then Dolph.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:The flaws in those arguments are obviously clear and the jump straight to defensive is telling too.

You are the one that has to prove it. Every politician is criticised.

I never really came for an argument, and as your tone is as aggressive as ever, I've pretty much decided to leave it. I've noted it being interesting, you've dismissed it with outrage. We're not having the same conversation, basically

Scottrf wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:The flaws in those arguments are obviously clear and the jump straight to defensive is telling too.

You are the one that has to prove it. Every politician is criticised.

I don't have to prove anything, I've said I find it interesting and the response is remarkably defensive.

You're the one who made a statement he is unable to back up in anyway, my tone was in no way aggressive but my opinion just contrary to yours.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:The flaws in those arguments are obviously clear and the jump straight to defensive is telling too.

You are the one that has to prove it. Every politician is criticised.

I don't have to prove anything, I've said I find it interesting and the response is remarkably defensive.

I'm not defensive, just dismissive of your silly unsubstantiated comments.

Never change

There's probably a hint of misogyny in it but not really enough to say it's a big factor.

Mays approvals were fine until a particularly poor campaign where she was presenting an unpopular manifesto and lacked charisma to sell it.

Comparatively, Corbyn was taking massive amounts of flak when he was the one considered useless.

To be honest, GAC, I never really said it was a big factor. I'm unsurprised by the throat-jumping though. Hey-ho, off to teach

I'd also wager that Corbyn has taken far more flak about the way he looks than May has about her appearance.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Always interesting to see how men react to intelligent, ambitious and powerful women.

What has that got to do with anything?

Ummm. Let me see....misogyny playing a part in the voting outcome and in the nastiness directed at Clinton?

And the misogyny that has been evident ever since. It is notable here with May, too.

Evident...Where ???..

In the 24 point lead and the big local election win in May ??.

What complete nonsense.

It wasn't in results, which I also never said, but in the media. One could of course argue that not winning was then down to media coverage, or the way Trump went after her, but I think you have to be open minded to it.

This is not some wild theory I've made up, it is something roundly questioned. Would you say cabinets etc have enough female representation?

It's similar to say the lack of black football managers. I think you'd have to accept there may be some traces of sub-conscious racism, albeit pretty impossible to prove or pinpoint. You'd have to be at least open to it being an issue, rather than aggressive shouts of "nonsense" which aren't really the best stances to take if you don't want to be seen as rude.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:It wasn't in results, which I also never said, but in the media. One could of course argue that not winning was then down to media coverage, or the way Trump went after her, but I think you have to be open minded to it.

This is not some wild theory I've made up, it is something roundly questioned. Would you say cabinets etc have enough female representation?

It's similar to say the lack of black football managers. I think you'd have to accept there may be some traces of sub-conscious racism, albeit pretty impossible to prove or pinpoint. You'd have to be at least open to it being an issue, rather than aggressive shouts of "nonsense" which aren't really the best stances to take if you don't want to be seen as rude.

You've made a 'point' which has no evidence, refused to back it up whatsoever and you're surprised people call it nonsense?

I didn't realise this was a court of law. I've merely mentioned something you could easily google yourself, I don't actually know why you feel the need to be confrontational.

Although long live the days where every feeling on off-topic is based and supported by evidence

Why are some people so stupid as to think that if you disagree or even hate a public figure who is a female that makes you a misogynist. Am I a misandrist because I hate Trump? No, I hate him because he is a bigoted idiot. His gender is totally irrelevant. I find Clinton to be entitled, arrogant and vain...doesn't mean I am misogynist and it is the ultimate simpleton argument to suggest that the person's gender is the determining factor.

Gwlad wrote:Why are some people so stupid as to think that if you disagree or even hate a public figure who is a female that makes you a misogynist. Am I a misandrist because I hate Trump? No, I hate him because he is a bigoted idiot. His gender is totally irrelevant. I find Clinton to be entitled, arrogant and vain...doesn't mean I am misogynist and it is the ultimate simpleton argument to suggest that the person's gender is the determining factor.

Point taken. For future reference, interesting choice of language given your reaction to similar from elsewhere.

Clearly some men can dislike, say, Clinton without it being anything sexist, but to say that there's been none of that directed at her or part of the campaign against her is a little disingenuous. She's not charismatic, at all. Then again, I'd rather someone who's wooden and competent than charismatic and useless.

Re. Trump. I know you don't subscribe to it, but this idea that he's some sort of brilliant deal-maker is looking more laughable by the day. What's meant by it is that in business etc, where he can get away with it, he's a bully. Sadly for him, it doesn't look like it works in the political sphere where independent nations etc are concerned. Even his book ghostwriter, who presumably knew him well when that book was written, says he's dangerous and utterly untrustworthy.

You can't bring up misogynism as a reason for Clinton losing and then say "But to say there has been none directed at her is disingenuous"...

No one is saying there are no misogynists there probably are plenty just like men haters..............But when 50% of white women vote for a so-called misogynist it is a little bit rich to then say Men didn't vote for her because they hate Women..

Isn't it ??...

PPP Poll..............17/7/2017

Elizabeth Warren 49%
Donald Trump 42%............

Factor in Incumbent presidents always get a boost in one on ones......Because the other one has never done the job..........

He's just an idiot, a 42% approval rating is amazing for him.

Latest is telling the people of devastated Puerto Rico it wasn't a real disaster like Katrina was.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You can't bring up misogynism as a reason for Clinton losing and then say "But to say there has been none directed at her is disingenuous"...

No one is saying there are no misogynists there probably are plenty just like men haters..............But when 50% of white women vote for a so-called misogynist it is a little bit rich to then say Men didn't vote for her because they hate Women...

All very true. People have their priorities. Perhaps plenty didn't like the misogynism, but voted Trump for other, more important (in their view) reasons? Who knows?

Ent wrote:He's just an idiot, a 42% approval rating is amazing for him.

Latest is telling the people of devastated Puerto Rico it wasn't a real disaster like Katrina was.

He hasn't got a 42% approval rating.............Incumbents always do better in head to heads because they have experience in the job.......

Corbyn has a higher approval rating than May but she comes out better in the PM rating.

Apologies thought it was approval rating you were posting.

No worries....No big deal is it.

33000 jobs lost in the US in September, the first drop in 7 Years...so Trump doing really well for the economy as well.

Labor Dept figures show 1m more jobs created in the first six months of Trumps presidency.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labor Dept figures show 1m more jobs created in the first six months of Trumps presidency.

What legislation did he pass to create those jobs?

Every President owns his Economy.....You can say having a successful businessman in charge has pumped confidence into the markets if you want to.

Got to stop all this black and white crap.

I am no Conservative but I give Cameron credit for the gay marriage Bill and helping Self employed workers.

Every President inherits an economy aswell. Theres nothing credible to suggest that this is Trumps doing or the run off from Obama.

Maybe you're right, maybe it is just the market responding to Trump just being in power, but I dont think you can give credit to someone purely on the basis of 'right place right time'.

You play the cards you are dealt.

Bad economy you blame the guy before...Good one you take the credit..

Politics...

Now threatening war over Twitter.

It'd be quite funny if it wasn't so serious.