Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6816

  • DRW50

    5988

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3458

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Please register in order to view this content

Some days I really wonder how this is real life.  How many fools out there admired this guy just because he was rich. Most of us here were skeptical, but this just takes the cake. Americans really have to stop worshiping rich people in general, but when the person ends up being an absolute fake it's too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One thing that really struck me after reading about Trump's "Decade In The Red" was how much the press has aided and abetted the Trump myth of a successful businessman over decades. 

In interviews that were more like profiles, Trump was allowed to present himself as the ultimate corporate raider, even as he racked up huge losses. 

How did he get banks to repeatedly loan him money?  The "name" that he had created for himself actually got people to believe that if he even whispered about staging a takeover that somehow that would be a good thing (what fools these mortals be!), so much so that the stock actually went up, until after repeated false claims, investors actually got wise to this tactic and stopped believing Trump's claims.

Too late though because by this time Trump had managed to literally trade on his 'good name' by licensing it to companies-- despite continued losses, the Trump name somehow stood for success and some fools were willing to pay to use it on real estate.

Is it any wonder that Trump used that same strategy to present himself as worthy of the highest political office in the land? (Nevermind the fact that politics has nothing to do with business acumen and most CEOs have proved poor public servants ).  He'd been so successful scamming the media, even leveraging a television show where he could act out his persona on screen.  Enough of the U.S. voting base bought 'Don the Con' as a presidential figure and the rest of the vote was 'massaged' through grift (a common Trumpian tactic) to secure the presidency.

It's really breathtaking how many people refused to look at actual fact and believe artifice and smoke and mirrors, which is what Trump as a success is, largely smoke and mirrors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Probably but Fred Trump was not in the area of upscale real estate development that his son Donald became involved in.  It was more like the son got his "feet wet" working/grifting with his father after father greased palms for his son to go to Wharton's business school.  Then the son tried to present himself as succeeding his father by going into skyscrapers and towers (whereas the father had relegated development to apartment buildings for middle class mainly white families), when in fact, the father still made (and kept hold of) more money than the son, and the son's risky investments and vanity projects lost a lot of money, which his father had to write a lot of checks repeatedly to cover the shortfall. 

The Trump family as a unit kept cash rolling in by fraud, overcharging tenants, paying the minimum on maintenance and repairs while overstating the cost to their business (which was store in an opaque LLC., of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have to laugh at the pouting and fuming from boo hoo baby Jr over a Republican not towing the McConnell line.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/08/senate-subpoenas-donald-trump-jr-1312707

 

Speaking of unappealing and untalented oxygen thieves who only get support because of their last name, Meghan McCain is on a pout fest and her scumbag husband is on an unhinged rant because Seth Meyers didn't kiss her ass.

 

https://www.gq.com/story/meghan-mccains-husband-cuck

 

I saw someone going on about how upset Johnny Carson would have been. Yes, let's all talk about gentle Johnny Carson. He would have wiped the floor with her...when her makeup artist was done, anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I saw the same thing. I had to laugh with the Carson comments. I am old enough to remember he didn't give a crap who he offended. I guess his alleged gentle manner fooled a lot of people. I recall a rare appearance he made on Letterman's show years ago when Letterman had the late night slot and him basically ripping into GE mgmt. and the NBC primetime lineup.  Subtle yes. And his on air interviews with politicians were a thing of beauty. I guess subtle daggers are lost on the current climate.

 

And Seth Meyers surprisingly is the first Late Night host I have enjoyed since Letterman years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I wasn't watching SNL on a regular basis for most of his run - when I did I just remembered him smirking and saying "Really?" over and over, which was the type of frat boy flipness that drove me away from the show (he's not that bad when I look back but it annoyed me at the time). I don't watch his show that often but when I do he offers some of the few critiques of Trump or Dems that I can accept in late night comedy or cable comedy - most of the others are trying too hard with the jokes, smirking at their own cleverness, or just seem phony. 

 

I feel like he's grown up a lot in recent years, leaving the very insulated and privileged bubble that is Lorne Michaels and SNL. John Mulaney said recently that Trump has made him realize the biggest lessons he learned about political comedy at SNL - that you can find the humanity in everyone - aren't true. I imagine that is also the case with Seth. 

 

Still, he isn't a bare knuckle brawler, and he, like all the others at SNL, clearly adored her father. He would have given her a chance. She gets so very many free passes and chances because of the love that many in the media felt for her father, and she just burns those bridges every single time. 

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't want to turn this into a Seth Meyers commentary thread but IMO he's evolved since SNL where I could do with or without him. Maybe that's why I enjoy him is because it's been unexpected. 

 

McCain would be nothing if it weren't for her father. If not for him and the millions she's inheriting from her wealthy mom, she'd likely be a Walmart greeter. Actually she's too abrasive to be that. She'd probably be great at doing phone collections work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Interesting. There's quite a few people on this list that I'm not considering, mainly because they have no business running. I understand (and share) the dislike of Bernie and Tulsi but what is it about deBlasio that bothers people so much? I thought that was just an NYC thing but apparently it goes deeper than that.

 

 

Edited by marceline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

DeBlasio has no record to run on. The subway is falling apart. He promised to end homelessness and instead it doubled. Public housing is falling apart and infested with rats. He has a limo take him to is gym in Brooklyn. He spends way too much time outside NYC when we need him here. He talks out both sides of his mouth on a regular basis. 

 

Luckily he has 0 chance of getting the nomination. I don’t know why he would even try when 80% of NYCers polled do not want him to run. If you can’t even win your home state what is the point of running?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I could say so much (like how Trump is doing all he can to take us to war with Iran and yet half the country is numbed by him and the other half blindly support him, so no one even really cares anymore) but instead I will just say how disgusted I am that Jim Comey, after ruining our future for self-preservation, gets a [!@#$%^&*] town hall on CNN. 

 

This man is the epitome of how privilege means zero consequences. And of why I never, ever, ever go near cable news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Bill DeBlasio campaigned on and boasted of his progressive credentials but many of his policies haven't necessarily followed, so the backlash has been direct and long-lasting. FWIW, many voters are not in favor of most of NYC's mayors.  Giuliani and Bloomberg's presidential ambitions came to naught.  On the bright side for DeBlasio, I doubt he will ever be detested as much as Giuliani.

 

Speaking of a figure who people really detest right now-

Brian Stelter is getting cursed the hell out in response to some condescending comments he made to Amy Siskind some time ago.  Well, turned out he was wrong.

 

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Link to the official announcement on her Facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/100052018909496/posts/pfbid031y2oHoqXMuMCSZg1RToxEVH37UZCvGmrp6JhGBQXoGCv3X6mwouwxATxHF5PtvTJl/?app=fbl
    • I feel like the show has been like this for the past 15 or more years, IMO. Things happen but there are never or RARELY any long-term impacts. Instead, everything (characters, history) is just reset to what it was before. In a couple of months, Hope will be working at Forrester again. No one will ever mention the takeover. Brooke and Ridge will be back together for the millionth time, etc etc.  It's hard to get invested in a story when you know this is how the show works.
    • Martin and Smitty's kids not being there seemed like a glaring omission. Also, Naomi and Jacob weren't there as well. I know some of this is probably budget, but it seems like there could be a way to still have them all there.
    • Thanks so much for finding this & posting it. This makes me so angry!!!
    • Dani had a flashback of Dani getting ready for an event with Bill. The gown she wore in the flashback was light green and elegant and gorgeous. The light green flashback dress was quite different than the red/orange/lilac swirling print beaded gown that Dani is wearing to Nicole's anniversary party.   But there was clearly the show's intention to have the Dupree women (except for Nicole) wearing shades of red.   I love Anita but the red gown that she's wearing to the anniversary party -- not flattering.
    • I think you can find them here https://www.tumblr.com/tagged/OLTL What's there is recaps from SOD at the times it shows which is usually from way back up till 2003. Most if not all of this is due to Matt Smith who you may recall from his AW playlists on YoutTube. 
    • Party wardrobe color theme: Good Queen Nicole is in a solid gold gown. The other Dupree women (plus Smitty) are wearing shades of red/pink (with purple accents) -- Anita, Dani, Chelsea, Kat, in dresses. -- Smitty in white shirt and maroon jacket. (did not see Naomi?) "The help" Eva and Mona are in black. Antagonist queen Leslie/Dana in a black/gold gown. The men (except for Smitty) are wearing black. Ted - white shirt, black tie, black jacket. (Ted's jacket was shiny with back polka dots on black background) Vernon - black turtleneck, white dress shirt over it, black jacket (no tie). Andre - black T-shirt, gold chain, black jacket. Martin - black shirt, black tie, black jacket. Dr. Carlton Fitzgerald - white shirt, black tie, black jacket. (did not see Jacob?) I didn't see Naomi and Jacob at the party, but perhaps they arrive later? The evening is not over yet.
    • Tate seems to love throwing punches now

      Please register in order to view this content

      I enjoyed his scenes with Johnny. Both of their perspectives make perfect sense to me and are completely relatable. There’s no right or wrong person in this situation and I like that. LH  does pretty well when Tate is angry too, but I also liked the way that he comforted Johnny in the end. Days is finally remembering that they’re cousins. And, Johnny looked hot in the beginning   Btw, Johnny going to work for Xander? That could be interesting. And, also can cause some more animosity between him and EJ.  And again, Marlena/Belle were great. Scenes like theirs really seem to be commonplace under Paula/Jeanne and I couldn’t be happier that they are. It’s helps us get a much better understanding of these characters and why they do the things that they do and feel the way that they feel. Marlena supporting Belle was a bit of surprise, considering her insane reaction when she walked in on EJ and Belle, but I also feel that it’s totally in character for her, both as a psychiatrist and as Belle’s mother.  As for Sophia and Amy… I miss the first Sophia lol but I can’t help but think that Amy suddenly being so nice is foreshadowing of something. Either that, or Paula/Jeanne aren’t biased against her
    • @alwaysAMC Great mini-review as always.  That Gilly story is...certainly one I could not forget... I imagine a number of viewers were shocked with the temporary recast. It was revealed in the soap magazines, as was the news about Frank Beaty's breakdown, I think. I think Wolf had some statements or an interview at the time but very little. I wish someone could interview him. He did a good job under extremely tough circumstances.  For some reason I have a vague memory of him in the Marian getup but that's probably not right.  I'm glad you have appreciated the material with Susan after a shaky start. I always enjoyed her, and she was the only love interest I liked Nick with. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy