Trump explained - because you all are blind

There is still a negative bias in the press against Trump, whether it is warranted or not. I forget what I was watching, but they broke down the percentages of reports with a positive slant and ones with a negative slant for Bill Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. The three former were all pretty even in terms of positive and negative slant while Trump is currently sitting at 80% negative, 20% positive.

the media 'colludes' with the Dems and then complains about Russia
 
There is still a negative bias in the press against Trump, whether it is warranted or not. I forget what I was watching, but they broke down the percentages of reports with a positive slant and ones with a negative slant for Bill Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. The three former were all pretty even in terms of positive and negative slant while Trump is currently sitting at 80% negative, 20% positive.

There is a negative bias in Trump's actions, which is accurately reflected in the media.
 
There is still a negative bias in the press against Trump, whether it is warranted or not. I forget what I was watching, but they broke down the percentages of reports with a positive slant and ones with a negative slant for Bill Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. The three former were all pretty even in terms of positive and negative slant while Trump is currently sitting at 80% negative, 20% positive.

I'm sure Trump could change that percentage if he'd stop lying.
 
Well, a better sample set would be to look at the shallow fluff pieces, and then compare those across presidents. I mean, Trump really deserves a whole ton of negative press when it comes to important matters. But when a piece is about a golf game score or a choice in pub foods, then we can see if there's an actual bias against an official greater than normal.
 
That's about par for the course.

The present system, where you can, by and large, simply buy your way into political office, clearly suits the rich much better.

And then when they're in, and afterwards, they can make even more money.

Of course, sortition has its disadvantages:

1. You might end up with a house full of Trumps, anyway
2. The mandate isn't as strong
3. Lack of accountability

But they kind of pale in comparison with the disadvantages of the present system, imo..
 
Last edited:
But mostly, because it would end the long term power brokering of the re-elected, it will never be considered. Party affiliation would be devalued, campaign contributions would go away, lobbying would be less effective, etc.
 
Yeah, it sums it up. But i think a more precise, academic definition of Trump is needed:

 
There is still a negative bias in the press against Trump, whether it is warranted or not. I forget what I was watching, but they broke down the percentages of reports with a positive slant and ones with a negative slant for Bill Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump. The three former were all pretty even in terms of positive and negative slant while Trump is currently sitting at 80% negative, 20% positive.

This will have everything to do with the utterly shambolic nature of everything he and his admin does.
 
This will have everything to do with the utterly shambolic nature of everything he and his admin does.
There's a strange conviction, among a lot of conservatives, that if a food critics recommends an ice cream cone over a dog turd, it indicates an irrational pro-ice cream, anti-turd bias, and in no reflects way the objective qualities of those things as foodstuffs.
 
A long article, that I haven't read all the way through yet.

Pew Research Center, 26 June 2017 - "U.S. Image Suffers as Publics Around World Question Trump's Leadership"

Although he has only been in office a few months, Donald Trump’s presidency has had a major impact on how the world sees the United States. Trump and many of his key policies are broadly unpopular around the globe, and ratings for the U.S. have declined steeply in many nations. According to a new Pew Research Center survey spanning 37 nations, a median of just 22% has confidence in Trump to do the right thing when it comes to international affairs. This stands in contrast to the final years of Barack Obama’s presidency, when a median of 64% expressed confidence in Trump’s predecessor to direct America’s role in the world.

The sharp decline in how much global publics trust the U.S. president on the world stage is especially pronounced among some of America’s closest allies in Europe and Asia, as well as neighboring Mexico and Canada. Across the 37 nations polled, Trump gets higher marks than Obama in only two countries: Russia and Israel.
More poll respondents trust Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin than Donald Trump to "do the right thing regarding world affairs."
 
A long article, that I haven't read all the way through yet.

Pew Research Center, 26 June 2017 - "U.S. Image Suffers as Publics Around World Question Trump's Leadership"


More poll respondents trust Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin than Donald Trump to "do the right thing regarding world affairs."

I saw it to, did read it. I think it is a bit of overreacting, which is again understandable as well.
And we see I think a discontinuity point in western civilisation. The old post war cultural and geopolitical setting is changed.
I guess Trump will be lonely at the G20. His narcistic ego certainly not looking forward to it.

But all in all
I think it will not bother Trump at all.
It will not disturb in any way his agenda. Just as nothing so far did disturb that agenda.
It is America First
and plan B is America First
 
More like
Plan A:Trump first
Plan B:Trump first
 
More like
Plan A:Trump first
Plan B:Trump first

haha
Well I agree to that, that he will not do himself short in anything.
But besides that he wants to be GREAT
greater than his father
 
Back
Top Bottom