• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Official Paracast Political Thread! — Part Two

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well won'tcha listen to doctor spin. You should've worked for Hillaryous during the election, she could've lost even worse than she did! ROTFLMAO!!! Just like every time when ol' Marduk is backed into a corner, he comes out swinging the nonsense stick like a wild man. You're fulluvit as usual.

This is what you stated:





Oops, :oops: nothings REAL there. Where's those hard numbers that you were going all yakety yak about?

Evidence is NOT proof Sir, and you got not! :D
You obviously failed to see the NASA data on carbon dioxide.

And the PDF link with the stats refuting a link between vaccines and autism.

I'll correct myself: you obviously didn't understand them.
 
Fox News is reliable in one way ;)
They gave tens and tens of millions of dollars of free advertising to Trump and thus helped win the election. Trump ran at the behest of Fox News, and worked closely with its now-former CEO, Roger Ailes, to make it happen.
 
You obviously failed to see the NASA data on carbon dioxide.

And the PDF link with the stats refuting a link between vaccines and autism.

I'll correct myself: you obviously didn't understand them.

No, I saw them, understand them, and all of the 45 seconds it took you to link to them. The problem is they PROVE NOTHING in relation toman made climate change and that autism can definitely be linked to specific vaccinations.
 
They gave tens and tens of millions of dollars of free advertising to Trump and thus helped win the election. Trump ran at the behest of Fox News, and worked closely with its now-former CEO, Roger Ailes, to make it happen.


Hillary got the exact same thing from many more outlets than just Fox. Payolas she'll never be able to make good on either.
 
Clinton actually has been treated miserably by the mainstream media. This is how you continue to get things wrong and just take what Fox News says is gospel. The New York Times has a long record of going after the Clintons. You are living in a bubble; you need to spread your wings.

Just as important, what's your reaction to the decision of Trump to choose a notorious white nationalist, anti-semite and racist as one of his key advisors, co-equal to the Chief of Staff?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/u...p-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Speaking as someone who is both white and Jewish, who grew up in a working class family, I find this very discouraging. My closest friends marched with Dr. King in Selma, Alabama. We all stood with our African-American brothers, because we are all the same underneath.
 
They gave tens and tens of millions of dollars of free advertising to Trump and thus helped win the election. Trump ran at the behest of Fox News, and worked closely with its now-former CEO, Roger Ailes, to make it happen.

What I meant is that fox news is reliable, in that it practically guarantees to get things wrong, and misrepresent them.
 
Clinton actually has been treated miserably by the mainstream media. This is how you continue to get things wrong and just take what Fox News says is gospel. The New York Times has a long record of going after the Clintons. You are living in a bubble; you need to spread your wings.

Just as important, what's your reaction to the decision of Trump to choose a notorious white nationalist, anti-semite and racist as one of his key advisors, co-equal to the Chief of Staff?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/u...p-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Speaking as someone who is both white and Jewish, who grew up in a working class family, I find this very discouraging. My closest friends marched with Dr. King in Selma, Alabama. We all stood with our African-American brothers, because we are all the same underneath.

Simple.... Josef Goebbels is back and 'we the people' are eerily mute.

Maybe the silent majority is still trying to screw their jaw back in place after Trump got elected by the 'electoral college' ;)

There's an unusual tolerance to indecency out there... Halloween ?
 
Clinton actually has been treated miserably by the mainstream media.

Is that why every mainstream news outlet save Fox totally trashed Trump and made Clinton out to be a saint? Is that why every single media outlet spewed the same precise nonsense about her achieving an electoral landslide win from day one? Gene, what planet was it that you stated you were from? Come on!

Just as important, what's your reaction to the decision of Trump to choose a notorious white nationalist, anti-semite and racist as one of his key advisors, co-equal to the Chief of Staff?

This is my stance. If the person that is Stephen Bannon was a racist or a white supremacist I would be truly disillusioned and even horrified. However there is not one smidgen of SUBSTANTIATED evidence parking him in that lot. I mean NONE. Talk about nothing short of MSM click bait. You know Gene, they more I see from the left, the more I am inclined to label them delusional. The terms you used to describe Bannon are ridiculous and thoroughly unfounded
 
s that why every mainstream news outlet save Fox totally trashed Trump and made Clinton out to be a saint? Is that why every single media outlet spewed the same precise nonsense about her achieving an electoral landslide win from day one? Gene, what planet was it that you stated you were from? Come on!

Nothing you have to say is even close to reality. You actually need to pay attention to what shows other than Fox News really do. I have heard Trump surrogates (he stopped most interviews other than Fox last summer) constantly repeating his false talking points with just a glimmer of protest on CNN and MSNBC.

This is my stance. If the person that is Stephen Bannon was a racist or a white supremacist I would be truly disillusioned and even horrified. However there is not one smidgen of SUBSTANTIATED evidence parking him in that lot. I mean NONE. Talk about nothing short of MSM click bait. You know Gene, they more I see from the left, the more I am inclined to label them delusional. The terms you used to describe Bannon are ridiculous and thoroughly unfounded

It is very obvious from the approach taken by the site he used to operate that it takes a white nationalist alt-right approach. If you regard what's in front of you as not substantiated, you aren't looking.

Indeed, the problem in debating with you is that you are living in a tiny bubble with Fox News at one end of your universe, and Alex Jones on the the other. You have fallen for their false claims that the mainstream media kept supporting Clinton and always attacking Trump. The reality is that Trump got a free pass for months because he was good for ratings (do you remember what the CEO of CBS said?). Only in the late stages of the campaign were questions raised. Since 75% of the public made their decision about which candidate to vote for months ago, it was too late to really inform the public about what was going on.

But since you clearly don't understand any of this, why go on?
 
Word on the street has it; defense contractor, Raytheon’s stock has increased due to a partnership with Bannon in the development of a neuralyzer that will remove all recollection of the majority’s consensus that in fact Trump is a scumbag. We're talking about 61,039,676 Americans that will need to be transformed into Trump zombies, with still more who were too apathetic to vote.

This is the stock to watch ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Clinton actually has been treated miserably by the mainstream media.

That wasnt what happened in Australian media.
Trump was either directly described as repulsive by most of the opinion giving guests, sneered at and laughed at by presenters, while Hillary was held up as the only real choice given the options.
On the rare occasion a guest said they thought Trump was OK they were ridiculed too.

Australian media were very one sided in this

Media Bias Against Trump - Bing

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...p/news-story/32470d43613691425e4c82f2107d46d8

A poll taken in the past few days ago agrees with Trump in thinking the media is overwhelmingly biased against him. The Australian’s Cameron Stewart features it this morning.

http://thehill.com/media/303552-poll-public-overwhelmingly-thinks-media-is-in-the-tank-for-clinton
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here, Clinton was constantly criticized for her poor campaign delivery and other performance niceties for which Trump was never criticized. Not even when he read a teleprompter in a stilted fashion.
 
Here, Clinton was constantly criticized for her poor campaign delivery and other performance niceties for which Trump was never criticized. Not even when he read a teleprompter in a stilted fashion.

Here is entire campaign was looked on (by the MSM here) as a joke, every week someone would announce "Its over" he cant win now, right from his announcement to run, right through the primarys and then right down to the day before he actually won
 
They simply read the polls wrong. But the polls were actually close to the mark. When all votes are counted, Clinton may have a 1.5-2.0 percent margin of victory in popular vote. Trump was ahead in Florida, Ohio and North Carolina, which is precisely what happened. They didn't quite get the results in midwest rust belt states, but polling was limited. Again, polls allow for margins of error, plus or minus, of several points. So they were mostly within the margin of error.

The media erred in not understanding this critical fact. Polls are approximations. So if someone is up or down up to three or four points, which sounds like a lot, that's within the tolerance.
 
Even our politicians had a go

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has come under fire for saying United States presidential hopeful Donald Trump has "barking mad" views.
Mr Shorten also reiterated his concerns about Mr Trump's opinions and said they did not match mainstream Australian opinion.

"If you think that someone who says that Mexicans are killers and rapists, if you think that I can't have an opinion about someone who says about John McCain, 'Yes he's a war hero but Mr Trump prefers war heroes who aren't captured', you know, really," he said.

"We have a different world view.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said he would not be joining in the criticism of Mr Trump.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-27/bill-shorten-defends-comment-on-donald-trump/7452528


He said to do so would be contrary to Australia's national interest and would offend Americans.

"You can imagine how Australians would feel if an American president were to describe one of our prime ministerial aspirants as barking mad," Mr Turnbull said.

"You can imagine the resentment and ill will that would create."

But he stopped short of saying the remarks would damage or threaten Australia's relationship with the United States.

"It's an election and Americans understand elections very well, they have even longer elections than we have," Mr Turnbull said.

"Ill-judged remarks here and there are not going to put it at risk.

"But it's important for leaders to lead."

The Opposition said while Mr Turnbull might not want to criticise Mr Trump, other members of his party have been less circumspect.

In March, Coalition frontbencher Christopher Pyne said Mr Trump's growing popularity was "terrifying".

"I think the Donald Trump phenomenon is a real problem for the United States," he said at the time.

"It's making their democracy look kind of weird."

This is fairly typical

 
The real fight will be on the Electoral college. This is the second time in 16 years where the victor in the popular lost. The Electoral college was devised at a time when regular people weren't considered qualified to vote, and Blacks were 3/5ths of a person.

In 2012, Trump attacked the Electoral College too. He may not believe that now, but do you think the current situation is fair? It's not who won, but by which method.
 
The real fight will be on the Electoral college. This is the second time in 16 years where the victor in the popular lost. The Electoral college was devised at a time when regular people weren't considered qualified to vote, and Blacks were 3/5ths of a person.

In 2012, Trump attacked the Electoral College too. He may not believe that now, but do you think the current situation is fair? It's not who won, but by which method.

But by that logic the electoral college system favoured clinton, if blacks were only 3/5ths of a person at its inception, but are now equal then it should have favoured her
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top