Reply With QuoteThe MSM can't twist his words if he speaks direct. He's already had a meeting with them and called each one a knut to their faces.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I cant help think some might rally around someone who wants thier cars built in their own country and suggests why on social media.
Wants American industry back on its shores.
Via Twitter he has reversed the planned ethnic changes ,told them to concentrate on health ,less taxes, jobs.
Had a dig at China's support of North Korea, whilst China continues to invest or is allowed to in the USA.
Now he wants to continue and use Guantanamo rather than release more into the world's communities.
I can see how he has broad appeal,and I think he will Twitter on cleverly forever like a happy canary.
This bloke ain't daft, controversial yes , but very different.
The MSM can't twist his words if he speaks direct. He's already had a meeting with them and called each one a knut to their faces.
He's nothing but direct, may have taken some tips from our Neil.Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
The problem isn't Trump, he just says what he is thinking at that moment. The problem weird collection of parasites he has assembled to advise him, that is a result of the mainstream republican party burying their heads in the sand during the nomination contest.
It also means he can't be questioned on his thoughts, or asked to justify or elaborate on his policies. Which is great for him.
SOME of what he says is valid, as is, dare I say it, some of the stuff Farage spouts. But that's not the point.
Farage rarely says much wrong. Well, not wrong like the type of amateurish stuff trump comes out with.
It is just the mass media and liberals link absolutely anything right wing to him. They try to make out he is this lunatic that rallies the extreme right wing......when he is just a well spoken politician.
Given the chance to air his views, the opposition usually have little in reply.
No denying he has used peoples hatred for his own gain. But evil, he is not.
Last edited by LordKenwyne; 04-01-17 at 10:07.
Yeah right.
As for Trump, I agree it's a shrewd move to put things on Twitter, but we are still talking about the same guy who said all of those offensive things during and before the election campaign, so, no thanks, I'll not be joining his fan club just yet.
Do you want to link me this mass list of videos where farage speaks no sense whatsoever?.
As I said he used cheap tactics at some points but for the majority he just spoke with civility.
Trump is far worse than farage and it isn't even close.
The media and public generalise about people deemed right or left wing. As if they are a collective when they are just individuals.
Farage warned regularly about mass immigration. Mussolini he is not.
'Without a shot being fired' springs to mind.
Yes that was definitely extremely stupid
Government policy by Tweets. Says it all.
Probably not the best example as the Muslims quote was everywhere. I can even remember his intonation on the "figure out what's going on" bit.
In fact, he says "what the hell is going on" but obviously his team twisted his words in the official press release
With so much on you tube now I really don't think MSM twisting words is an issue any more. They usually play the clips on TV as well.
Since, and including 9/11, up until 2014 in the US
Deaths by Terrorism 3,412
Deaths by firearms 440,095
Methinks Mr Trump needs to look at amending the 2nd amendment before getting too hung up over foreign terrorists
Yes there is absolutely no issue.
None whatsoever.
Deaths from firearms are individual incidences rather than their being a fundamental basis for them.
The edit time of this site is quite annoying....
People are liberal for the sake of it at times.
People shouldn't generalise about foreigners. But at the same time trying pathetically to reduce the threats of isis etc to try to protect them is also wrong.
Given the opportunity there would be far more dead in the US. Middle Eastern attacks should you what would be achieved if not for the distance.
Apart from trigger happy cops, gangs, gun manufacturers wanting to safeguard their profits and the good ole boy's from the NRA who refuse to give up their flintlocks... yes I see your point
Ok, I may be a liberal, but I'm not trying to minimise the terrorist threat, I'm merely trying to put it into context
Yes.
And most people there understand shooting a gun is a personal choice.
Don't terrorists have the same choice?
I think there is a difference between deaths through living your normal life. Guns are normal life in america. And the threat of isis etc.
Guns clearly cause more harm than good, they should be banned. America is not exactly an example of a perfect society.
People claim more die driving to work than from ISIS. Definitely, but more often than not they controllable situations. Or accidents. Smoking kills more, without a doubt. But smoking again is a choice.
Most people accept death is inevitable and that they cannot live in constant fear of it. But the threat of being driven over by a lorry is a bit different. Targeting popular events in Europe. Groups that put our rhetoric that the US and the West will see more attacks, it isn't very surprising that it gets coverage.
Trump could've made it easier if he said people from specific countries should be screened, rather than Muslims in general. But that wouldn't have won him the election if he didn't go OTT!!.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...an-nationality
Stuff like the above has already occurred, so its not like anyone who visits the middle east can waltz in.
Yes but Joe Bloggs in Tennessee doesn't plan on shooting wendy from down the round. He owns a gun for the defence of his property.
Jihadi Dave from Iraq on the other hand has said multiple times he wants to shoot wendy. Given the chance.
I would argue that Joe Bloggs and Jihadi Dave are as barking mad as each other, and whilst I would accept that they have different motivations, the average american has more to fear from Joe than Dave.
I don't necessarily accept the protection argument either - Ronald Reagan was surrounded by the most highly trained, armed protection detail in the world, but John Hinckley still managed to put a bullet in him. A half asleep Joe Bloggs woken up in the night by a noise downstairs is more likely to shoot the cat.
Or his son
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.016bb81c89c7
I won't defend people who want guns.
The idea that you'd shoot someone for simply going on your property is insane.
It is obvious the constitution was written in an era filled with fear of others.
And most modern people would be happier if guns didn't exist in the US.
But it is a method of harming someone. It isn't a threat in itself.
Posting Permissions
