the fox news piece was complete garbage. it was straight fake news. the officers interviewed were aghast that their words were distorted in that fashion. they were not even talking about immigrants.

the prime minister of sweden was surprised and befuddled by trumps comments about his country.

after doing my own research, its pretty clear that you yourself are completely full of sht with regards to all these issues in sweden. there are no so-called "no-go zones" or any of that crap that you spew.

I remember playing poker in Birmingham right around the time Fox News had an expert declare it a city where non-Muslims aren't allowed.

Pro-tip: if you need to type "*sarcasm*" it's time to sharpen your wit.

I'll add to this: identifying and opposing injustice doesn't mean embracing victimhood mentality.

This is possibly the worst analysis of the current situation I've seen yet. It couldn't be more wrong.

How recently were Democrats laughing gleefully at never losing the white house again due to demographic shifts? The country has gotten more brown, liberals just coming out of the woodwork, the "swing" states that haven't swing for Republicans in forever? Texas, yessss, the big prize, TEXAS was within reach in another election cycle or two.

Whoops.

What happened? The entire Western world shifted right. Brexit. Trump. Le pen next.

The leftist liberal leadership of the west forgot about something, that the people have to agree with them. The Democrats lost because they deserved to lose. Their hubris cost them the election because they turned their backs on the one group of people who put them in power in the first place. Globalism, immigration, the gutting of the middle class. No wonder so many people turned on them, and they got exactly what they deserved.

The left lost, and if Trump delivers on his stimulis package you're toast again, guaranteed. Lol @ gerrymandering. Please.

Will, people said democrats wouldn't lose the popular vote due to demographic shifts. No one said the white house. There was plenty of outrage over North Carolina and other states and their gerrymandering pre election.

Trump tried to say he was going to do a trillion dollar infrastructure package and then was told that's larger than the entire budget. At least you almost spelled stimulus correctly.

Everything in this post is incorrect.

Google : Schumer stimulus.

Not everyone. There are plenty of people who benefit psychologically from the thought that the reason for their plight or non success comes from bad luck or other people, and was beyond their control. For instance free college for everyone, something that I am for, will, besides helping many, force people who can't cut it in college to confront that fact rather than blame it on their circumstances.

Awhile ago a poster criticized a post made by Mason Malmuth that he thought was dumb with the approximate words "this post shows that people's success is many a matter of luck rather than anything else". Then a few weeks later there was a thread about the wiseness of a minimum guaranteed income for everyone including the unemployed. That same poster wrote "if that guaranteed income was high enough I would spend all my time hiking and skiing." Of course he exaggerated. But the point is that he wouldn't be spending his free time studying, inventing, writing, creating etc while most of the present day highly successful (now unemployed) would. He is wrong that success is almost exclusively luck (assuming you are not disabled, unless you want to include the lack of curiosity and ambition under that bad luck category. But if he realized that, nothing would change except he would feel bad.

You also need to factor in that the Democrat party's base has gone a lot farther left. A lot of positions Bill Clinton had now are not just totally unacceptable but are considered racist. Bill Clinton's speeches on immigration, crime, .... almost identical to Trump.

its seems presupposed that a person in the position of a victim who thinks is something reducible to stereotypical mentality.

Wouldn't the original identifiers and opposers of injustice include victims of injustice who think?
Wouldn't abusers avoid justice by arguing about victims using stereotypical arguments?

nope. gerrymandering and voter suppression has given the republicans control of the house and senate.

voter suppression has given the republicans control of the white house.

and the effed up fake news media has brainwashed a large portion of our society.

these are facts and they are easily viewed. the nebulous concept of backlash against liberals is not a fact and is impossible to find evidence of, but it is gleefully promoted by the fake news sites that are intent on destroying democracy.

December: Spicer says the White House will not ban media outlets

And today, of course, numerous mainstream media outlets that Trump has feuded with were banned from the White House press briefing.

By Spicer's own words, this becoming a dictatorship.

Trumpkins, are you worried yet?

@Sklansky

Of course, this is a linguistic ploy from the likes of Halcyon. We (the Royal we) add the qualifier of "mentality" to undermine the term "victim". Because no one would say "being a victim is a terrible life strategy", that would be redundant. It's not a "strategy" at all if the person is an actual victim.

To say it's merely a mentality is the rhetorical game.

And we have to play this game where people get upset when they're accused of denying the reality of the impact that racism and sexism has on the respective demographics, but then they go right back into their double plus good phraseology as if we're never going to notice.

Again Wil, what are you saying? Are you saying we shouldn't try and stop racism? That we should just accept it and the good ones will overcome it and **** the rest? That isn't liberal. That's racist as ****.


I'm saying that when anyone says "I won the election so bigly let's get rid of the dept of education it's what the people want" that he's full of ****. Less than half the people in the country voted for him, never forget that when he's talking about the "great movement" he's started.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.b41bb4a10e7d

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic..._medium=social

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/...d-donald-trump

Some links for you.

One of us is very wrong.

I wonder who is wrong, Victor or the guy who gets most of their news from anecdotes of people they've made up. I genuinely wonder. (Wil hasn't spent 30 minutes in his entire life researching gerrymandering)

Not really. Seems like more hyperventilating by the left. My understanding, It was not a full blown press briefing. It was a small gaggle where it is standard to limit such to the press pool. The press pool was invited. They then invited some extra outlets to allow those more access.

Giving more access to sympathetic press was pretty standard for the Obama administration which routinely meet with off the record, emailed with only certain outlets to push their talking points.

I'm usually right about most things in life. Sorry.

It's funny how people forgot how many media outlets threatened to boycott if Obama actually banned fox news in 2010.

I am not learning about this from news articles, when you are interested in the actual situation come back to me and ask some questions. I don't give a **** about what you read in some liberal rag regurgitating second hand information by our government and leftist media outlets.

Unlike you, I'd be buying low on this idea.

Sounds about right

Like when I offered you your 50 bucks to my 1000 yesterday that you were lying?

Lol.