"Currants Bw..."

[Xhaka Can’t]

[Niall_Quinn]

So how is this a revolution for the voters? How is this the end or push back to the Globalist bullshit if we’re getting more of the same? No more warmongering? Didn’t the last President promise that? It’s the American machine, not leadership that’s the problem. Trump has said he’s going to put an end to ISIS. How? Will he try negotiation or more military action? You know the answer. There is no way that will be solved peacefully and the people behind in the military won’t advise that route. I’m sure they’ll be itching to play with the latest toys Trump hands them.

Also, Trumps already declared he’ll recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He’s said Israel needs protecting. Doesn’t that alliance alone set alarms bells off for a new conflict?

But again, the win for Trump doesn’t represent people standing up against war mongering. It’s been about the economy and everyday people being squeezed to breaking point. You may be pleased with the result and think people are waking up and it’s a vote against the establishment but I disagree. It’s a step backwards when people can be played with the same card so easily and it’s poor vs poor again. Heck, the fraction opens wider and things get worse, I wouldn’t be surprised if they find a new enemy other seas just to get those flags waving again. It’s a shitty system and I’m not saying Hilary would have fixed it. It’s Capitalism that’s the problem. It doesn’t work and it makes sense that people want something new. I get that. But I find it funny how people have run into the arms of Donald Trump as if he’s a saviour! He represents the very system that has been fucking these people over for years.

Why don't you read what people write? I didn't say Trump represented a revolution. I said when he screws his supporters over then they might wake the fuck up and realise nobody can change anything for them, they'll have to do it themselves. And you can project all you want but the choice here was very simple. On the one hand we have a warmonger and a criminal with an established track record of being a warmonger and a criminal. So there are no grey areas there. On the other we had Anybody But Clinton. Which happened to be Trump. Basically a glorified landlord with a track record of screwing tenants. Yet still, he hasn't started any wars that I'm aware of. He might. But he hasn't. That's a pretty unambiguous choice and an easy one to make. The warmongering criminal who wants more wars and has a bag full of scumbags who are eager to help her get them, or the grubby corporate bloke whose primary focus seems to be accelerating the speed at which the rich get richer. With one you'll probably end up dead, with the other you'll be poorer but alive to fight another day.

I said it was encouraging that people decided not to vote for a criminal and with 87% of the voters stating Clinton's criminality troubled them then that just leaves the 17% who are either too ignorant to be aware of the rather public issues or else are too immoral to care. Does this mean 87% of people are now virtuous? No and I didn't say that. Analogy. The BNP. Isn't it somewhat encouraging that they don't get a lot of votes? Wouldn't it be rather discouraging if they became competitive? Wouldn't that say quite a bit about the people of this country, even if they were voting for other issues? Well it's the same with Clinton. It's encouraging that her criminality at least had a bearing and it would be bad news if it had been overlooked. That doesn't mean it was the only issue, just as the BNP might roll up with all sorts of promises to spring things their way. But fundamentally, whatever they say, you don't vote for people like that because you know what their true intentions are. Just as Clinton's true intentions are obvious after a 30 year track record.

The pushback against globalisation is happening all across the world. Plenty of people in this latest election expressed concerns about jobs and trade and these are the stock in trade of globalisation. Cheap labour markets and a greater divide between those who have and those who have nothing. The hallmarks of globalisation. Here in the UK we voted against a superstate and more of this centralised bullshit. In the States they voted against the status quo that has delivered the same centrist misery. I don't know why you are questioning the existence of a significant push back against the globalists because it's all there right under your nose. In America and across Europe. People have, at least, woken up to that bullshit. Or at least half the people to a degree that they are prepared to vote for outcomes that are directly opposite to the stated establishment wisdom and expectations.

You are projecting reasons why Trump is a bad choice while ignoring all the concrete reasons why Clinton was unelectable. You have placed way too much emphasis on Trump and everything you are saying seems to imply Clinton would have somehow been an acceptable choice. Well there were only two choices and Clinton thankfully lost. After that, Donald Trump or Donald Duck, it doesn't matter really does it? Not unless you think there is somebody out there in US (or global) politics that has genuine intentions and even a glimmer of a chance of getting elected. Do you? What are you arguing here?

[Kano]

[Letters]

Yeah, no chance of a war with Trump in charge.

[Niall_Quinn]

Yeah, no chance of a war with Trump in charge.

Can't you be honest maybe once a year? Nobody said there was no chance of a war with Trump in charge. Except you. Your usual. Tell somebody they've said something and then disagree. Usually because you are too lightweight to follow the debate so you have to simplify.

You do realise that we're involved in five wars initiated by the neoliberals that the Clinton gang represent? So if your argument is fuck Trump because he might start a war, let's go with the bitch who has already helped start five I can only say I pity you and there but for the grace of God...

[Power n Glory]

Yeah, no chance of a war with Trump in charge.

Exactly! The whole people choosing not to vote for a war criminal goes out the window because this is what they were voting for. I give up.

NQ, you've lost your mind. Share more vids and say less! The one shared yesterday was great. More of that please.

[Letters]

Can't you be honest maybe once a year? Nobody said there was no chance of a war with Trump in charge.

No, but your logic is that he's the better choice because he hasn't started a war yet, which is on a par logically with saying Messi is shit because he's never scored for Arsenal.

[Niall_Quinn]

You can apply that logic to all protests. You can apply that to the poll tax riots as well.

I don't get that at all. The poll tax riots were push back against one of Thatcher's more egregious attempts to steal from the poor. People hit the street, the bitch shit her knickers and discovered the lady was for turning and pretty damn fast. How is that the same as a bunch of ignoramuses crying and having tantrums about their criminal candidate not getting elected?

[Letters]

They're crying and having tantrums because of the criminal (and misogynist, and racist, and bigot, and sexual abuser) who did get elected...

[Niall_Quinn]

No, but your logic is that he's the better choice because he hasn't started a war yet, which is on a par logically with saying Messi is shit because he's never scored for Arsenal.

Is that what it's logically on par with? Like I said, thick as pig shit.

Here's one that works. You need a babysitter. Who do you pick? The known paedophile or the creepy looking guy? Neither I guess. But if you are forced to make a choice?

Well here's what you would do. You'd pretend the paedo wasn't a paedo.