193
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
jcboy
 
  11  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 11:43 am
The irony is that Trump could be bothered to troll Obama's WHPC Dinner but didn't dare risk explaining himself at his own.


Hasan Minhaj’s Trump-bashing comedy routine at the White House correspondents’ dinner, annotated


Quote:
President Trump did not attend the White House correspondents' dinner, but he was still the butt of host Hasan Minhaj's jokes. We have annotated Minhaj's remarks using Genius. To see an annotation, click on the yellow, highlighted text.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the series finale of the White House correspondents’ dinner. Oh man.
0 Replies
 
ossobucotemp
 
  2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 11:46 am
@hightor,
I see your point..
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 11:53 am
@blatham,
I was under the impression that the "paid demonstrators" were hired to coordinate the unpaid people who showed up to participate. It's not uncommon for organizers to tap certain people as "marshals" or whatever who have the responsibility of overseeing the crowd and preventing the demonstration from turning into a disorderly mob. They might comprise a small percentage of the total number of participants. The more interesting question would be the source of the funding and it's possible that some group which received money from Soros's Open Society Foundation saw fit to use it in this way. It's not as if he drew up the plans, oversaw the hiring process, and kept in radio contact with the demonstrators.
georgeob1
 
  -2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 02:58 pm
@hightor,
The same goes for most groups, including the infamous Koch brothers, funding political action, except perhaps labor unions which are generally very experienced in organizing their own efforts. Interestingly labor unions very often employ paid labor for their picket lines and other activities.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Kolyo
 
  3  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 03:06 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

I was under the impression that the "paid demonstrators" were hired to coordinate the unpaid people who showed up to participate. It's not uncommon for organizers to tap certain people as "marshals" or whatever who have the responsibility of overseeing the crowd and preventing the demonstration from turning into a disorderly mob. They might comprise a small percentage of the total number of participants.


Yeah, paying everyone is a waste of money. The paid staff call the unpaid people up to turn them out, then they lead them along an arranged route. Of course it's not spontaneous. Marches are planned at least a week in advance most of the time. The airport protests over the immigration ban may have been an exception.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -3  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 03:33 pm
2822 days until Pence takes over as President
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:13 pm
@hightor,
That's pretty standard with large events like the Women's March. personally, I believe individuals are being paid to demonstrate. Can I prove it? No.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:27 pm
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:34 pm
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:36 pm
@blatham,
I've got Republican and Democrat friends who've gone to Republican rep townhalls in the past 3 - 4 months. No money for any of them. None of them reporting any non-locals in the crowds. There could be some out there but that doesn't seem to be the norm. The norm seems to be pissed off constituents - with the angriest being Republican voters. They're trying to figure out what the hell to do in the mid-terms.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:43 pm
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 04:55 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

I've got Republican and Democrat friends who've gone to Republican rep townhalls in the past 3 - 4 months. No money for any of them. None of them reporting any non-locals in the crowds. There could be some out there but that doesn't seem to be the norm. The norm seems to be pissed off constituents - with the angriest being Republican voters. They're trying to figure out what the hell to do in the mid-terms.


No Republicans, angry or otherwise are going to allow the Looney Left to regain the congress...or the Whitehouse.
0 Replies
 
thack45
 
  6  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 05:34 pm
@giujohn,
Boy.. somebody's a sensitive lil' snowflake. Mad about the media being a bunch of meanies. Mad you got called out for whining about the media being a bunch of meanies. Mad about people calling you names.. And what of these 'personal attacks' you're referring to? I haven't said anything worse than you here. Assuming I was a part of this "tolerant left" you've imagined (obviously I'm not), is the idea that you as an intolerant rightist are allowed to make personal attacks while the tolerant leftist is not? I'm assuming you're not, but rather are regurgitating yet another tired bit that breaks down logically just beyond the meme that thousands of people made of it

Let's be real here. I'm as much a tolerant liberal as you are a compassionate conservative. Nice try trump-guzzler
oralloy
 
  -4  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 05:45 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
When did the Democrats ever refuse to take action on a Supreme Court nomination?

They didn't. John Bolton was a nominee for UN ambassador. Various other nominees were for positions within the Bush Administration.


Blickers wrote:
The Constitution makes clear the nominee must pass the Senate. So the Senate refusing to pass a Supreme Court nominee is perfectly all right-in fact, historically one in five nominees don't get past the Senate. But the Constitution says the president is supposed to nominate a candidate for a Supreme Court seat, and the Senate has to pass or reject the nominee. This is what the Republicans are doing that was wrong-they refused to even hold hearings or take action on the nominee at all.

That counts as a rejection of the nominee.


Blickers wrote:
In so doing, they have gleefully ripped the advise and consent portion of the Constitution to shreds. And they love themselves for doing it.

Of course. The Democrats did it to them first. And then when the Republicans first tried to retaliate, the Democrats used the nuclear option to block the retaliation.

When the Republicans were presented with an opportunity to get revenge for W's nominees, and use the nuclear option themselves in the process, and to do it over a supreme court seat, they must have been like kids on Xmas morning.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 07:04 pm
@thack45,
thack45 wrote:

Boy.. somebody's a sensitive lil' snowflake. Mad about the media being a bunch of meanies. Mad you got called out for whining about the media being a bunch of meanies. Mad about people calling you names.. And what of these 'personal attacks' you're referring to? I haven't said anything worse than you here. Assuming I was a part of this "tolerant left" you've imagined (obviously I'm not), is the idea that you as an intolerant rightist are allowed to make personal attacks while the tolerant leftist is not? I'm assuming you're not, but rather are regurgitating yet another tired bit that breaks down logically just beyond the meme that thousands of people made of it

Let's be real here. I'm as much a tolerant liberal as you are a compassionate conservative. Nice try trump-guzzler


In point of fact (and I challenge you to prove different) I, like Trump, am a counter puncher...I never launch personally directed attacks...but I have no problem returning such in kind.

Yes I am intolerant of stupidity on the left...but unlike them I'm not a hypocrite about it. And if you ain't a lefty, I'm Jesus Christ.
roger
 
  2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 07:19 pm
@giujohn,
I would put thack slightly right of center on most issues. Like most honest people, he isn't 100% consistant.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 30 Apr, 2017 08:52 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

I would put thack slightly right of center on most issues. Like most honest people, he isn't 100% consistant.


I dont see him as slightly right...he wants to make you think he's on the fence but his disengenuous nature shines through...he's definitely a looney lefty.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 1 May, 2017 06:41 am
Wow. CBS news is sitting in the East Room interviewing Reince Prebus, showing very positive excerpts of a non-cringe-worthy Oval Office interview with Trump.

I guess the powers that be at CBS are eyeing that migrating audience from FOX. It's such a spectacle. I've never seen Trump get good press.



blatham
 
  4  
Mon 1 May, 2017 07:21 am
@ehBeth,
Quote:
I've got Republican and Democrat friends who've gone to Republican rep townhalls in the past 3 - 4 months. No money for any of them. None of them reporting any non-locals in the crowds. There could be some out there but that doesn't seem to be the norm. The norm seems to be pissed off constituents - with the angriest being Republican voters. They're trying to figure out what the hell to do in the mid-terms.
Yes, of course, and the same is true with my friends down south. When Trump/Pence/Preibus say "paid protesters" or when Fox or Breitbart etc make the charge, they are doing propaganda (the ad hominem variety).

And the silliness of this is pretty amazing. The 2017 Women's March, for example, was not merely the largest single day protest in US history, it was a worldwide phenomenon. But maybe Soros has a million secretaries working on this organizationally and another million couriers to deliver cheques.

Of course, any such protest or march is "organized" in some sense - via social media or local groupings, etc. And some elements in this are likely to be political entities with funding from somewhere but as I said, that's normal. The more questionable type of activity comes out of covert front groups claiming to be "grassroots" but which are astro-turf operations funded with big bucks by predictable characters and political operatives. When the Tea Party was ramping up, I heard Dick Armey promoting the thing on NPR. He was barely coherent as he was sticking "grassroots" into every second sentence. And as we learned fairly quickly, the Koch brothers' Freedom Works operation which Armey was leading (before he got removed with a greasy 8 million bucks to go quietly) were deeply involved in promoting, organizing and facilitating events and local TP groups.

Obviously, something approximately similar to Freedom Works could be going on with the Women's March or Black Lives Matter or townhall protests, etc but evidence for such has to be provided. I've not seen anything remotely close to such evidence.



0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.49 seconds on 05/07/2021 at 02:21:01