Discussion in 'The Clubhouse Bar' started by Draggs, Jan 14, 2015.
Okay so 1 out of the 4 or so who replied
I think you read what you wanted to read, nobody supported him committing those acts they don't have to explicitly call them racist. Anyone with half a brain knows blackface is racist act and if they are saying he was wrong in doing it they are calling it our for what it is.
On your 'further evidence', I can find tons of recent examples where the like of Johnson and Trump have shown sympathy towards racism and racists. Can you find further evidence of 'Trudeau' being a racist or sympathising with those views?
I think you'll find the left wouldn't have much time for it aka 'see Ken Livingstone'.
We'll have to agree to disagree in that case.
So you come to this thread, accuse it of being an echo chamber and when someone engages with you reasonably, you run off.....
I'm not running off. I've explained why my point was proven. I never said echo chamber. I could care less about the mob on here jumping up and down about Trump and Johnson all day. I think all politicians are dodgy.
I challenged a poster who said that the left and right hold different standards. They don't. They are both bias.
That's not what holding different standards means, though.
You've failed on at least two levels,
On a very basic level you haven't provided an example where someone on the left was held to a lower standard than someone on the right. You just provided an example of someone on the 'left' being in the wrong where is the person on the 'right' being condemned for similar histories and similar position of power?
You claim bias (separate from standards) to why some are pointed out but not others but when pointed out that your example that the Canadian Prime Minister is of a global presence lesser then the President of the USA therefore gets less scrutiny overall you refuse to even engage with it.
Your point isn't even close to proven except you want to claim victory where there is none.
Er no we haven't, nobody here has defended Trudeau's actions. Fewer have branded him a racist because his actions recently have indicated he is anything but a racist. If anything people such as yourself on the right complain that he is always apologising and too PC, you can't have it both ways (although as this thread is pointing out, you seem to like to try.) Ultimately it looked like a stupid action from when he was much younger and not something that is part of a repeated trend. Was it wrong? Yes. Was it stupid? Yes. Was it racist? Yes. Do I think Trudeau now is a racist for an apparently isolated incident years ago? No.
No politician on the right would get close to that benefit of the doubt? Excuse me? Are you walking around with your eyes and ears closed? Just look at the right wing and their base and see just how many actions they excuse. We aren't even talking racist comments now, we are talking about getting the benefit of the doubt for criminal activity so don't give that complete bullshit. You are proof of the massive double standard in that you aren't even aware of the massive free rein your own side gives right wing politicians.
Let's go through a list of things the right wing have claimed was fine:
Russian election rigging
Trumps sexist talk
Attacks on the media
Physical attacks on people at Trump rallies
Campaign finance fraud
Cheating on your wife whilst she died of cancer
Separating children from their parents
Entrapment and false imprisonment
Stacking the supreme court
Lying under oath
Falsely claiming Ukraine interfered in the elections
Multiple investigations into Benghazi
Threatening to lock up political opponents
Threatening violence against political opponents
Dismissing the threat of white supremacists
Various white supremacist terrorist actions
Stacking the supreme court
Abusing gold star families
Abusing a dead senator and war veteran
Double standard with the amount of golfing
Double standards with use of executive orders
Blocking giving testimony to the legal process of impeachment
Offering pardons to criminal acquaintances
Interfering in the elections of allies
Ruining relations with said allies
Destroying the 2 state solution between Israel and Palestine
Rigging state elections
Using dodgy voting machines
Voter suppression reactive
Let's add stuff from the uk
Breaching campaign finance with brexit
Writing false claims on the side of a bus
Having 2 transfers of pm after whining about it under Blair and brown
Posing as fact centersc
Dodging debate and media scrutiny
Not turning up to international events
Lying about his relations
Man handling an opposition member on camera
Racist comments he had not apologised for
A false web page for the Labour manifesto
All of this many of the right have turned a blind eye too so how the hell can you sit there and claim there is no double standard!? Had anyone in the left got away with all that, or even a fraction!?
Need I ******* go on!?
Oh and of course
Sean Spicer lying about the inauguration crowd size despite being proven wrong
Kellyanne Conway "alternative facts"
The entire "fake news" thing
The Republican opposition to Ilhan Omar saying she should be hanged
The death threats to various Democrats
The farcical press briefings with Sarah Sanders, which were drastically reduced
Russian media being allowed into a meeting between the president and Russians but no US media allowed
Russian media being given access to parts of the WH that are off limits normally
Trump giving Putin state secrets
Trump declassifying information at will
Trump sabotaging the climate change accords
Trump sabotaging the Iranian nuclear deal
I mean bloody hell, the man still has roughly 50% approval and you want to claim the right wing aren't applying a double standard!? Look at how they treated Obama and look at what Trump has done in comparison. How in God's name can you claim they are being held to the same standard!? Can you point to things Obama did that even come close to what Trump and the right wing have done recently? Shouldn't the fact the list is so long I even forgot bits from the earlier days be a massive bloody clue?
Oh and dismantling the healthcare arrangements and giving a massive tax break to the wealthiest whilst raising taxes on the poorest and ballooning the deficit (remember when that was a problem when Obama was doing it? Nope?)
And Trump demanding Obama's birth certificate
Trump refusing to release his tax returns
FFS man. This was just all off the top of my head! I haven't even bothered googling anything yet. There's likely still more I've forgotten.
yeah but her emails.
(please ignore that the bush administration did the same exact thing and multiple members of trumps inner circle have been discussing official business nonsecure servers)
Trump calls Trudeau ‘two-faced’, cancels press conference and leaves Nato summit early after video of world leaders making fun of him
Former Soviet Union
Swinson didn't do particularly well with Andrew Neil tonight. Her voting record and ambition to cancel Brexit the biggest points.
However even bigger news it seems is the fact that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't watch the Queen's Speech. Seen some commentators ridicule him for not watching it (though to be fair he goes to the local homeless shelter).
Right so firstly i dont follow politics at all really, just the basics but seriously my question is how do these parties look at all their members and come up with Boris/Corbyn...that is the guy run this country....
In America all their presidencial candidates seem to come accross as powerful or least likable. I cant remember anyone of our priministers who looked like a world leader or powerful or someone you like and trust.
What is wrong with our country? Im not by any means saying America is perfect i mean Trump got in but alot of previous ones.
I always joked before to my wife, i said god i hope Boris Johnson wins just to see BoJo and trump together and see how long till they start a new war.
Just to finish and reiterate i know extreamly little about politics and i could be being an idiot but someone who must kind of see some logic in it
I dunno I just watched this clip on her voting record and she does as well as reasonably possible. She can't change her or the LD voting record from coalition years. I understand why some consider it too much black mark against them (personal opinion is they need to hold their noses in LD/Con marginals) but in those instances there is nothing she could say to change their mind.
Here's the question, you said she did badly what could she of said different?
Well, at least no-one ever accused Pasty Cockwoble of having any morality, or love of accountability: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-shuts-down-press-21024829
I'm sorry, but we've reached the stage where any vote for the conservatives is a vote in favour of moral bankruptcy and against the interests of 99.9% of the country
I personally thought she did better than Corbyn and Cranky, will be interesting to see how Farage gets on, Neil is very much a details man so I can see him pulling apart a lot of Farage's statements.
That's what Neil has been very good at in the past year and why Johnson won't do him he got completely bamboozled by trying to act as if he knew details earlier this year when people were paying less attention to Neil interviews.
Last time Farage got properly skeward was against James O'Brien who asked all the hard questions and where his statements were clearly ********. Think he'll try bluster and talking over him.
The Room Next Door guy is brilliant! That's all
Separate names with a comma.