Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

An interesting article from the Guardian that explains in a way Trump's phenomenon:

Dangerous idiots: how the liberal media elite failed working-class Americans

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/oct/13/liberal-media-bias-working-class-americans


Some insights:




&





Thoughts?

I like how an old white man winning the presidency is now a "phenomenon". It's the standard; 44 (counting Grover twice) out of 45 presidents have been white men.

Put the blame on the losing party and not the ignorant voters. Nice stigma

Yeah. It would have been so much better to buck the system and vote in an Old White Woman.

Originally posted by Robtard
I like how an old white man winning the presidency is now a "phenomenon". It's the standard; 44 (counting Grover twice) out of 45 presidents have been white men.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Put the blame on the losing party and not the ignorant voters. Nice stigma
So... you don't like the article, or what?

FYI The Guardian is a left-wing British newspaper. I don't think they support Trump at all. That said, the author's analysis is quite on point.

Originally posted by Stigma


FYI The Guardian is a left-wing British newspaper.

Aren't they all?

Well mmm

http://i60.tinypic.com/jhsqol.jpg

Well, that's how a typical left-wing journalist is perceived. The resemblance is uncanny.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Put the blame on the losing party and not the ignorant voters. Nice stigma

Now that's the true marvel here. Normally when the team one is rooting for wins, one takes pride in the winning/accomplishment.

With Trump's win, they make it a blame-the-other tactic. It's almost like they're expecting a shit-show and preemptively shirking responsibility. "It's not my fault I voted for Trump." (which we had happen here)

Really? I would have gone with this....

https://imagemacros.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/im_so_british.jpg?w=1400

Originally posted by Stigma
FYI The Guardian is a left-wing British newspaper. I don't think they support Trump at all.

Heh, you don't know how much of an understatement this is. They loathe Trump. The comments sections can sometimes become almost psychotic, but in that weird British way.

Originally posted by Surtur
Heh, you don't know how much of an understatement this is. They loathe Trump. The comments sections can sometimes become almost psychotic, but in that weird British way.
Huh.

But yeah, a lot of Leftists are now in a period of intense soul-searching in the wake a devastating loss Democracts suffered..

Originally posted by Stigma
Huh.

But yeah, a lot of Leftists are now in a period of intense soul-searching in the wake a devastating loss Democracts suffered..

Those on the left do not want to even look at the part they played in Trump winning. They would rather convince themselves Trump won because you have all these racist, sexist, xenophobic people in the country. The deplorables, that is the narrative. For all their talk about how Trump voters want to pass the buck about responsibility, they want to do the same because they can't handle the notion their behavior lead to this. They don't want to think about how they created such a desperate situation in this country that some people decided to gamble on Trump.

Instead of people getting pissed off and arguing back and forth with those on the left..they are just saying "f*ck it" and washing their hands of politics. Which at the moment just harms democrats more than republicans.

There's a multitude of reasons for Trump being elected and the media is one of them but calling the media 'liberal' isn't exactly accurate. Most media corporations are owned by billionaires who aren't exactly known for being liberals. Globalists would be more accurate and globalism has undoubtedly failed the American working class as it is failing working classes across the world. Companies used to have an anchor in a certain location. They would have manufacturing, head offices etc all in one city and so would have a vested interest in that area. Now when a company can source its cheapest labour in one part of the world, it's head office and executives in a more developed country and have its brass plate registered on some tiny island tax haven then they don't feel they need to have any responsibility to the country that built their fortunes in the first place. Thus you end up with a lot of formally well employed and well paid people dumped on the scrap heap. Trump's promises obviously play into that.

Then you also have people who think certain agendas are being forced upon them. Gay rights etc. A backlash against that is part of it.

Then there's the continuing problem of corruption of elected officials from lobbyists. The whole Drain the swamp nonsense played well although this is a problem that definitely won't be fixed by Trump

http://www.monbiot.com/2017/02/04/dark-arts/

I think most of it is simply that people really disliked Hillary Clinton. That, and the pretty predictable desire to change course after one party has the presidency for 8 years was enough to give Trump enough support to get the win.

Originally posted by jaden101
There's a multitude of reasons for Trump being elected and the media is one of them but calling the media 'liberal' isn't exactly accurate. Most media corporations are owned by billionaires who aren't exactly known for being liberals.

Frankly I don't care about the billionaire owners. The billionaire owners aren't the friggin media, are they the ones reporting on the news?

Or are you saying they somehow influence what pieces their companies will run? Because that also flies in the face of your "The media isn't liberal" claim, since a lot of them have narratives that lean towards liberals. If someone owns one of these companies and isn't a liberal and is choosing what stories to run then it's an awfully big coincidence which side gets favored more.

But even if you don't want to phrase it that way, what about saying: the media is far more liberal than it is conservative?

Originally posted by BackFire
I think most of it is simply that people really disliked Hillary Clinton.

Yes, disliked her as a politician and potential president of the USA.

Originally posted by Surtur
Frankly I don't care about the billionaire owners. The billionaire owners aren't the friggin media, are they the ones reporting on the news?

Or are you saying they somehow influence what pieces their companies will run? Because that also flies in the face of your "The media isn't liberal" claim, since a lot of them have narratives that lean towards liberals. If someone owns one of these companies and isn't a liberal and is choosing what stories to run then it's an awfully big coincidence which side gets favored more.

But even if you don't want to phrase it that way, what about saying: the media is far more liberal than it is conservative?



Yes, disliked her as a politician and potential president of the USA.

Of course the owners dictate the direction of the company. Just like any other company in the world. If it wasn't the case then why do politicians cosy up to the likes of Rupert Murdoch

If you consider people like them to be left wing then you're frankly an idiot. Even if they're left of your political viewpoint that doesn't make them liberal.

Til an #altfact, the majority of billionaires are liberals. Lol.

Originally posted by jaden101
Of course the owners dictate the direction of the company. Just like any other company in the world. If it wasn't the case then why do politicians cosy up to the likes of Rupert Murdoch

If you consider people like them to be left wing then you're frankly an idiot. Even if they're left of your political viewpoint that doesn't make them liberal.

So then, the best case scenario is billionaires are forcing issues they don't give a shit about in order to manipulate liberals and make money. Which still translates into that kind of agenda being pushed more than the other. Whatever reason the rich people want to push it, it gets pushed more than the other and this is a problem.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Til an #altfact, the majority of billionaires are liberals. Lol.

Quote me where this is said.

TIL: Owners of companies don't dictate the direction of their companies

Originally posted by Robtard
TIL: Owners of companies don't dictate the direction of their companies

Triggered.

Pretty funny, considering a short while ago you cried when Beni used that on you. There's a word for that...

#It'sOkayWhenSurturDoesIt

Originally posted by Surtur
So then, the best case scenario is billionaires are forcing issues they don't give a shit about in order to manipulate liberals and make money. Which still translates into that kind of agenda being pushed more than the other. Whatever reason the rich people want to push it, it gets pushed more than the other and this is a problem.

Again, just because something is left of your political viewpoint doesn't make it liberal.

Just look at how much time news networks dedicate to business news. They're quick to tell you about "economic growth" but not quick to tell you that 95% of all growth since 2009 went to the top 1% of wealthy people. They're not quick to tell you that in a decade of stagnant wages that the number of billionaires in the world has tripled and the number of millionaires has went up 60%. They're quick to tell you about tax scandals of celebrities they don't like but not quick to tell you how they and other conglomerates avoid hundreds of billions of taxes in off-shore tax havens.

You should read Manufacturing Consent.

I don't have a problem with "Liberals". Its the Marxist/Socialist/Leftist Progressive/PC SJW Nazis I got the prob with.