Jump to content

Rayvin

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21563

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Rayvin

  1. Rayvin
    I think HF made a good point before (not sure if intended) wherein he noted that in the UK, a Trump style victory wouldn't currently be possible. We're still too used to following the tabloids (in general). Obviously here it's the right wing tabloids that influence people predominantly. Trump bypassed the media. He held mass rallies, he use TV opportunities to speak directly - people consumed Trump news from Trump, not the media. As such, he managed to win despite their efforts. And I agree, the media do control fuck all. They influence much though, albeit a diminishing amount in an age where they're struggling for both traffic, sales and attention.
  2. Rayvin
    Some of them were reporting 1% then. None of them were thinking it was likely.
  3. Rayvin
    Nope, don't think so? Was that just after his election? Fair enough if so, it'd at least tell me where that majority HF mentioned came from.
  4. Rayvin
    Trump and Corbyn? Russia? Neoliberalism I could just start throwing all my buzz words at you now.
  5. Rayvin
    Look, this is what I would say in support of that statement. The media over here is universal in condemnation of Trump, right? I mean, I assume even the Mail has been critical. So we think Trump is an absolute disaster. And yet, he still retains widespread support from those who voted him in. You wouldn't know that to listen to the media though. They're out of touch. They didn't see Brexit or Trump coming (they gave Trump a 1% chance of winning on election day). How can we trust the media's representation of how people feel any more? Why do you put so much faith in them? Too many echo chambers around these days...
  6. Rayvin
    I don't think we're necessarily representative though, and I don't think you can pull those two numbers together and make an assumption as to how things might have gone if the press had sat back and said 'well let's see what he has to say first'. We know his policies poll well, and we know he wasn't associated with old New Labour and their poisonous brand. His issue was that he galvanized the whole establishment in opposition to him and that the press were clearly not happy with him. I know what you're saying mind, but the fact remains that we can't say with certainty that Corbyn couldn't have capitalised on an anti-establishment, anti-austerity narrative. What I remember from the early days of his time in power was people throwing media articles about how useless he would be around, and how his colleagues were coming out to discredit him. It was a fucking shambles. If the whole establishment had come together to oppose Brexit as effectively as it did Corbyn, we'd not be leaving Europe. But look, you made a good point before - in the UK it's not yet possible to bypass traditional media. It's coming, but it's not there yet. The Americans have already sailed through that - Trump cut them off at the knees though. Fewer people in the US trust the media than trust Trump. Something like 48% behind Trump and 42% behind the media. Is this all Trump's fault? If it isn't, whose is it?
  7. Rayvin
    Also curious about this - clearly not the majority who voted for him, so who else are you talking about?
  8. Rayvin
    I notice that you can't say the same about the US
  9. Rayvin
    What happens when the media all take the same side on an issue?
  10. Rayvin
    I don't blame them for all the world's ills, I blame them for ignoring them. But yes, the press is not always a collective entity. On some issues it is though. Corbyn was one. Trump is another fwiw. Russia seems to be as well.
  11. Rayvin
    They're definitely to blame for the 'received wisdom' of his unelectability. In your world, are the press an entirely passive, non-partisan force or something?
  12. Rayvin
    Personally, I think this is because Trump is correct when he labels the media as the opposition party. He's not saying that just cos he wants it to be true, he saying it because it's exactly how they're acting. Because Trump's victory wasn't over the democrats, it was over the status quo. If the democrats choose the left wing change option, it'll be interesting to see what the media does. I suspect they'll throw their lot in behind it because they can't do anything else. I suspect they'd overwhelmingly prefer the centrist option though. EDIT - if they give the Corbyn treatment to a more left wing Democratic party, then we'll know which option they'd have preferred, I guess.
  13. Rayvin
    Missed this altogether but I think we can safely say that if they choose the former they will immediately become an unelectable laughing stock, a dismal opposition, and out of touch with everyone.
  14. Rayvin
    There are a number of people on the Brexit side who seem convinced that we have the upper hand in negotiations for some reason, and for the life of me I just can't see how. What frustrates me more than anything here though is that both the EU and the UK governments will present the outcome as 'a great deal' by couching it in utter gibberish so that we don't really know what it means. And then there'll be a public inquiry or review 10 years down the line when those involved have either left office or died (basically, have become unaccountable), which will reveal that actually, the deal was beyond shit.
  15. Rayvin
  16. Rayvin
  17. Rayvin
    The Israelis didn't do it. We did it. And generally when that sort of thing happens, the invading country doesn't displace the existing populace with it's own citizens. I can't imagine any other historical example of this being done having gone any better than what we're seeing now. Moreover, this happened at the birth of the 'civilised' age. We should know better than this.
  18. Rayvin
    Quite a few people on spurs boards now consider him to be the worst signing, pound for pound, that they've ever made.
  19. Rayvin
    So what? It changed hands in living memory and the expectation is that the displaced just get over it? It should have never happened. Of course, it did happen. But only the most rational of the displaced peoples will be ambivalent about that. We wouldn't meet that standard, dunno why we should expect it of them.
  20. Rayvin
    Yeah I can see that rationally but to be fair, this happened with no consideration for the Palestinian people and they will see this as an enforced occupation. If it had happened to us we'd probably not like it either. I daresay most of us would believe the state that was created in our country had no right to exist. This isn't really Israel's fault mind, but if Europe was going to give them anything, it should have given them part of Europe. Unbelievable arrogance for us to do what we did.
  21. Rayvin
    I meant more the creation of the state altogether. Can't comment on the apartheid bit, don't know enough of the particulars.
  22. Rayvin
    Yep, both good points. It does seem obvious that the Palestinian side can't be placated and that Israel responds accordingly. That said, I still understand why the Palestinians are pissed off. This whole shambles remains one of the stupidest acts of politics ever considered IMO.
  23. Rayvin
  24. Rayvin
    Yep, good article. Ignores the atrocities committed but makes a good case for the basic position.
  25. Rayvin
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

  I accept