|
Post by Dex on May 13, 2016 12:53:00 GMT -5
Johnny Depp Weighs In I wonder how many people are going to care. Johnny Depp: Trump Would Be Final President Of The United States Actor Johnny Depp sees a gloomy outlook for the future of America if presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump were to win the presidency. While doing press for his latest film, “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” Depp was asked Wednesday by United Kingdom-based Channel 5 News whether the actor would like to see the billionaire demagogue as the next president of the U.S. “If Donald Trump is elected president of the United States, in a kind of historical way it’s exciting because we will see the actual last president of the United States,” Depp said. “It just won’t work after that.” “So you won’t be thrilled if that happens?” reporter Minnie Stephenson asked. “I don’t believe in that stuff, you know?” Depp replied. Earlier this year, Depp portrayed the bombastic reality television personality in “The Art of the Deal: The Movie” a satirical biopic about the real estate developer released by comedy website Funny or Die. The parody film took its title from Trump’s own 1987 non-parody book “The Art of the Deal.” Depp has condemned Trump in the past, and during a recent Q&A at Arizona State University for the parody film, Depp simply laid out his feelings about the Republican presidential hopeful. “What he is, I believe, is a brat,” Depp said. www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/johnny-depp-donald-trump_us_5734f151e4b077d4d6f28c9b
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 13, 2016 15:47:21 GMT -5
Even though I'm a Johnny Depp fan, I'm not impressed. lol No doubt some people out there will pick upon this and pass it along as a true fact.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 13, 2016 17:53:14 GMT -5
Johnny Depp is a very good actor, other than that his opinions have no real value.
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 13, 2016 23:34:41 GMT -5
Here's a nice little boost for Trump from Jeff Sessions (R Ala)Sen. Sessions: Election offers a simple choice For the first time in a long time, this November will give Americans a clear choice on perhaps the most important issue facing our country and our civilization: whether we remain a nation-state that serves its own people, or whether we slide irrevocably toward a soulless globalism that treats humans as interchangeable widgets in the world market. In Donald Trump, we have a forceful advocate for America. Trump has said that our trade, immigration and foreign policies must be changed to protect the interests of American workers and our nation. In Hillary Clinton, we have a committed globalist. Clinton was an ardent supporter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership — which surrenders American sovereignty to an international union of 12 countries — and has clearly left the door wide open to enacting the pact if elected. There is only one sure way to defeat the TPP, and that is to defeat Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, Clinton’s immigration platform is the most radical in our history. Freezing deportations. Ending detentions. Halting enforcement. She’d expand President Obama’s illegal amnesty decree, effectively creating open borders. www.usatoday.com/opinion/
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 14, 2016 3:10:47 GMT -5
what a horrible choice..damned if you vote either way.... globalisation reduces the voter to a commodity ie human resources...and nothing more than a consumers on the other hand Trump is an unknown egotist who so far has not covered himself in glory
I think I would go for Trump..in that he and the state combined do not have the power or the ruthlessness of the global profit control maniacs...whose only values are profit at any price
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 24, 2016 0:17:32 GMT -5
Donald Trump is going to win: This is why Hillary Clinton can’t defeat what Trump represents Here's the first paragraph of a Salon article. Worth reading, but if you don't want to read it all or don't have time for that ... at least, go read the last paragraph. The neofascist reaction, the force behind Trump, has come about because of the extreme disembeddedness of the economy from social relations. The neoliberal economy has become pure abstraction; as has the market, as has the state, there is no reality to any of these things the way we have classically understood them. Americans, like people everywhere rising up against neoliberal globalization (in Britain, for example, this takes the form of Brexit, or exit from the European Union), want a return of social relations, or embeddedness, to the economy.more www.salon.com/2016/05/23/donald_trump_is_going_to_win_this_is_why_hillary_clinton_cant_defeat_what_trump_represents/
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 24, 2016 2:41:25 GMT -5
""""Americans, like people everywhere rising up against neoliberal globalization (in Britain, for example, this takes the form of Brexit, or exit from the European Union),""
not sure I would title it neoliberalism...its more enslavement to a money market run by the large coporates.... people every where across the planet are fighting the onslaught of control by those who can see no further than a profit margin....people are sick of being manipulated and looked on as nothing more than a resource the end aim of course is global government...under a [so far]benign eye...a few at the top in areas of the planet directing events..and the so called elite scramble for places at the top for them and theirs...
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 24, 2016 21:51:47 GMT -5
The article comprises sophomoric gibberish. He was obviously paid by the word. It bored me to tears.
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 24, 2016 23:19:33 GMT -5
The article comprises sophomoric gibberish. He was obviously paid by the word. It bored me to tears. I'm replying from the Recent Posts thread and can't see exactly where this post is located. But, have to guess it's about the Salon article. Must say ... you nailed it. ha!
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 25, 2016 0:08:38 GMT -5
Anis Shivani is mostly a fiction author. A fiction author who can turn a phrase as easy as walking. Reading his words made me think for a moment that I had entered an off campus rathskeller filled those who finally read their text books on Economics 101 and Anthropology. And now, has found a place to use those new words. His mixing of politics, pseudo economics and anthropology, hasn’t really added anything except to muddy the waters.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 26, 2016 5:08:27 GMT -5
well he may have muddied the water and been extravagant with his choice of words but he actually is spot on...the rise of Trump is the voice of those who feel dispossesd and irelivent in the face of the contempt of the present polititions and corporates who and what exactly does globalisation do for the average person ?? does it make life better..no it simply makes life more uniform ..more meaningless with the end game of global government coming ever nearer globalisation hasn't housed the homeless..fed the hunry or cured the sick or provided clean water...but it has ensured bigger profits..it has ensured that the children of the Russian/Chinese/America and European can post pictures of them selves with what ever new toy money can buy..and this new world elite...are contemptuous and how they do show it of the average man and women with their displays of obcene wealth Globalistion what good doe it do...it isn't globalisation which improves the lot of the average man or woman...all globalisation does is reinforce divisons.. down with globalisation Clinton.... """Meanwhile, Clinton’s immigration platform is the most radical in our history. Freezing deportations. Ending detentions. Halting enforcement. She’d expand President Obama’s illegal amnesty decree, effectively creating open borders""" absolute madness..has America learnt nothing from the catastrophe which is present day Europe
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on May 26, 2016 18:05:42 GMT -5
Trump reaches the magic number WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump on Thursday reached the number of delegates needed to clinch the Republican nomination for president, completing an unlikely rise that has upended the political landscape and sets the stage for a bitter fall campaign. Trump was put over the top in the Associated Press delegate count by a small number of the party's unbound delegates who told the AP they would support him at the convention. Among them is Oklahoma GOP chairwoman Pam Pollard. "I think he has touched a part of our electorate that doesn't like where our country is," Pollard said. "I have no problem supporting Mr. Trump." more www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-reaches-the-magic-number-to-clinch-nomination/ar-BBtvX3y?ocid=spartandhp\
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 26, 2016 18:15:45 GMT -5
Only MSN would characterize Trump's rise as "unlikely."
He had it in the bag from jump.
|
|
Jessiealan
xr
Member of the Month, October 2013
Posts: 8,726
|
Post by Jessiealan on May 26, 2016 19:29:52 GMT -5
Only MSN would characterize Trump's rise as "unlikely." He had it in the bag from jump. You are probably right, given his personality and his fanning the flames of "states rights" in the critical southern states. I think it is likely he has a more cosmopolitan view than he has presented during this campaign. Some of his supporters may be disappointed later on.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 26, 2016 19:53:37 GMT -5
Only MSN would characterize Trump's rise as "unlikely." He had it in the bag from jump. You are probably right, given his personality and his fanning the flames of "states rights" in the critical southern states. I think it is likely he has a more cosmopolitan view than he has presented during this campaign. Some of his supporters may be disappointed later on. I believe that it is likely that Donald Trump will change in some respects (undetermined at present) assuming he eventually becomes President. Will the change be negative or positive, obviously none of us know, we can (and do) guess, but we don’t know. There is one other thing which I have seen come up in the past which I haven’t seen defined and I’m guessing that it is mention in a negative sense and I would like (if possible) some clarity on the issue. That is the comment, “. . . fanning the flames of "states rights. . . “ For me I view States’ Rights as is defined within the Constitution. But I guessing that here it is referred to in a different context. I can easily be wrong but I am interested in more definition.
|
|