It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
...and everything just happened to go tits up.
- Gaddafi stayed in power and was as brutal as Assad was in dealing with the popular uprising.
- Egyptian public discontent bubbled for another two years before exploding in popular anger, resulting in just as much chaos as happened in reality.
- Same in Syria, except more refugees were killed before they could flee in a quicker, more brutal and less drawn out conflict.
- Iraq and Afghanistan destabilised faster and more chaotically than they actually have, and as a result Isis took a much stronger grip on the middle east region while islamist militant forces took back control of Afghanistan and the Pakistan border region.
- Saudi's decrease oil production, knock on effects cause worse economic performance around the fragile recovery of the early 2010's. Domestic Unemployment rises.
- Without US support, Israel's position becomes more tenuous. Attacks on Israeli settlers increase, government responds by further annexing Palestinian land and forced relocations, which sparks a new outright conflict.
As a world leader, you are blamed for this, everyone hates you and people on forums discuss what at IDIOT you were for not interfering more in libya, supporting regime change at the critical moment in Egypt, Ignoring the plight of Syrians, letting Iraq and Afghanistan go to the dogs, provoking Saudi Arabia and not supporting Israel.
My point is, even with the benefit of hindsight, you just don't know what would have happened. And most of the problems you'd be blamed for aren't really your fault, it's just that humans are *fucked up* and do terrible things to each other all the time. Then we look for who to blame.
Just let me point out in closing that I agree with all of your points, for example when the US finally didn't veto the UN resolution against settlement building last month I was very surprised and pleased. But my point is that as a world leader, you're basically herding feral cats.
Bandcamp
Spotify, Apple et al
I don't think he had a choice - he wasn't a dictator. He'd have had advisers and the Senate breathing down his neck.
And I wasn't being serious.
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
But couldn't eat a whole one...
No I am not asserting that he was a household name to rival that of, say, John Cena or Miley Cyrus, and at no point did I attempt to assert that. Instead I focused purely on your words:
"I’d wager nobody in the USA had ever heard of him before Trump brought him over so he’s hardly in a position to influence the US electorate."
I emphasise the 'nobody' element. Clearly that is erroneous.
In keeping with everything else you've written in this thread, there is nothing of substance so I shall cease this engagement now.
But that's beside the point. My original post was pointing out the hypocrisy of Obama complaining of interference in an election by a third party whilst at the same time being instrumental in some brutal uprisings and regime changes by brutal means.
Never mind though eh? You pointed out a mistake on the internet. Have the rest of the week off darling.
Offset "(Emp) - a little heavy on the hyperbole."
If nobody had known of him as you stated, then he wouldn't have been on American television over the six year period. If nobody had heard of him, then he wouldn't have spoken at the Heritage Foundation in both 2015 and 2016. The Farage influence on American politics is not some wispy cloud. No, I completely agree that the average man in the American street wouldn't recognise him. But many folk within politics would and did and listened to what he said and watched how he and UKIP have operated.
It's also more than one mistake. Never become a football referee: constantly moving goalposts only leads to bizarre scorelines, darling.
A football referee? Have you watched football lately? They make howlers all the time, I'd fit right in.
Obama could have ended Hilary Clinton in his first term by not appointing her to his administration. He would not take the risk, so the Clintons continued to dominate the democrats.
So now its Trump´s turn.
Can't see Trump lasting long. If he lasts longer than a year, I think someone will assassinate him. His tenure is going to be bizarre I think. Its all very well tearing up the rulebook, but this twat can't even read.
What I dislike intensley is his media coaching. He rarely spoke a sentence in one go without pause.
Every few words
there was a pause
so that the telly and radio
could pick
at sound bites.
That's it exactly. Farage's efforts over the years didn't go unnoticed in America. A small party without huge funds with pretty much one man as the figurehead managed to sustain a series of attacks on the EU and played a huge part in the Brexit result. No matter what Nigel came out with, right up to his near-gibberish on Nigerians with AIDS during the televised debates last election, nothing really stuck to him and took away from his principal message, that of being anti-EU. A man who can do that without actually getting elected as an MP is a curious one but one to learn from.
And Steven Bannon of Breitbart saw that. Farage's own book, The Purple Revolution, talked about the September 2014 meeting with Republicans and Tea Party officials in September 2014.
Bloomberg ran an excellent article in October 2015 where it mentioned the annual Conservative Political Action Conference that took place in 2015. It mentions how Bannon had two guests with him. One was a duck hunter turned television star; the other was Farage.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2015-steve-bannon/
Relationship building like that is how Farage influenced the US election. Getting involved with the Heritage Foundation saw his influence grow. His relationship with Breitbart grew and articles under his name started appearing online in mid-2015. Some of the Breitbart rivals saw this. I invite you to read a hilarious article by Louise Mensch for instance:
http://heatst.com/world/steven-bannon-is-the-link-between-donald-trump-and-nigel-farage/
The chronology of the Bannon-UKIP involvement is all there alongside the absurd Mensch barbs which now look even more hollow since Trump won.
So Farage didn't influence the election in a 'Look, you should vote for The Donald' way. Not at all. He influenced it in showing Bannon how you could fight an election. Bannon took that and ran with it with Trump. Nigel Farage is unquestionably for me the most influential British politician since the Reverend Blair (with obviously no judgement on whether that is a positive or negative influence), all the more remarkable considering his General Election failures and the failure of his party to build on the increase in coverage.
Not so much circles as us having a different idea of influence. I agree that on the street influence appealing to the average American baseball fan, Farage is very small. It's the behind the scenes influence that I'm on about. As wagers are in, I would lay down $50 that most Americans couldn't recognise Steve Bannon in the street but there'd be no doubting his influence on proceedings in America.
I'm not a party man when it come to politics. I'm sure that some eejits would look at me saying Farage is influential and take that as me endorsing his policies and standpoints. Not at all. Farage's greatest weakness over here, not knowing when to stop when it comes to some of his more ludicrous comments, actually became a strength for Trump. Farage showed Bannon what could be achieved on a pretty shoestring budget, and Bannon took that to the next level with a far greater budget and media framework around him.
All of this makes Nigel Farage the Velvet Underground of British politics: pretty unsuccessful in terms of sales but look at the motherfucking influence afterwards!
My Dad used to complain that he couldn't explain or explore something without eejits assuming that meant he supported or condoned it. If you mention Trump without villifying him, many folks on here think you're defending him. Perhaps we need an acronym or emoticon that means "Eejits, I'm going to talk about something now that I neither support nor condone!"
Trump actually completed my hat trick of successful wagers which netted me some coins (predicting result of 2015 General Election, referendum, and US election) which was a rather bittersweet financial bonus. All too often political analysis is reduced to Love or Hate on the knuckles, not surprising when the central ground has been so squashed in the last few years. Nuance has been a major casualty. I still wish the referendum had had that third option: Stay in the EU but demand systematic reform of the entire system.
What we see with Farage, Trump, Corbyn, and Marine Le Pen are figures on the outskirts who don't rely on traditional media to get the message across. That online contact with the electorate is where all four have picked up the baton.