Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Labour gains in British election: From Enniskillen to London Bridge)
(Labour gains in British election)
Line 271: Line 271:
 
:::::::Peter, that is a decent analysis by Mr Steyn but she was never Thatcher, from my point of view she started of this election as Hilary Clinton and ended it as Hilary Clinton. RobS, no, the crash is well behind us now. A good way to show the effect of the crash is to look at house prices which are 15/20 % higher than they were before the crash. Conservative, the DUP are strong protestants and are very socially conservative although more fiscally liberal. Conservative protestants hold the balance of power in The UK, they are the kingmakers.--[[User:Tory1|Tory1]] ([[User talk:Tory1|talk]]) 17:26, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
 
:::::::Peter, that is a decent analysis by Mr Steyn but she was never Thatcher, from my point of view she started of this election as Hilary Clinton and ended it as Hilary Clinton. RobS, no, the crash is well behind us now. A good way to show the effect of the crash is to look at house prices which are 15/20 % higher than they were before the crash. Conservative, the DUP are strong protestants and are very socially conservative although more fiscally liberal. Conservative protestants hold the balance of power in The UK, they are the kingmakers.--[[User:Tory1|Tory1]] ([[User talk:Tory1|talk]]) 17:26, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
 
::::::::I taught ''Nineteen Eighty-Four'' to some of my classes recently, so I have the image in my mind of a London where bombs go off without warning as the locals go about their business and try not to notice. The 2016 exit polls showed that terrorism was the No. 1 concern of U.S. voters. Steyn argues that the British are way past that sort of thing and are "[https://www.steynonline.com/7889/getting-used-to-it Getting Used to It]." He illustrates the decline of civilization by comparing the outrage over Enniskillen in 1987 to today's ennui. Only tweets can spark outrage these days. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:31, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
 
::::::::I taught ''Nineteen Eighty-Four'' to some of my classes recently, so I have the image in my mind of a London where bombs go off without warning as the locals go about their business and try not to notice. The 2016 exit polls showed that terrorism was the No. 1 concern of U.S. voters. Steyn argues that the British are way past that sort of thing and are "[https://www.steynonline.com/7889/getting-used-to-it Getting Used to It]." He illustrates the decline of civilization by comparing the outrage over Enniskillen in 1987 to today's ennui. Only tweets can spark outrage these days. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:31, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::I shudder to think of the dog's dinner you must've made of teaching ''Nineteen Eighty-Four''. Any man who can read that Steyn article beyond "the remorseless Islamization of Britain" without being incapacitated by laughter should be instantly barred from teaching. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:13, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:13, 9 June 2017

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal

Archive Index

Manchester terror attack - Please add to Main Page News

The Manchester terror attack killed 22 people, injured about 59, and ISIS claimed responsibility for it.[1] Why in the world has no one added it yet? --1990'sguy (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

I don't know. It would certainly belong, and Conservative himself mentioned it on this talk page earlier. Was that you, blocked and coming back under the name FTorres?--Nathan (talk) 11:22, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
It has not been posted because the UK is "godless" [2][3]. It his mind it is probably deserved.--FTorres (talk) 11:32, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Just post the story and prove you are not a heartless hatemonger.--TtSmith (talk) 12:00, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Just who are the real hatemongers, Mr. Smith? People on this website, or those in your country who let these terrorists in to kill? Karajou (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Neither; it's the terrorists themselves. Trick question.--Nathan (talk) 12:11, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
So folk allowing in people who have lost their homes to American aggression are hatemongers? I go for you. PS, what happened to "destroy isis in 30 days"?--TtSmith (talk) 12:13, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
So now it's "blame America" for the problems there. You need a sedative, Smitty. Karajou (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Hey, Karajou added the Manchester bombing, and Conservative added something mentioning its influence on the election. Also, I suspect his name isn't "Smith."--Nathan (talk) 13:21, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
It's not. This guy has been trolling before, under the names TrSmith, TtSmith, ElijahT, FrankLa, and perhaps a few more, so he's pretty much the hatemonger that he tries to accuse us of being. Oh well. Karajou (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
I open the page to Conservative massively censoring something. Wonderful. The hatemongers are the terrorists, not the Americans, not the Brits. Asking whether its the 'people on this website or those in your country who let these terrorists in' is a false dichotomy, since the 'people who let these terrorists in' neither A) intentionally let them in nor B) is an opposite point to 'the people of this website'. Vive Liberté! 17:13, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Nobody let him in. He was a Brit. Rafael (talk) 15:00, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
Technically yes, but that statement distorts the facts. His parents were Lybian refugees (and his brothers and father were arrested[4]), and he had just come home from Lybia and Syria, where he presumably trained for what he did.[5] He is more Libyan/Muslim than British. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:51, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
and just what or who are we censoring, Koi? The false accusations from liberals? The false dichotomy that comes from liberals? Saying that we should accept all these poor "refugees" and yet be called hatemongers because we've identified the fact that most of them are military-age males with killers hiding within them just Speaks volumes about your kind. This is a conservative website, Koi. You don't like it, leave. Karajou (talk) 23:57, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for updating MPR, Conservative and Karajou. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

The person I banned was someone not creating article content and who engaged in foolish behavior on the talk page. For example, he made it appear that Trump said the USA would defeat ISIS in 30 days once he was in office. Trump said no such thing. Trump said he would have his people come up with a plan to defeat ISIS and the plan would be in place within 30 days. Conservative (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
I been following BBC & other reporting on this for two days; the same people who have been expressing concern about terrorism 24/7 for 16 years the BBC and other MSM were calling 'facsist' 3 days ago. Now they talk this rot that "we all stand together". Nuh ah. No we don't. It's a new ball game. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:34, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

Trump and Alzheimer’s

The Young Turks is blaming Roger Stone for this story, so I decided to trace the genealogy:

I see David Pakman did this story back on March 30: "Is Trump Suffering from Dementia?" The video noted that Trump is more coherent when he reads a script, refuting an earlier Pakman video that claimed Trump is illiterate. (The illiteracy video is far more popular than the Alzheimer's one.) PeterKa (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
It's pretty much reached the point where the liberal media has become so desperate in their affliction with Trump Derangement Syndrome that they'll throw anything at the wall, no matter how far-fetched, outlandish or false, to see what sticks. Northwest (talk) 02:47, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
Rush Limbaugh reports that Sen. Al Franken had to send out a tweet to supporters that Donald Trump was not going to be impeached this month. I think it is time we begin resurrecting articles on the relative intelligence of liberals and conservatives again. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:39, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
"To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil." - Charles Krauthammer[6]
"Liberals believe that human nature is fundamentally good. The fact that this is contradicted by, oh, 4,000 years of human history simply tells them how urgent is the need for their next seven-point program for the social reform of everything." - Charles Krauthammer[7]
More Americans are conservatives than liberals. In addition, a sizable portion of the world's population disagrees with various Western liberal ideologies. For example, there are anti-homosexuality laws in about 70 countries of the world.
If Krauthammer is correct, this means that Western liberals have a great capacity for engaging in doublethink (Doublethink is the acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination). Conservative (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
Nowhere do you see this more clearly than among American Jews who call themselves liberal and support Israel. They can recite pro-Obama or anti-Trump talking points like Sir Laurence Olivier delivering a command performance. Then when the subject turns to Bibi Netanyahu, suddenly it becomes "I agree with Obama on everything but...", or Trump "there is one good thing to say...". None of this comes from any deep-seated conviction, or even rational dissection of the issues. It is emotional, handed down by tradition, a role to play. I view it as an opening. I say "Good. Let's talk Islam and the Palestinians." It's not worth debating a philosophical outlook with somebody whose reasoning is full of holes, and their attitudes are guided by habit and emotion. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:22, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

The British Tories and Immigration

MPR and the source says the Tories are running on an anti-immigration platform. That's a half-truth.

The Tories have stated that they want to cut migration but, in their manifesto, they say its an "aim" rather than a target or a policy. In other words, they're saying they're going to do something about it but, as they did in 2010 and 2015, they are leaving themselves room for a quick U turn. In the UK, we hold the government to account on its manifesto promises.

What's more, Theresa May was Home Secretary - and responsible for immigration - between 2010 and becoming PM. Her failure to do anything is not a good sign, particularly as she has a track record of passing the buck. This is worrying as the main plank of her manifesto is managing Brexit successfully and very little else of substance - something the British people can see. She started the election campaign with a huge advantage - 28% IIRC - and was down to a 12% lead as of last weekend.

There are far more conservative parties than Theresa May and her carpetbaggers. UKIP, for all its weaknesses, is the only major party with consistently conservative policies.

Could the attack on Monday help May and the Tories. Could be. She's certain to win anyway, but she may not get the parliamentary majority she needs to drive through any significant policies. Rafael (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

I removed the article from main page right.Conservative (talk) 23:51, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
How could May not get a majority? The polls I've seen give her massive leads. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:52, 24 May 2017 (EDT)
The British system works on the number of Parliamentary seats won and the majority refers to the number of surplus MPs the government has. The larger the majority, the easier it is to pass legislation. May called the election because her majority was tiny, small enough to put her government in danger. On the back of the polls, she expected a massive parliamentary majority, enough to reduce the Labour party to political irrelevance. She's managed to squander most of that lead and could end up with a larger majority than now but still not a definitive one. The Labour party, on the other hand, has seen a resurgence.
The bottom line is that May is a cynical opportunist. Remember, she campaigned to stay in the EU and, like Marine Le Pen, changed her mind when it suited her. For all her talk, people are starting to see through her.Rafael (talk) 02:00, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
Why is the British Labor party in such sad shape? cause their globalist leaders and allies shipped all their jobs to China and there's no Labor movement left? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:33, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
In the last month, Labour has gone from 25 percent in the polls to 34 percent. The Conservatives have gone to from 40 to 45 percent. Meanwhile, UKIP and the Lib Dems are way down.[8] PeterKa (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
The Labour Party is in bad shape because it's led by an old school socialist, well to the left of Bernie Sanders. Ironically, Jeremy Corbyn is the only major party leader who isn't a globalist. Theresa May is mainly about keeping foreign capital happy and Tim Farron - an evangelical Christian - is the most pro EU of all. Very different from the US model! Rafael (talk) 18:35, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
I read about Farron, and he also supports homosexual "marriage" and the legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes. I shouldn't judge his faith, but his positions are inconsistent with Scripture. Regarding May, she may be a globalist, but she's expressed a more nationalistic platform (regardless of whether she will actually follow through on it). --1990'sguy (talk) 19:00, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
So what are May:s strengths? Speaking as someone who admittedly knows nothing about it, my impression is she's a good internal party consensus builder with very clear public speaking skills. Does she have this at a national level, though? Does she have the international "vision thing"? My impression is, she's just the most articulate party spokesperson right now, but maybe I'm wrong. Is she ambitious for a program or ideology, or just a party caretaker bureaucrat? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:08, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

Liberal meltdown and desperation tactics: A look at the future

See Essay: Liberal meltdown and desperation tactics: A look at the future

In the short term and midterm, liberals will probably get more and more desperate. Conservative (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Reporter assaulted, Trump blamed

Is there any news anywhere that can't be blamed on Trump? If the Onion ran this, people would say it was unrealistic: "Press advocates see Trump’s words behind physical attacks on journalists." The press has been egging on political violence by Black Lives Matter and anti-Trump protesters at least since Ferguson. But when it happens to them, they are incapable of self-reflection. PeterKa (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Here is my response:
Hopefully, the dust will settle in Western politics without a lot of bloodshed. Conservative (talk) 06:40, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
  • Ah, Conservative? The Nazis were not right-wing, they were left-wing, as even Conservapedia had to take pains to stress. The Nazis were only called right-wing due to Stalin wanting to pull a CYA. We really shouldn't be adopting what the left claims about the right, so we really need to fix that bit if not get rid of that article altogether. Pokeria1 (talk) 09:15, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

I've heard the left say fight Trump supporters, allude to punch a Nazi and the media nods in agreement [9] [10]. Media attacked and it's how can you justify violence Trump supporters? I love that Gianforte won despite it all. It really shows that the media has completely lost control and is looked at as lower than pond scum. How many special elections have Democrats lost since Trump's election? All of them! --Jpatt 09:26, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

Dems are 0-3 in special elections; and if you throw in the Omaha mayoral race where the national party spent some resources, 0-4. The Resistance seems to be loosing at the ballot box.
MSM has no one to blame but themselves. They reported an alleged assault on a MSM reporter 24 hrs before an election, and nobody believes them. Innocent til proven guilty. And Montana in no sense can be considered a hardcore red state, either.
Despite all the nasty garbage the London Guardian plans to write about the GOP in Podunk, Idaho, maybe they'll think twice before failing to respect local cultural norms (like they would in Demascus or Mecca) before they bring their big city rudeness into town, chasing the Almighty dollar, and spew hate rhetoric on their pages. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:37, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
Pokeria, I didn't specifically say the Nazis were right-wing and I went out of my way to call them the National Socialist German Workers Party. Nevertheless, you were right that I should have clarified matters and so I just clarified that point in the essay. Conservative (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
Okay, fine. This line definitely threw me off, though, since it seemed to conflate the right-wing with the Nazis and Social Darwinists:
"The right-winger Anders Breivik was influenced by both right-wing politics and liberal/left-wing ideology to some extent. For example, he was influenced by contemporary European right-wing politics, evolutionism/social Darwinism and National Socialist German Workers Party (NAZI) ideology (See also: Nazism and socialism and Anders Breivik—Social Darwinism leads to mass murder). Breivik gave a Nazi like salute during a recent court appearance. Adolf Hitler was also greatly influenced by Darwinist ideology (see: Social effects of the theory of evolution). "
Pokeria1 (talk) 16:26, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

Pokeria, I further clarified things. Thanks. Conservative (talk) 16:42, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

Montana election: not good for Dems

Gianforte's bodyslam may have actually caused people to vote for him.[11][12] Either way, this doesn't look good for the Democrats, and they do not have the "momentum" they need. I'm glad they have nothing to gawk about so far. If the GOP is able to win 60 Senate seats in 2018, they will actually be able to pass legislation. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:47, 26 May 2017 (EDT)

Now that Gianforte won, the MSM is trying to make the case that Trump had very little to do with this election.[13] I think they would have put a different spin on the election had socialist Quist won.
Also, Dems are probably going to say that Gianforte's six-point win was small compared to Trump's 20-point win in 2016, however, that is a false comparison. Montana is not as Republican on the state level, as the Democrats try to frame themselves as more conservative (pro-gun, in particular). Democrats can win in Montana (they have a Dem governor, a U.S. Senator, and had more state positions before the two most recent election). Besides, Gianforte only won 5 points less than Trump. It was a good election result. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
Prophetic words:Watch as Gianforte goes to Washington. The media and DNC are looking to ambush him again to provoke a similar response. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:58, 26 May 2017 (EDT)
It's probably not going to happen again. Everyone has moments of rage at one point of life or another. AFAIK, Gianforte is a regular person with no anger issues. Being in front of pushy reporters all day and having them shove microphones in your face is hard to handle, and most politicians are able to deal with it probably because of the presence of security guards and lots of practice. Gianforte has learned his lesson.
However, unlike what many Democrats are saying, it is very reasonable and likely that Trump was an asset to Gianforte and a liability for socialist Quist. He's still popular in conservative places. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
Each Congressional seat is worth $6.5 billion ($3500 billion the size of federal spending ÷ 535 congressional members); with that kind of money, there's enough interest among lobbyists, DNC goons, private investigator, etc. to discover each members weakness. Gianforte revealed his - he can be provoked into a violent reaction. Hence, you routinely get ambushes around the halls of Congress like this. It shouldn't be too hard to provoke a response. The issue and timing has to be just right. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:57, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

Ben Jacobs, the reporter that got bodyslammed, is a scumbag.

Please see:

Its reporters like Jacob that have caused America's trust in the media to further plunge.[14] Conservative (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

Al Franken body slammed a Larouchie who was heckling Howard Dean back in 2004.[15] Four years later, Minnesota elected him U.S. senator. Far from apologizing, he sounds quite proud of himself. Franken attacked a protester in a public place. Jacobs pushed his way into a private office where he had no right to be.
In 2014, Jacobs tweeted about how much he wanted to punch a 16-year-old conservative journalist at CPAC, according to Twitchy. PeterKa (talk) 22:37, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

Are NeverTrumpers deplorable too?

MSNBC recently hired George Will while The New York Times hired Brett Stephens, both conservative Hillary supporters. As far as Hillary is concerned, it's just as bad as Chamberlain offering Hitler a job at Munich: “Why … would … you … do … that?....It’s clearly a commercial decision. But I don’t think it will work. I mean, they’re laughing on the right at these puny efforts to try to appease people on the right.”[16] Actually, I doubt it was a commercial decision. The MSM is hoping to split NeverTrumpers off from the rest of the conservative movement. PeterKa (talk) 02:42, 28 May 2017 (EDT)

This just in: Kathy Griffin has gone certifiable

Something that might be considered for the Main Page news section: Heads roll: Now CNN chops Kathy Griffin

Northwest (talk) 00:05, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

Now she's blaming "sexism" for the fallout from the controversy, as if she didn't go one step below an outright death threat by her image of her acting like ISIS chopping off the president's head.[17] --1990'sguy (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
I took her apology as being sincere - when she was trying to save her job. Then at the press conference this morning, she unloads more abuse and blaming him for her getting fired (kinda like Hillary blaming Putin & Comey for her own stupidity and incompetence). Looks like we have to add Jim Carey to the boycott list. Oh, somebody should add this incident to the CNN article. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:12, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
It is arguable that Kathy Griffin is a public figure and that there is a low risk a suit for republication of libel or slander. Please be careful to limit your remarks to clearly proveable facts and avoid personal opinion. A public figure can recover for defamation if he can show "actual malace" toward the person being defamed. (A private citizen can recover without regard to "actual malace.") Ms. Griffin was accompanied by her attorney at her last press conference. I doubt that she will sue the Trump family because of their extensive legal resources, but CP could make an easier alternative target. JDano (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

Trump a man of his word

Despite the backlash, despite the lobbyists, the globalists, the socialists, the RINOs all begging for Trump to stay in the Paris Climate Accord, he breaks with it. The election of Jeb or any of the 16 other candidates would have seen us sticking to the accord. The left hook came with ending the TPP. The right upper cut was ending the Paris Accord. The people that lord over us are on the ropes. My confidence in Trump has reached a new level. --Jpatt 00:21, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

In the big scheme of things, Trump had nothing to lose by keeping his promise about this matter. It is not as if his decision is going to cause him to be even more hated by liberals/RINOS. I think he has pretty much plateaued when it comes to liberal/Democrat/RINO hatred towards him. Conservative (talk) 07:15, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
A serious attempt to control the climate would involve jobs lost and enormous costs. Yet the Paris Accord was the most popular treaty in history. From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, from Albania to Yemen, the planet was awed by the sheer brilliance of an idea whose time had come: "Uncle Sucker pays." PeterKa (talk) 08:32, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
I agree that Trump is a man of his word. However, the Paris Accords were non-binding and voluntary targets, so this is more about setting a tone for international cooperation than it is about on-the-ground energy policy. Someone should write a series of articles about different energy options, carbon-capture, "clean coal", electric storage options, REGI, carbon tax, geothermal, and the various international treaties. JDano (talk) 21:12, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
In the next 20 years, energy use is expected to increase dramatically, especially in the non-OECD countries. It certainly won't decrease anywhere. We will need more of everything -- including coal, according to these projections. My favorite is a nuclear reactor redesigned to be nonproliferating. China is working on a thorium molten salt reactor.
In case anyone thought I was exaggerating when I wrote that this was the Uncle Sucker pays accord: "U.S. Paid $1 Billion To Paris Agreement Green Fund – All Other Nations Combined $0" The only country that made a serious attempt to comply with the carbon reductions required by the Kyoto Agreement was New Zealand. They nearly went bankrupt as a result. In the Paris Accord, the proposed reductions were voluntary. Assuming every country complied 100 percent and that the AGW theory is correct, the Accord would leave the world 0.6 degrees to 1.1 degrees Celsius cooler than it would otherwise be in 2100.[18] PeterKa (talk) 18:30, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

London Bridge

Theresa May is in way over her head. She is blaming the internet for spreading Islamic terror and it must be regulated. [19] May is no Thatcher that much is for sure. That is exactly the kind of Mealy-mouthed, 1000 words but no answer, statement we rejected with the election of Trump. In fact, that excuse aligns more with what a President Pelosi would say. Sad, UK citizens should take matters into their own hands in order to save their daughters from Muhammad's death cult. Drive them back to the Middle East. --Jpatt 11:42, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

Looks good - she even admits that "tolerance" is not meant for extremists. But what's the terrorist attack that galvanized this reaction? Is London Bridge really falling down?--Nathan (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

Qatar

Let me present a narrative which hopefully will help make sense out of many unresolved and unanswered questions over many years.

Donald Trump met with Arab leaders in Riyadh. Within days of his leaving several broke diplomat relations with Qatar. Why? and What was discussed? Trump laid down the law -- the weapons supply program that Obama, Hillary, and John Brennan covertly established about March 2011 to groups in Libya and Turkey that evolved into ISIS is over. The Pentagon was out of the loop, that's why the Pentagon could not send assistance during the Benghazi massacre because the Pentagon was unaware US facilities in Benghazi were being used for storage of captured weapons from the Gaddafi regime, or that Benghazi airport was being used for transfer of the weapons to Incirlik in Turkey, near the Syrian border where jihadis were being trained. Michael Flynn, head of the DIA, became aware of the program when a Chinook helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan with a Stinger missile whose serial number matched a batch of Stinger missiles the Pentagon transfered to the CIA. Flynn was outraged, but kept out of the loop. The Obama administration (Hillary's State Dept. and Brennan's CIA) arranged for the return of some of the Stingers from the Taliban, through Qatar, by trading 5 Taliban commanders from Guantanamo for return of the Stingers. The episode had a demoralizing effect on the military - the fact that Obama, Hillary, and Brennan (a) were supplying weapons to jihadists, and (b) Obama, Hillary, and Brennan were releasing captured jihadist commanders back to the battlefield. Tensions between Flynn on one hand, and Hillary/Brennan on the other, led to Obama siding with Hillary/Brennan and firing Flynn.

Flynn, unemployed, went to work for Trump and told him the whole story. The Obama administration, principally Obama, Hillary, Brennan, and Susan Rice, knew that Trump now had full knowledge of what Flynn knew. Flynn also had a vendetta against Obama, Hillary, and Brennan for treating the lives of US military personal so recklessly. This led to efforts to silence Flynn further, discredit both Flynn and Trump, cover the conspirators tracks for their war crimes, and frame both Trump and Flynn up on bogus garbage by further misuse of US intelligence agencies.

Trump served notice face-to-face on Arab leaders (where the NSA can't monitor his calls) and told them "game over." Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, and UAE severed relation with Qatar within 30 minutes of each other. Hillary & Obama's ISIS program -- intended to remove Hezbollah from Israel's borders and weaken Iranian influence in region - is now dead meat. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Sanders slight

NSA Leaker Is A Bernie Sanders Supporter Who ‘Resists’ Donald Trump.[2]
Another defeat for liberals who want to sabotage the Trump administration.

Why would we want to offend Sanders backers? to drive them back into the arms of Hillary or Elizabeth Warren? Wouldn't it be enough to the point out a member of the #Resistance is a traitor? or a climate change activist? or supporter of Iranian terrorism? There's plenty of ammunition to choose from, nonetheless we (again) take the path of isolating ourselves. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:26, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

I changed the title. Conservative (talk)
Sanders attracts the unhinged. Jeremy Christian, the perpetrator in the Portland train knife attack, is a Bernie bro. On Facebook he wrote, "I gonna kill everybody who voted for Trump or Hillary!!!"[20] As far as the media is concerned, he is just another Muslim-bashing Trump supporter. PeterKa (talk) 21:48, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
Sanders won the DNC nomination, and was cheated by Hillary. Hillary won the popular vote in the general. From a Sanders backer perspective, neither one is legitimate and Bernie should be president. And very very much like Trump supporters, they do not believe a word of MSM reporting, and look for alternative sites. The hardcore Sanders backers are more concerned about Deep State cover up of the Murder of Seth Rich, and like all Republicans, concerned about DNC corruption, than the supposed Trump-Russia scandal, which they rightly see as more manufactured lies by the Hillary-swooning media. Sanders supporters, and Sanders himself, have been victimized the by the same group of corrupt media, Democrat establishment types, and Deep State operatives. Giving in to media lies is a betrayal of all they believe in. We need to court them in common cause, not ridicule or offend them. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:00, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
I despise Sanders and everything he stands for. However those that sided with him rejected the corruption of Hillary, the Democrat Party for what they've become. Rob is right for the most part, especially if those corrupt Democrats keep holding onto their power, keep winning super delegates and not the people, put in charge those rejected by the people- like Perez, nominate the next presidential nominee because it was their turn in the hierarchy. It's an opportunity for Trump to show progress in his fight against the Swamp. To win over those that reject the political machine and all it stands for.--Jpatt 22:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
Seth Rich was 26, Reality Winner, a Farsi speaking Air Force volunteer is 25. Among those people under 30 who grew up since 9/11, there is a deep strain of patriotism and love of country, although it became very corrupted under Obama. While I'm unconvinced someone is going to volunteer to serve their country and risk their life to protect the God-given constitutional right of one man sodomizing another in Afghanistan, we should avoid debating such issues with them for the next two election cycles, over the next three years. Pelosi, Sanders, and Hillary are in their 70s. We are on the cusp of generational change of leadership in the DNC. The next generation of DNC leaders are even more wacko. We need steer this younger generation - who genuinely love their country and want to be involved - away from corrupted ideals. It begins with engaging with them, and right now we have more in common and the same opponents. We should not focus on differences. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:31, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
I see your point, but I'm still not supporting Bernie Sanders, because he's a card carrying socialist, and I have absolutely no intention of supporting socialists after what they did to those of my religion or, heck, ANY religion whatsoever. They dug their own grave the moment they decided to make mass graves of various religions, especially us Christians, simply to prove there is no such thing as a religion or deity in the name of "scientific materialism." Even if it is to take down any corrupt democrats, siding with socialists is a very bad idea, since they generally turn out to be just as corrupt as the corrupt democrats we removed. Rob, remember how we sided with Stalin just to stop Hitler, and how that ended badly even after Hitler was deposed? Siding with Bernie Sanders is essentially the same as trying to side with Stalin during World War II, and will achieve the exact same bad results. Besides, as PeterKa pointed out, the Jeremy Christian guy was a Bernie Supporter. Pokeria1 (talk) 06:15, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
No, we should neither support Sanders nor attack Sanders, we should show solidarity with (a) the DNC is corrupt, (b} Seth Rich murder is being covered up, (c) the media is biased toward Hillary and the corrupt DNC machine. If you can't do these things, at a bare minimum stop attacking Sanders and alienating people who love the guy. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:31, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Sorry, but no. We made that mistake with the French Enlightenment Philosophers such as Sade, Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau, and later Karl Marx, and both times we paid for it dearly with multiple mass graves. I have no intention of allowing us to make the same mistake three times. Quite bluntly, anyone who knowingly supports a guy who knowingly supported a communist group during Vietnam and tried to demonize Americans during that time, is automatically an enemy. They are either for us or against us. I'll avoid alienating those who don't know how Sanders is evil when they support him. But I WON'T stop attacking Sanders, or alienating those who do knowingly support such an evil man like him. The only way to truly stop evil is to fight it and destroy it. Pokeria1 (talk) 11:48, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
This has nothing to do with Sanders per se, it has everything to do with Sanders supporters in a limited capacity for a limited time spanning two election cycles in three years. Nobody gives a rip what their ideology is. We share common aims in taking down the corrupt DNC establishment, the corrupt mainstream media, and the corrupt Clinton machine. Period. Sanders himself won't last (he's 76), but Elizabeth Warren, the heir apparent, already cast her lot with the corrupt Clinton machine and corrupt DNC. The corrupt mainstream media will not trash her like they did Sanders & Trump. There's a limited window of opportunity right now, to poach some Sanders backers to the conservative movement. And it's not done by insulting them or debating ideology. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:39, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Same goes for the Jill Stein/Gary Johnson voters, who are the stubborn, hardcore, anti-Hillary, anti-DNC, anti-MSM, left-wing idealogues and Sanders movement remnant whom we not only want, we need to put together an electoral coalition over 50%. Sound crazy? The Hillary/DNC/Deep State/MSM is the main opponent which is intent on destroying both the Sanders movement and the Trump movement. Look at the power they wield. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:04, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Yeah, and we operated with that exact same idea when we aided Stalin to take out Hitler. Guess how well that turned out? Most of Eastern Europe and even parts of the Third World subjected to the horrors of Communism, millions more killed for that sick ideology, the whole Domino Theory ultimately coming to pass, letting them even HAVE our nuclear secrets, and right now most of our education systems and media being so entrenched with communist ideology that it is practically anti-American in all but name. Aiding them, even in the name of stopping Clinton, the corrupt DNC, the MSM, and all of that, will only get us back where we're started, start the cycle again with little change except for who is ultimately pulling the strings there. My idea is to outright get rid of leftist ideology, permanently, which means fighting against both those elements AND the Sanders movement, even the Gary Johnson elements if I must, in order to ensure any threats to God's iron-fisted rule over this planet are extinguished, not stopping until the left itself is completely and utterly DEAD. And yes, I mean exactly what I say about that. We've let Gramsci, the Frankfurt School, Marx, Nietzsche, and the French Enlightenment Philosophers (or, perhaps, the Enlightenment philosophy itself) get away and worked with them in promoting their ideologies for far TOO long, and have caused countless damage as a result. It's time we stopped giving them ANY support at all. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:23, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
To do that you still need a couple million more votes. You have three choices where they come from: (a) hardcore Democrats and Hillary backers; (b) Sanders/Stein/Johnson voters; (c) immigration.
And we're not talking about fighting WWII. We're talking about an electoral coalition for the 2018 Midterm elections and the 2020 Presidential election. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:38, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

Opportunity

After yesterday's blowout of James Comey, where many young liberal millennials again were led down the garden path by the DNC & MSM, [that's strike three: (1) Sanders stolen nomination; (2) Hillary as gonna win big; (3) Comey was going to get Trump impeached] we need to give the smarter ones credit for some intelligence. I find it hard to believe an under 35 ideological liberal Sanders/Stein/Johnson supporter is that shallow or ignorant to not see what is happening, and will blindly surrender their idealism to a demonstrably corrupt media and DNC. We should reachout to them, less we suffer a Theresa May-type setback. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:40, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

Breitbart

I doubt Breitbart moved leftist and it keeps growing exponentially, far from dead. They canned a reporter for Muslim political correctness. I've read stories completely the same as a liberal journalist would create (title was clickbait but the story was a non-story). They pushed rising homosexual journalist Milo. To jump out and say they are leftist is just insulting and false. Mike Cernovich has commented about issues with Breitbart's leadership. We need to stop dividing the right into factions based solely on who is pure. It's another reason why a true conservative can't gain the highest office. The struggle on the right is real. --Jpatt 22:10, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Amen. Bottomline: if Trump is ever to break the 50% mark in approval ratings or a general election, it can only come from Sanders supporters. The sooner we accept this and start acting on it, the better. All else is peeing in the wind. RobSDeep Six the Deep State!</port Breitbart]].sup> 22:21, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
Is it right to abandon Breitbart news? Please read: Essay: Why I no longer support Breitbart.
A farther right-wing alternative to Fox News and Breitbart News is going to spring up. It is not a matter of if. It is a matter of when. The political center is shrinking. Conservative (talk) 03:58, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
You are projecting again user:Conservative. You don't support it doesn't mean it's dead. Nothing in life is perfect and there will never be a perfect conservative candidate nor conservative news source. Critique them is fine, explain their failings and weakness, I am alright with that. Calling them liberal would be a credibility mistake. --Jpatt 10:16, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
A balance needs to be restored. The Bush administration very effectively created the division between Muslims, and radical Muslim terrorists. Unhappy with the status quo, the Obama extremists erased all references to Islam or Muslims. Now the pendulum has swung back to where McHugh of Brietbart did wholesale Twitter postings attacking all Muslims. She's probably too young to remember 9/11, so we are right back where we started in 2001-2003, educating people about terrorists and their motivations.
The big problem is, which Obama exacerbated, there are more of them (terrorists), and they are more widespread. Brietbart is taking the lead in educating people on these issues. The mainstream media sure hasn't, and can't, and won't. They exacerbated the situation along with Obama. McHugh was rightly fired, as Kelly Griffen was, too.
We need to show leadership, as Brietbart has done, and educate people on (1) the true nature of Islam, and (2) the true nature of the terrorist threat. Sanctioning wholesale bigotry, which is what McHugh did, should not be tolerated. The only solution to the problem as she stated it would be Hitler-style round-ups of 2.7 million Muslims based on identity cards, and ship them Allah-knows-where, or put them behind barbed wire. This is insanity. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:26, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Balance? BALANCE?! I don't recall Jesus ever asking for Balance. If anything, his exact words was that he'd spit out the lukewarm, ie, those who believe in balance between two extremes. And for the record, balance won't educate people on the fact that Islam has its adherents practicing Taquiyya, which literally means they are allowed to lie to a non-Muslim to screw them over. In other words, that makes them inherently untrustworthy. And God never wants balance, he wants the whole pie to himself. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

I would not call Breitbart a liberal news outlet. But after they lost Bannon, this most recent event shows that Breitbart went from being a right-wing news website to being a cuckservative news website. I already found replacement news sources which are far better. It is just a matter of time before they lose a large chunk of their audience. I am spending less time following the news anyways. Conservative (talk) 13:43, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

Yeah, and it doesn't help that Internet Explorer currently has trouble allowing me to read their articles without freezing up and reloading the page anyways. Pokeria1 (talk) 13:45, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Pokeria1, I had the same problem with Internet Explorer. Now I use Chrome, and it works much better when I read Breitbart or other news sources.
Regarding Breitbart, yes, I am also getting the impression that it is sliding towards the Left, but it is still pretty conservative overall. I happen to agree with Jpatt on this. The great thing about the present day is how many news outlets exist. If Breitbart ever becomes liberal, I can still go to Fox, the Washington Times, the Washington Examiner, or the Washington Free Beacon, among other sites. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:34, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
I don't rely on any single one source. I have individual journalists (whoever they work for) and news organizations rated on a scale of reliability. The trap a consumer of news falls into is, swallowing whatever garbage any organization puts out daily to meet a deadline and collect revenues from advertisers for that days' 24 hour cycle. Once you fall into this rut, you loose perspective of the larger picture.
One must learn to pick up on news stories were a reporter is focused on a large, ongoing story, and deem the credibility of it's reporting (for example, Daily Caller is the only source focused on the huge Awan investigation scandal right now, with Politico doing some peripheral reporting aimed at cover up for the Democrats, not informing at all). When a breaking story occurs, instinctively you'll learn which timely source to use.
Brietbart & InfoWars I seldom use for anything, except when they come up on a research project. You would never want to use Brietbart or InfoWars as a source on breaking news, even FOX is risky, because you know dang well you'll have CNN & the New York Times refuting it within hours, and the whole world calling you am idiot (as just happened recently on FOX's Seth Rich story). You need about 72 hours for those stories to ripen and develop. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:04, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Muslim terrorism/rapists/rioting/etc. being avoided by not bringing in tons of Muslims into your country is Right-Wing 101. Breitbart isn't even getting that right.
And previously, their leading spokesman was a homosexual who recently advocated pederasty in certain cases.
Breibart has failed Civilization 101. And there is no indication they are moving in the right direction as far as righting the ship. Conservative (talk) 16:08, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
I realize that Breitbart was a big help in getting Trump elected. I am grateful that Steve Bannon created Breitbart. It is a pity that he didn't find a replacement as good as himself. Conservative (talk) 16:25, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Louise Mensch, who re-started the Trump-Russia hacking scandal on election Eve, hoping to jumpstart Hillary's campaign after Comey reopened the email investigation, the first to leak about FISA warrants in Heatstreet on Nov. 7th and an authority on the alleged details of Trump-Russia, on obvious Deep State mouthpiece, claims Vladimir Putin murdered Andrew Brietbart. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:26, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

A possible reason why Breitbart moved leftward on Muslim immigration

Advertising revenue is down 90 percent at Breitbart.[21]

Perhaps, the advertising is the real problem. Post Trump being elected the mainstream media hammered Bannon/Breitbart. Also, leftists are pushing advertisers not to advertise on right-wing news outlets. Maybe Breitbart is moving leftward into cuckservative territory on immigration to stay profitable. Conservative (talk) 16:16, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

I just researched Brietbart, and the Mercer family remain big owners, so I don't think there's a big shift in editorial policy. You should recognize, Bannon & Trump are going through what every White House goes through - reconciling campaign rhetoric with reality, what can practically be accomplished, while remaining true to their ideological objectives and voters. Tough task. It's exactly what Baby Bush and Obama had to do, too. Walk back tuff talk on terrorism while being fair to the vast majority of Muslims worldwide who have no connection (Obama went too far denying any connection to Islam).
Saudi Arabia is not the bogeyman. And we need to spend time explaining two currents within fundamentalist Salafi-Wahhabism, one, the Saudi state official religion, the other, a renegade version that seeks to overthrow the Saudi state.
If your looking for good source, I'd recommend Tyler Durden of zerohedgefund. I don't know if he cranks out daily filler, but on the big, important, often confusing stories, he is very fast to put out excellent researched analysis with good supporting links. Has a knowledgeable following, and a much tougher target for the MSM hatemongers to destroy. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:34, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

Comey's written testimony

Worth a read. JohnZ (talk) 19:33, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

Yah, he clearly says he informed Congress Trump was not the subject of investigation, yet Democrat members have have been lying to the media for months. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:07, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
Here it is: "I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded [Trump] I had previously told him that." PeterKa (talk) 23:08, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
The most damaging part of the memo for Trump is where Comey quotes him as saying, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” If only he was as clever at these things as Obama, Trump would have said something more along the lines of, "I don't think it posed a national security problem....I do think that the way it's been ginned-up is in part because of — in part — because of politics."[22] PeterKa (talk) 01:55, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Damaging? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:21, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
The Jan. 6 memo Comey wrote on a secure laptop. It is not his personal property. In fact, the other memos per his testimony, were held as possible future evidence. Comey admitted to leaking them. Comey needs to be prosecuted, and not by Robert Mueller who is a personal friend. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:14, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
I love the smell of wishful thinking in the morning. JohnZ (talk) 16:01, 8 June 2017 (EDT)

Trump took a political battle axe to Comey when he fired him. This is especially true because Comey said Trump was not under investigation.

Trump is not going to be convicted/impeached over anything related to the election or the transition period. It is the liberals who are engaged in wishful thinking.Conservative (talk) 16:36, 8 June 2017 (EDT)

Hahaha. Ever heard the one about the guy who fell off a skyscraper? On his way down past each floor, he reassures himself, "So far, so good... so far, so good..." JohnZ (talk) 18:45, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Wait a second, didn't your type of people (leftists and "moderates") continually reassure yourselves that Trump wouldn't win? "He's not a serious candidate...he'll drop out before Iowa....He won't even come close to winning the primaries....if we join together we'll defeat him....he won't win the convention vote....he'll never win the general election....he'll definitely lose because of the 11-year-old Access Hollywood video....the entire GOP will fall with him....he won the election, but he won't win the Electors....IT WAS RUSSIA'S FAULT!!!" Look where we've come, despite your past predictions. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:12, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Aye. Sadly, we had faith in you lot. We kept telling ourselves that - when it came to the crunch - decent, God-fearing conservatives such as yourself could never vote for such an obviously amoral huckster. JohnZ (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
"such an obviously amoral huckster" --> you mean Hillary Clinton, the corrupt far-left anti-Christian politician who bullied women abused by her very amoral husband? We Christians voted for the candidate strongly opposed to abortion and who has strongly defended religious liberty. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
You're relatively new round here, so perhaps you won't RINO Trump with the vigour that others will once his presidency crumbles in ignominy. It'll make your head spin, and I'll enjoy telling you I told you so. JohnZ (talk) 19:39, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Once again, you are very confident in yourself. Overconfident, I would say. The current UK election is an example of how we shouldn't jump to conclusions. You guys made a bunch of bad predictions regarding Trump during the 2016 election. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:42, 8 June 2017 (EDT)

Travel to U.S. increases

For April, travel to the U.S. was up 4 percent year-on-year. For 2017 as a whole, it's on track to be up 1.8 percent over 2016.[23] Worldwide, travel is expected to decline. France, normally the number one tourist destination, has been hit hard by Islamic terrorism. Who said a Muslim ban would hurt tourism? It's America's selling point! PeterKa (talk) 21:03, 7 June 2017 (EDT)

Where does Trump-Russia go?

Chris Matthews says Comey's testimony is the end of the line for the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory.[24] To me, it was always "not even wrong," as the mathematicians say. By this I mean, it's hard to think of a way the theory could be proven or disproven by investigation or evidence. Everyone has their opinion, and that's about as far this issue can ever go. The Dems plan to shift their focus to obstruction of justice. Somebody should have asked Comey if deleting 33,000 emails while under FBI investigation is obstruction of justice. The president has the constitutional authority to order the FBI to discontinue investigations, as Alan Dershowitz explains. The Flynn stuff is pretty small beer compared to Obama's repeated interference in the Hillary email investigation. PeterKa (talk) 21:32, 8 June 2017 (EDT)

What is Trump-Russia? haven't been following. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:49, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Trump Russia, Kushner Russia, Flynn Russia, Manafort Russia. But we'll have no discussion on Hillary Russia, BJ Clinton Russia, John Podesta Russia nor Tony Podesta Russia. It's all about being more flexible after the elections. --Jpatt 00:46, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
That is precisely why Congressional investigations will end in a bipartisan compromise, with nobody being prosecuted. Meanwhile, the Obama-Hillary-Brennan-CIA allies --> the Islamic State, have turned directly on Iran, after Trump shut down the supply-line by isolating Qatar. So, Trump is in bed with the anti-Iran (hence Assad & Putin as well) Deep State; we've entered a new stage with Trump slowly getting in charge of IC. He needs to prosecute the former FBI Director. Geez, Obama prosecuted a CIA Director. If that's what it takes to drain the Deep State swamp, do it. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:55, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

Labour gains in British election

All the jihadi terrorism lately apparently isn't enough to scare the British away from Corbyn and the Labour Party. They are projected to gain 29 seats to 261.[25] UKIP has been wiped out. The Conservatives have 322 seats, plus eight for the Democratic Unionist Party. 326 is a majority. I guess we all need learn more about the new kingmakers. This article says that the DUP is, "staunchly pro-union and pro-Brexit, making them a shoe-in for a Tory coalition." PeterKa (talk) 22:53, 8 June 2017 (EDT)

Sinn Fein won four seats, but won't participate. So a majority is actually (650-4)/2 +1 = 324. PeterKa (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
The latest predictions are for the Conservative Party to be just short of a majority. The Democratic Unionist Party has 10 seats (a very good result), with Northern Ireland's results all in. This might actually help Brexit, as the DUP is strongly in favor of Brexit, and it is a very conservative, right-wing party. The hung parliament means that the Tories need the DUP, and the latter may be able to ensure that the former keeps its Brexit promises. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:39, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Here is a live feed of the results: [26] --1990'sguy (talk) 23:40, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
Hello, I often come here to post about British politics when a big event happens, it's nice to be back. The Conservative Party may not get 310 seats. The speaker of The House of Commons is a Conservative MP but by law he must remain neutral and only vote in the event of tie in which case, again by law, must always to vote for the status quo so his seat is not included. If the UUP/DUP form an alliance it would alienate even moderate Irish Nationalists so I think that will not happen. I predict that May will resign, Boris Johnson or Amber Rudd will become and interim Prime Minister and there will be another election in October.--Tory1 (talk) 23:57, 8 June 2017 (EDT)
That would be bad for the Tories and for Brexit. I don't see the Tories agreeing to this (but, of course, I'm not British, so what can I say?). The UUP does not hold seats in the House of Commons any longer -- SF defeated them in Fermanagh & South Tyrone. Is the pressure so extreme on the DUP that they will not agree to a coalition? Not even support for a Conservative minority government? --1990'sguy (talk) 00:07, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
A minority government cannot work, they cannot pass laws and they cannot negotiate Brexit. Imagine if the Republicans lost the majority in Congress and then gained the power to veto any executive order that President Trump makes, at the same time removing the Presidents veto. That is the sort of power a minority PM would have.--Tory1 (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
Sorry , I misread you. The pressure would be on the Conservatives, not the Unionists.--Tory1 (talk) 00:17, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding you: What I mean is the Tories form a minority government with the support of the DUP (they wouldn't actually join the goverment, but they would block votes of no confidence and help pass the Conservative agenda). Regarding the U.S., Congress needs a two-thirds vote to override the president's vetos or overturn his desisions. On an unrelated note, the UK election is not escaping U.S. politics: [27] --1990'sguy (talk) 00:29, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
May is a disaster for Britain. She is clearly in over her head. --Jpatt 00:42, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
Totally agree Jpatt. She made a huge miscalculation, she thought that pushing a hard Brexit would get her the votes of all the Brexiters, that is not how it works. Brexit in itself is neither a liberal or conservative thing, but there are conservative and liberal factions within it, conservatives preferring hard, liberals soft. More prefer the soft option.--Tory1 (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
It seems like the adult conversation is over and the Kids are waking up(see below). I will be off now, see you in October.--Tory1 (talk) 03:27, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
May seems to think the DUP can bail her out: "Theresa May in talks with DUP over forming coalition." The coalition math is 315 318 Conservative seats plus 10 DUP. Substract one for the speakership gives you 327. Sinn Féin has seven seats. So (650-8)/2 +1 = 322 seats are required for a majority. "Hard Brexit" suggests a hard international border between the republic and Northern Ireland, which the DUP opposes. PeterKa (talk) 05:41, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
@Tory1: What do think of Mark Steyn's analysis? He says all the terrorism had no effect on the voting: "Theresa May started this campaign as Mrs Thatcher and ended it as Kim Campbell." PeterKa (talk) 08:48, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
So this is a reaction to Crash of 2008 austerity measures? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:04, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
Peter, that is a decent analysis by Mr Steyn but she was never Thatcher, from my point of view she started of this election as Hilary Clinton and ended it as Hilary Clinton. RobS, no, the crash is well behind us now. A good way to show the effect of the crash is to look at house prices which are 15/20 % higher than they were before the crash. Conservative, the DUP are strong protestants and are very socially conservative although more fiscally liberal. Conservative protestants hold the balance of power in The UK, they are the kingmakers.--Tory1 (talk) 17:26, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
I taught Nineteen Eighty-Four to some of my classes recently, so I have the image in my mind of a London where bombs go off without warning as the locals go about their business and try not to notice. The 2016 exit polls showed that terrorism was the No. 1 concern of U.S. voters. Steyn argues that the British are way past that sort of thing and are "Getting Used to It." He illustrates the decline of civilization by comparing the outrage over Enniskillen in 1987 to today's ennui. Only tweets can spark outrage these days. PeterKa (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
I shudder to think of the dog's dinner you must've made of teaching Nineteen Eighty-Four. Any man who can read that Steyn article beyond "the remorseless Islamization of Britain" without being incapacitated by laughter should be instantly barred from teaching. JohnZ (talk) 20:13, 9 June 2017 (EDT)