• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

TRUMP 2016: "The Winston Churchill of Our Time"

Status
Not open for further replies.
honestly this is a lot more entertaining than trying to organize the year(s)long stream of "if you knew anything about politics, you'd know that Hillary already has this thing won" posts


hopefully there's a fun primary challenger in four years and we get to do it all again
 

Keasar

Member
JonStewartKillMe.gif~c200
 

benjipwns

Banned
Probably been waiting for this day for awhile now.
When he won I came back to it and noticed that just by sheer coincidence I had posted it on what would be two years to inauguration day, and the first page, really first few, are funny. We're all (and I include myself) so completely dismissive and mocking of the idea. Not even of him winning it all, even just the nomination, especially after his glorious entrance down the escalator. So I figured a few weeks ago when the day came it'd be a funny little time capsule to revisit of ourselves in simpler times.

Mentions of Russia/Putin in the entire thread before this post: two.

If only it was one of my other two candidate OT's (Jim Gilmore and Gary Johnson) I was bumping in friendly jest...
 

KdylanR92

Member
Those quotes are too much.

I wish I had a time machine, to go back in time to tell everyone on Gaf that trumps gonna win
and then proceed to get shit on by everyone in the thread and probably banned.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
It's not just stupid people. People whom you might consider normal or even smart tend to insert their own ideal version of what those details could be, on their own. It's a common aspect of human psychology, and one of the tools of persuasion and selling.

Still true. Do you guys see it now?
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Those quotes are too much.

I wish I had a time machine, to go back in time to tell everyone on Gaf that trumps gonna win
and then proceed to get shit on by everyone in the thread and probably banned.

I did that, but no one shit on me, nor did I get banned. Just chuckled at, or ignored, mostly.
 

Keasar

Member
How much of the popular vote did Churchill win?

He was never voted in. He was appointed after Chamberlain resigned during the outbreak of the war and only after Lord Halifax turned down the offer to become Prime Minister.

Churchill was more or less chosen by members of the Parliament and the King because of his proven military leadership. However, while he was perfect for the job as PM during wartime, it was pretty expected he would have to leave after as nobody saw him as a fitting leader during peace.

So, in short, he won by technicality of some whole other governing body other than people's democratic choice, sorta like Trump. :p
 

Keasar

Member
Churchill won in 1951. Though he was quite ill-suited for party leadership and elections.

Not entirely surprising, I can see that people voted for him after leading the country to victory in a World War. But yeah, from what I read, he was not that great for much else if England wasn't under siege.
 
He was never voted in. He was appointed after Chamberlain resigned during the outbreak of the war and only after Lord Halifax turned down the offer to become Prime Minister.

Churchill was more or less chosen by members of the Parliament and the King because of his proven military leadership. However, while he was perfect for the job as PM during wartime, it was pretty expected he would have to leave after as nobody saw him as a fitting leader during peace.

So, in short, he won by technicality of some whole other governing body other than people's democratic choice, sorta like Trump. :p

Sounds very similar to original idea of dictators by the romans.
 

RedShift

Member
He was never voted in. He was appointed after Chamberlain resigned during the outbreak of the war and only after Lord Halifax turned down the offer to become Prime Minister.

Churchill was more or less chosen by members of the Parliament and the King because of his proven military leadership. However, while he was perfect for the job as PM during wartime, it was pretty expected he would have to leave after as nobody saw him as a fitting leader during peace.

So, in short, he won by technicality of some whole other governing body other than people's democratic choice, sorta like Trump. :p

He did win a later election though.

And it's not a technicality, a large number of PMs come to power without a general election. 3 of the last 5 did in fact, including May.
 

Kastrioti

Persecution Complex
It's hilarious reading threads like this in hindsight and while I wasn't as passionate as some on GAF about my disdain for Trump I believed throughout it all he had no chance of winning. But he did and here we are.
 

Mortemis

Banned
I didn't even post here? Guess Trump becoming president wasn't even close enough to reality for me that I didn't even bother and ignored it back then.

This teaches us a lesson to not make too many jokes from politics. sooner or later your joke will start living and breathing and ruling over you
 

Croyles

Member
Says a lot really. Time has proven that Churchill was not a good post-war leader. He was good at war, at a time when war was inevitable. Now we have a war monger who is more likely to start another world war than end any current ones.
 

Aurongel

Member
I'm on the first page making an ass of myself, so that's cool.

The thread does a good job showing the immediate appeal of outsiders though, we all were so jaded at the time of the current nominees (including Clinton) that we were open to Trump on that premise alone.
 

Osahi

Member
it comes to the general election, he has essentially no chance no matter who the Democratic nominee may be.

If you care about progressive ideals, you should be doing everything you can to pump up this moron.

Badadvisemallard.jpg
 

Ewo

Member
In 2015, it seemed obvious what was going to happen. Turns out that an iota of faith put into the American people is misplaced. We found that grandstanding is much more important than giving a shit about your country in campaigning.

I had this 2015 mindset until the election night, what a rude awakening that was.
 
B

bomb

Unconfirmed Member
Tonight Putin's bitch will be inaugurated as the President of the United States.


How the fuck did we come to this.

yeah and he had hookers pee on a bed for him cause I read it on the internet!
 
B

bomb

Unconfirmed Member
Lol there's no classified document or secret knowledge that it takes to see that Trump has his nose firmly up Putin's ass.

how about a wait and see approach? He is not even the President yet. You have four full years to take a big sniff yourself.
 

NekoFever

Member
Not entirely surprising, I can see that people voted for him after leading the country to victory in a World War. But yeah, from what I read, he was not that great for much else if England wasn't under siege.

They voted him out less than two months after winning the war lol

Still the biggest swing in British electoral history.

And the one election he did win, in 1951, he lost the popular vote.
 
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

― Winston Churchill

"Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than evil is. Against evil, one can protest; it can be exposed and, if necessary, stopped with force. Evil always carries the seed of its own self-destruction, because it at least leaves people with a feeling of uneasiness. But against stupidity, we are defenseless. Neither with protest nor with force can we do anything here; reasons have no effect. Facts that contradict one’s own prejudice need only to be disbelieved – in such cases stupid people even become critical, and when facts are unavoidable, they can simply be swept aside as meaningless isolated cases. Stupid people, in contrast to evil ones, are satisfied with themselves. Indeed, they become dangerous in that they may easily be stimulated to go on the attack. Therefore, more care must be taken in regard to stupidity than to evil…"

---Dietrich Bonhoeffer, anti-Nazi dissident
 

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

― Winston Churchill

"Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than evil is. Against evil, one can protest; it can be exposed and, if necessary, stopped with force. Evil always carries the seed of its own self-destruction, because it at least leaves people with a feeling of uneasiness. But against stupidity, we are defenseless. Neither with protest nor with force can we do anything here; reasons have no effect. Facts that contradict one’s own prejudice need only to be disbelieved – in such cases stupid people even become critical, and when facts are unavoidable, they can simply be swept aside as meaningless isolated cases. Stupid people, in contrast to evil ones, are satisfied with themselves. Indeed, they become dangerous in that they may easily be stimulated to go on the attack. Therefore, more care must be taken in regard to stupidity than to evil…"

---Dietrich Bonhoeffer, anti-Nazi dissident

"I love low information voters"

---Donald Trump
 

Pejo

Member
I'm not happy about Trump in office, but I always do enjoy smug posters getting a healthy crow serving.

That sounded smug, didn't it? :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom