Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[goyacobol]

# 2 in the "Trending" ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P1ScLjrGzo

I like it!

 

[anothermagyar]

I just find this video , pretty much summarized info about Soros.
It's too bad about the religious tone, but it's from the American Association of Evangelicals:
:/

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Yc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Cosmos]

Interesting move if true! Notice the rule Trump wants to set up and that people in his team have to sign a ducument:

Trump administration will ban lobbyists, enact five-year lobbying ban after leaving government

 

[Meager1]

If we assume that anything from the above could be true, then he probably has used everything in his power, as a "elite" figure, to further his image both in the eyes of the elite and that of the ordinary people. Already in the 90ies Trump had managed to put himself up as the brand "of the rich and famous" and when anybody heard his name, already then it was associated with the image of "richness" and "elitism".

I mean, even before we knew that Trump was going to run, pretty much everybody in the world already knew the word or brand named "Trump". Connected to building up his powerful and relentless image, was certainly also a number of his TV shows, in which he stood there and had the power to say "you are fired!".

So if it was a plan from a early point in time from Trump, to become president, since he saw where the country was heading from a financial standpoint, he was certainly in the best position to "rig the system" into his favour "as a member of the elite", from the get go.

The problem being, you can't serve two masters.
The American people have no power in government, no matter the illusion to the contrary.
The government, being a fiction maintained entirely by the elite would crumble and dissolved if
ordinary men and women ever wake up enough or gain the determination to govern themselves.
Most Americans have no clue that the United States is a corporation and that being a "citizen" of the U.S
makes you non existent, that is, an artificial non living "person".
America, inhabited by living men and women and the United States are to different entities, one is a country and the other is a foreign owned company..who's main product consists of the military industrial complex.
And since it can't be both, which master will Trump serve?

Supreme Court of the United States 1795
Government Is Foreclosed from Parity with Real People

"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible.
The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."

S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54),

Supreme Court of the United States 1795

 

[SummerLite]

I got the urge before seeing the image posts here to create one for George Soros this morning if anyone wants to use it. It is not the greatest, just short and to the point maybe. I don't usually just go for a more emotional effect but rely on a full article but I do see some usefulness in the impact of the imaging.

I like elephants and that is sort of demeaning to elephants.

I agree. It would be demeaning even to a snake with is closer to his nature probably. I was playing to the "elephant in the room" saying. And I like elephants too.

Did my allusion fail? My mind works in strange ways even to me and I have been accused of being too subtle sometimes. Any ideas for a better image to use?

.

I love elephants as well. I like your picture very much goyacobol and it conveys the message perfectly. I think you nailed it! You could also post more then one if you like.

 

[Laura]

I agree. It would be demeaning even to a snake with is closer to his nature probably. I was playing to the "elephant in the room" saying. And I like elephants too.

Did my allusion fail? My mind works in strange ways even to me and I have been accused of being too subtle sometimes. Any ideas for a better image to use?

.

I love elephants as well. I like your picture very much goyacobol and it conveys the message perfectly. I think you nailed it! You could also post more then one if you like.

If you like elephants, why would you like them compared to an EVIL man like George Soros?

I don't think it is subtle at all; that would suggest at least some accuracy. I don't even think it is a good analogy or metaphor.

An "elephant in the room" is something big and obvious that you don't want to talk about, or you avoid. That really isn't the Soros problem. The problem is that most people are completely IGNORANT of the Soros problem and what it represents. Now, if you are trying to convey his destructive nature, a bull in a china shop might work.

 

[Cosmos]

Interesting piece on Steve Bannon, Trumps top adviser:

https://www.sott.net/article/334033-The-Steve-Bannon-the-liberal-left-doesnt-want-you-to-see

http://<iframe width="560" height="...ow" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[RflctnOfU]

I agree. It would be demeaning even to a snake with is closer to his nature probably. I was playing to the "elephant in the room" saying. And I like elephants too.

Did my allusion fail? My mind works in strange ways even to me and I have been accused of being too subtle sometimes. Any ideas for a better image to use?

.

I love elephants as well. I like your picture very much goyacobol and it conveys the message perfectly. I think you nailed it! You could also post more then one if you like.

If you like elephants, why would you like them compared to an EVIL man like George Soros?

I don't think it is subtle at all; that would suggest at least some accuracy. I don't even think it is a good analogy or metaphor.

An "elephant in the room" is something big and obvious that you don't want to talk about, or you avoid. That really isn't the Soros problem. The problem is that most people are completely IGNORANT of the Soros problem and what it represents. Now, if you are trying to convey his destructive nature, a bull in a china shop might work.

Or to use a Gurdjieff saying: "Show me the blind man who has seen a fly, and only then will I believe you have seen an elephant". Soros is the elephant who became a fly.

Kris

 

[goyacobol]

I agree. It would be demeaning even to a snake which is closer to his nature probably. I was playing to the "elephant in the room" saying. And I like elephants too.

Did my allusion fail? My mind works in strange ways even to me and I have been accused of being too subtle sometimes. Any ideas for a better image to use?

.

I love elephants as well. I like your picture very much goyacobol and it conveys the message perfectly. I think you nailed it! You could also post more then one if you like.

If you like elephants, why would you like them compared to an EVIL man like George Soros?

I don't think it is subtle at all; that would suggest at least some accuracy. I don't even think it is a good analogy or metaphor.

An "elephant in the room" is something big and obvious that you don't want to talk about, or you avoid. That really isn't the Soros problem. The problem is that most people are completely IGNORANT of the Soros problem and what it represents. Now, if you are trying to convey his destructive nature, a bull in a china shop might work.

It is obviously too subtle for most. To me Soros is the "obvious" big animal in the room. It was not meant to be taken literally. I don' think most people use "elephant in the room" literally but that's just my take. Elephants are not my "sacred cow" or anything. As I say I like elephants. If one was in the room I would definitely notice. I did get your attention I think but it wasn't in a good way. It is exactly because no one wants to talk about it that I used the expression. I guess it is a passive/egressive way draw attention to Soros. How can anyone feel good being reminded of Soros?

Sorry if I offended the animal kingdom with the elephant in the room saying and Soros in the same breath. I deliberately wanted people to think about Soros as something that "should" be obvious but isn't for the most part. The comparison is "inaccurate" for those who do not see how 'big" Soros influence really is OSIT. "Bull in a china shop" would be good I think but Soros is not that obvious I don't think. It is the "size" of the elephant and the lack of anyone wanting to point it out that made me choose that saying. Making the un-obvious "obvious" is obviously not an easy thing to do. :(

 

[goyacobol]

I got the urge before seeing the image posts here to create one for George Soros this morning if anyone wants to use it. It is not the greatest, just short and to the point maybe. I don't usually just go for a more emotional effect but rely on a full article but I do see some usefulness in the impact of the imaging.

I like elephants and that is sort of demeaning to elephants.

I agree. It would be demeaning even to a snake with is closer to his nature probably. I was playing to the "elephant in the room" saying. And I like elephants too.

Did my allusion fail? My mind works in strange ways even to me and I have been accused of being too subtle sometimes. Any ideas for a better image to use?

.

I love elephants as well. I like your picture very much goyacobol and it conveys the message perfectly. I think you nailed it! You could also post more then one if you like.

Thanks, SummerLite. I think you got my line of thinking and why I chose the comparison. And I did look for a nice looking elephant to draw attention from the viewers. It's a big kind of aggressive looking one I think but beautiful too. I'll try to use more "deplorable" animals next time.

 

[goyacobol]

<snip>

Or to use a Gurdjieff saying: "Show me the blind man who has seen a fly, and only then will I believe you have seen an elephant". Soros is the elephant who became a fly.

Kris

I agree Soros has tried to assume the visibility of a "fly". I was trying to get people to see his real "size" and realize he is definitely "in the room". Pointing that out doesn't work for everyone I guess. :/

 

[NormaRegula]

<snip>

Or to use a Gurdjieff saying: "Show me the blind man who has seen a fly, and only then will I believe you have seen an elephant". Soros is the elephant who became a fly.

Kris

I agree Soros has tried to assume the visibility of a "fly". I was trying to get people to see his real "size" and realize he is definitely "in the room". Pointing that out doesn't work for everyone I guess. :/

I understand what you were attempting to accomplish with the elephant in the room. However, I agree with Laura that it's insulting to elephants to be the symbol of creepy, evil George Soros. Better to be more direct with those who don't understand the significance of Soros's lust for money and power.

I've sent this link to the entire George Soros 60 Minutes interview to a so-called moderate aquaintance who was griping about the Koch brothers supporting Trump. I told him the Koch brothers didn't support Trump because Trump wasn't a Washington elite. When I mentioned George Soros' name, my friend said he was a good guy who gives money to good causes. I asked him to watch a 60 Minutes interview of Soros and tell me what he thinks afterwards. Not a peep from him thus far.

I decided to send the Soros interview link to others I know who started an election-related conversation with me with a "OMG, check out this 60 Minutes Interview!"

Got a couple of hopeful responses - one from a Jewish friend who is worried that Trump has anti-Semite Stephen Bannon aboard. She was both shocked by Soros' callousness and greed. I replied with "Yeah, this is the guy who supported Hillary because he knew she would foment more civil wars in other countries for profit. Soros is still upset that Russia is no longer under his and his elite pal's control. Trump wants to negotiate, not start a war with Russia. That's probably why Hillary was accusing and insulting Putin of interfering with the election. Projection? And if you actually researched Bannon, you'd find he's not anti-semitic. Back to Soros - the enemy of my enemy is not anyone's friend in this instance." My friend agreed!

The lack of critical-thinking skills and parroting of what the MSM wants the public to believe from my family and friends is annoying, if not alarming. Well, the best we can do is give a lie what it deserves - the truth. Of course, not all people want the truth even if they started a political conversation to begin with. I've had to practice external consideration with more than a few family and friends because I know they want to believe in the negative and no amount of truth is going to change their minds. At least right now.

Interesting times we live in.

 

[Mark]

<snip>

Or to use a Gurdjieff saying: "Show me the blind man who has seen a fly, and only then will I believe you have seen an elephant". Soros is the elephant who became a fly.

Kris

I agree Soros has tried to assume the visibility of a "fly". I was trying to get people to see his real "size" and realize he is definitely "in the room". Pointing that out doesn't work for everyone I guess. :/

Sometimes a more direct correlation works better for a broad audience. For example, this is probably more accurate and widely understood:

 

[goyacobol]

<snip>

Or to use a Gurdjieff saying: "Show me the blind man who has seen a fly, and only then will I believe you have seen an elephant". Soros is the elephant who became a fly.

Kris

I agree Soros has tried to assume the visibility of a "fly". I was trying to get people to see his real "size" and realize he is definitely "in the room". Pointing that out doesn't work for everyone I guess. :/

I understand what you were attempting to accomplish with the elephant in the room. However, I agree with Laura that it's insulting to elephants to be the symbol of creepy, evil George Soros. Better to be more direct with those who don't understand the significance of Soros's lust for money and power.

I've sent this link to the entire George Soros 60 Minutes interview to a so-called moderate aquaintance who was griping about the Koch brothers supporting Trump. I told him the Koch brothers didn't support Trump because Trump wasn't a Washington elite. When I mentioned George Soros' name, my friend said he was a good guy who gives money to good causes. I asked him to watch a 60 Minutes interview of Soros and tell me what he thinks afterwards. Not a peep from him thus far.

I decided to send the Soros interview link to others I know who started an election-related conversation with me with a "OMG, check out this 60 Minutes Interview!"

Got a couple of hopeful responses - one from a Jewish friend who is worried that Trump has anti-Semite Stephen Bannon aboard. She was both shocked by Soros' callousness and greed. I replied with "Yeah, this is the guy who supported Hillary because he knew she would foment more civil wars in other countries for profit. Soros is still upset that Russia is no longer under his and his elite pal's control. Trump wants to negotiate, not start a war with Russia. That's probably why Hillary was accusing and insulting Putin of interfering with the election. Projection? And if you actually researched Bannon, you'd find he's not anti-semitic. Back to Soros - the enemy of my enemy is not anyone's friend in this instance." My friend agreed!

The lack of critical-thinking skills and parroting of what the MSM wants the public to believe from my family and friends is annoying, if not alarming. Well, the best we can do is give a lie what it deserves - the truth. Of course, not all people want the truth even if they started a political conversation to begin with. I've had to practice external consideration with more than a few family and friends because I know they want to believe in the negative and no amount of truth is going to change their minds. At least right now.

Interesting times we live in.

I think that probably "cosmic" events will be the final less subtle images that are needed. One vote yea and 3 nay I guess. Subtlety is not for many I suppose.

As m puts it:

<snip>

Sometimes a more direct correlation works better for a broad audience. For example, this is probably more accurate and widely understood:

How about something more like Soros-Backed NGO Fakes Photos To Blame Russia For Dead Civilians

 

[angelburst29]

Jeez! She must have fired her make-up artist and hairdresser?

The face of defeat: A weary-looking Hillary Clinton makes her first appearance since her concession
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3944234/Hillary-hiding-Clinton-says-wasn-t-easiest-thing-children-s-gala-disappointing-defeat-considered-never-leaving-house-again.html