Politics? - Hell no, it's all entertainment, all Hollywood

Why did John F. Kennedy win the Presidency in 1960 - Better looking and put on a better show than Nixon.

Why did Ronald Reagan win in 1980? - An experienced better actor easily won against Jimmy Carter who was too honest to act.

Bill Clinton in 1992? - A class act against Geroge Bush who had no acting talent whatsoever.

And the last election Trump vx. Clinton? - Hillary's vast Liberal base, including a huge Feminist voting block
was dwarfed by Apprentice Star Donald Trump who showed for the first time what Reality Television is all about
by winning the Presidency.

And the issues you ask? - Trivial diversion while 'we the people' elect the next great entertainer

"Politics" is a stage play to fool the people. To make them believe they would have anything to say, with giving away their voice.

a reply to: DerBeobachter

"That's Entertainment!" is a popular song with music............Since the movie, the song has become an anthem for Hollywood and theater in general, being used as an opening number in many shows......."


I'm beyond political solutions - Just give us 'transparency' - And instead of nasty elections let's run them as a
Reality TV show!

a reply to: AlienView

Politicians and politics are sold to us by Hollywood style programming. What makes a celebrity? Repetition, presentation, acting.

Why does Hollywood create celebrity, to make money. And to make us fall in love with the celebrity of our leaders. Its why hollywood exists; to make superheroes, supermen, supreme beings, gods-- of men.

In most of the peoples minds, most of the time. Its working.

"Politics" itself is the art of speaking without saying anything.

Follow the Money..

This 1995 documentary provides insights into how television is used by the industry and by politicians to mold and distort the American public's view of reality.

In 1996 Bill O'Reilly was hired by Fox News Channel, to anchor The O'Reilly Report.(No Spin Zone)

a reply to: Infoshill

Wrching video now. Those bits of off camera coaching by advisors to Pat Robertson were precious. "Expanding the Party" (mixing of church and state) were telling.

a reply to: AlienView

I feel this is a rant? Breathe. In, 2, 3, out, 2, 3 again

Besides that,
Yeah Reagan!



Difference between Trump and Reagan is right there in the slogan btw "let's make America Great again!" vs "make America great again".
Reagan was so conservative he can be called reactionary, with his war on drugs, ... (personally I think he was racist) but I like Reagan, Trump is quite the embarrassment and I think he means himself with his slogan. Read as "Trump: Make America Great Again"
Is there something one can justifyably have a problem with?
In a democracy?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Infoshill

Wrching video now. Those bits of off camera coaching by advisors to Pat Robertson were precious. "Expanding the Party" (mixing of church and state) were telling.

ETA: Finished video, very interesting, the days of analog satellite feeds are Over. Not that politics has changed or the secrets kept by the state of secrets.

a reply to: Peeple

Besides that,
Yeah Reagan!

Hollywood elects presidents, because the people like film stars, are swooned by their celebrity, and the actors are good at following their lines in scripts.

On another note: Behold, Death rides a pale horse.

a reply to: intrptr

But look at the happy look on the horse's face, he loves it.
That should be the goal of a politician, not? To make a majority, bigger than that which voted him in, happy.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: intrptr

But look at the happy look on the horse's face, he loves it.
That should be the goal of a politician, not? To make a majority, bigger than that which voted him in, happy.

Yah, taming the "Wild West" and all that.

Kill the savages, hang the bad guys, John Waynum, six gun packing, two fisted, bar brawling Hollywood movies, Reagan on his horse is only personifying that genre, isn't he...

a reply to: AlienView

I would totally agree that today we have popularity contests instead of elections.
Obama was not qualified.
Neither of our last candidates were good choices.
They were just able to get votes.

Kennedy looked better on tv.
Clinton had charisma but was also qualified.

Now ith Reagan I disagree with you.
18% interest rates.
Gas shortages.
Iran hostages.

That's why Carter got stomped.

a reply to: intrptr

I'm sorry I'm guilty. Favourite game Red Dead Redemption. Favourite Movie of those I recently watched Aliens & Cowboys.
There are aspects of violence I like. Karate. Kung Fu. And if they wouldn't be financially pressured to do it, I could enjoy cage fighting too.

I also can't say I mind hooligans. As long as they keep it between hooligans.
What was the point? .. right, there are certain types of savage where I don't see much alternative. We sure are beyond hanging... I never watched a Reagan movie, it's not like I'm fan, or anymore interest in him than other historic world leaders, like Mao, etc.
But you have to admit the horse looks happy?

Even before Reality TV Hollywood ruled:

Frank Sinatra - "High Hopes" with Jack Kennedy (1960)




Seriously though in the last election - All the rock bands and entertainers money could by could not put Hillary back together after the vaninshing emails - She had three opportunities in the debates and even though some said Hillry could be pretty nasty
- She was not nasty enough to beat the Devil at his own game.
ON the Reality TV show of the Presidential debates Trump was triumphant.
Hillary needed to sound like Margaret Thatcher - not Eleanor Roosevelt!

a reply to: Peeple

We sure are beyond hanging... I never watched a Reagan movie, it's not like I'm fan, or anymore interest in him than other historic world leaders, like Mao, etc.

I don't think Mao ever starred in a Movie. US cops execute 'criminals' now, no need for trial by jury, or a hangman...

Your interest in Reagan the celebrity was what caught my eye, (but keep deflecting to the horse, if you like).

Politics? - Hell no, it's all entertainment, all Hollywood

Well if you caught last nights episode of DC Legend's of Tomorrow.

You can't disagree.

The killer ape Grodd went back in time to kill Barrack Obama.

I didn't even make more than 3 minutes in to the episode.

a reply to: intrptr

No my point was more like Reagan was similiar and bad but Trump is worse because he is on a personal mission.

I'm sorry, but I've forgotten where or when it was. All I do remember was that it was many years ago and quite a few of our Australian elections ago.

I saw/read or heard that the winner of elections tend to be the candidate who's name is mentioned the most.

Although I couldn't give a rat's backside who wins elections, (I don't think it really makes a difference) since I started paying attention to who's name gets mentioned the most during election campaigns, I've noticed that the name mentioned the most in the media has ended up winning. Without fail.

Now I don't have actual data to back that up, but pay attention during the next few elections you have to suffer and see for yourself.

In the case of the last U.S.A. elections, even though the majority of stories/topics were against him, Trump had considerably more mentions in the media. The Australian media included too.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: intrptr

No my point was more like Reagan was similiar and bad but Trump is worse because he is on a personal mission.

Politicians, Presiders, Puppets.

I know because they read from teleprompters. In Trumps case he represents the wealthy businessmans interests. He's a tri billionaire, he's one of them.

(imo)