The latest anti-Trumpism

…and it comes from…China?

Check this out:

If you ignore the apocalyptic predictions at the end of the piece, what the author says is pretty much true.

CNN’s current tagline for it builds it up as some kind of Chinese communist manifesto, but it really isn’t. Of course, I had to get over my initial reaction of “A one-party, one-candidate system has the balls to criticize our electoral process?”

I also like the reactions of some of the leaders of the Tianenmen Square protest, near the bottom:

EDIT: and not 30 seconds after I checked back to CNN’s front page, they’d changed the tagline to something less inflammatory. It was originally something like “China’s scathing criticism of our electoral process.”

Yeah, that first article is from mainland china, so it can be dismissed, but what those former protesters from Tienanmen Square and other dissidents that are going WTF at Trump as a candidate should give pause to many in the USA.

But this is not new, early in the primaries it was noted also that in Hong Kong (that still has some independence) there is a group of computer animators of the news that have become popular (even Conan O’Brien used them one day) that made fun of Palin and Trump by noting that they seem [their brains] to be powered by hamsters.

More serious publications from England like The Economist are just asking

“Really?”

With Trump as Uncle Sam in the cover.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21693579-front-runner-unfit-lead-great-

The China criticism may reflect its own interests, but it’s harder to dismiss something like this (emphasis mine):
A Donald Trump presidency poses a top-10 risk event that could disrupt the world economy, lead to political chaos in the U.S. and heighten security risks for the United States, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit … [a] well-respected global economic and geopolitical analysis firm.

Until Trump, the firm had never rated a pending election of a candidate to be a geopolitical risk to the U.S. and the world … “It’s highly unusual, and I don’t think we ever have done it where we’ve had a single politician be the center of our risk items,” Powell said in an interview …


And on the lighter side

Seems pretty clear to me. I wonder that there are people who can’t see this.

“Even if it’s accurate?”

Oh, especially if it’s accurate."

Ours at least allows some kind of illusion of choice, even if it is only an illusion.

Interesting; I went to Wang Dan’s page on Facebook to post a reassurance that all, in fact the majority, of Americans aren’t idiots and supporting Trump, but he has none. It was one automatically generated by Facebook because: “This Page is automatically generated based on what Facebook users are interested in, and not affiliated with or endorsed by anyone associated with the topic.”

I guess he doesn’t have an official page, or I’m not good enough to figure out how to find it.

Nevermind, I ferreted it out, as I usually (eventually) do…and I gave him an assurance that Trump is not only the crank he thinks, but also not going to be President.