Donald Trump

beach_walker

Donald Trump wrote: »

Leave me alone yiz shower of bastards.

Haha, John Oliver told me we should call you Drumpf. Haha. He's so funny.

Cienciano

If sanders isn't in the race, which he probably won't, I'd vote for trump in a heartbeat ahead of Hillary Clinton. You can't dismiss him for being an idiot, if his campaign is genius, not idiotic.

pickarooney

pickarooney wrote: »

Why the **** don't Americans just vote for another party? It's like they feel they have to vote for one of the two big ones. Land of the free my hole.

I think its because of their lack of preferential voting and first-past-the-post system. Voting for a third party takes votes away from one of the other candidates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo

HensVassal

pickarooney wrote: »

Why the **** don't Americans just vote for another party? It's like they feel they have to vote for one of the two big ones. Land of the free my hole.

A lot of Americans actually THINK that they live in a functioning democracy when in effect they live in an oligarchical police state. The 2 party system they have is just a pantomime to give the illusion of choice. Everyone in each party works for the same masters, Koch Brother, Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, Verizon, etc. These congressmen are buddies with each other off duty. They drink in the same country clubs and play golf with their other party adversaries. It's a complete charade. The object of the game is to distract the smellies with rubbish non-issues like gay rights and abortion and crap like that and all the while they are taking taxes sitting in the public exchequer and shovelling it upwards to the mega rich.

This isn't an opinion it's a fact.

There are plenty of other candidates who can register to run but you will never hear about them. They will never get airtime because the airwaves (and news channels) are owned by the very people who control the game and only allow the great unwashed masses to be exposed to their right hand ("republican") or left hand ("democrat") in the great card trick hustle that is the US presidential election.

HensVassal

Polo_Mint wrote: »

There's no reason why Donald Trump wont win.

He won't win if he hasn't been selected. Whoever has been selected by what Eisenhower called the military industrial complex will "win".

Arghus

Wibbs wrote: »

+1. Clinton is only in the mix because of her last name, her deep party and business connections and the fact she's a woman. They got a Black president in before, so they're going for the twofer.

The only reasons that she's in the mix? She was secretary of state and a two term senator for New York. If a surname, party connection, business connection and gender are all that matter, then where have all the other ex-first ladies been when it came to running for President? Or even running for elected office for that matter.

I wouldn't gladly vote for her myself, but to dismiss everything about her political career and reduce her appeal down to the bare bones, is a level of analysis not much deeper than just calling Trump an idiot.

Aidric

Wibbs wrote: »

There is enough anger and frustration among enough Americans that their political landscape might see some change. Or as per usual, nada will happen.

That there is anger among the American electorate is beyond doubt. That they would choose to channel that anger behind a candidate like Trump is worrying. I'm not even sure you could brand his promises as populist because they have no grounding in reality. Trying to apply logic to his appeal seems forlorn, I think he is simply the face of protest against the status quo.

The Republican party has largely drawn from a conservative base and Trump draws much of his support from blue collar disaffected conservatives. Are the Republican party so out of touch that they couldn't have identified a moderate candidate? His closest challenger was Cruz, who is reviled within the party.

Trump won't win and he knows it. Moderates won't allow it.

Saipanne

I feel sorry for people who dismiss him as "stupid" or a "fool".

He is clearly far from that, and the name-calling is likely due to not wanting to face up to the issues he raises, minus the more silly ideas like "the wall".

I'm a Sanders man, before the lazy throw accusations.

Penn

Saipanne wrote: »

I feel sorry for people who dismiss him as "stupid" or a "fool".

He is clearly far from that, and the name-calling is likely due to not wanting to face up to the issues he raises, minus the more silly ideas like "the wall".

I'm a Sanders man, before the lazy throw accusations.

What issues does he raise, which none of the other candidates have raised, which you genuinely believe he will actually try to address once elected?

ohnonotgmail

Penn wrote: »

What issues does he raise, which none of the other candidates have raised, which you genuinely believe he will actually try to address once elected?

I dont see how that plays into whether he is a fool or stupid.

Penn

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I dont see how that plays into whether he is a fool or stupid.

The point was made that people were calling him stupid to avoid addressing the issues Trump raises. I'm asking what issues has Trump uniquely raised, because if the issues Trump raises and which people believe he will definitely stand by once elected are serious issues, it follows that perhaps people are calling him an idiot so as to avoid the issues he raises.

So what issues are people trying to avoid discussing which Trump will work to solve?

Edit: Also, you can't say "minus the more silly ideas like "the wall"". That's one of his primary policies. You cannot simply dismiss it.

KomradeBishop

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

most of that could apply to hilary as well.

A common saying is that it takes the Republicans to push the boundaries of poor standards and bad policy - and the Democrats to legitimize it once they get into power; something we've definitely seen with Bush and then Obama, with the initiation of all the civil liberties rollbacks and new round of ME wars by Bush, only to be continued and legitimized by Obama.

So I partially agree with you there, and in no way do I support Hillary. That doesn't justify people voting for someone like Trump though.

ohnonotgmail

Penn wrote: »

The point was made that people were calling him stupid to avoid addressing the issues Trump raises. I'm asking what issues has Trump uniquely raised, because if the issues Trump raises and which people believe he will definitely stand by once elected are serious issues, it follows that perhaps people are calling him an idiot so as to avoid the issues he raises.

So what issues are people trying to avoid discussing which Trump will work to solve?

Edit: Also, you can't say "minus the more silly ideas like "the wall"". That's one of his primary policies. You cannot simply dismiss it.

ah, i misread Saipannes post. you're right, anybody who is calling him a fool or stupid is just being glib.

ohnonotgmail

KomradeBishop wrote: »

A common saying is that it takes the Republicans to push the boundaries of poor standards and bad policy - and the Democrats to legitimize it once they get into power; something we've definitely seen with Bush and then Obama, with the initiation of all the civil liberties rollbacks and new round of ME wars by Bush, only to be continued and legitimized by Obama.

So I partially agree with you there, and in no way do I support Hillary. That doesn't justify people voting for someone like Trump though.

Hilary is probably closer to the republican party than Trump is.
unfortunately for our americans friends they have to pick one or the other.

Aidric

I've noticed that there are some parallels between Trump voters and Brexit voters. If you ask them to articulate their views beyond populist noise they are rendered speechless.

Aidric

Aidric wrote: »

Trump won't win and he knows it. Moderates won't allow it.

Have you ever seen the devil's advocate? Well here's Hillary telling her story of getting a child rapist off on a technicality while laughing about it.. She says she lost faith in lie detectors because the rapist passed. It's all in her own words.

It's disgusting that a woman with this history might be president. Look up the girl's story after..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2f13f2awK4

Sanders wouldn't touch this stuff. Trump will. And lots of moderates will abstain and let him win. She's clearly fit to be a lawyer but America will know she's not fit for president.

Every poll has Sanders beating Trump more easily than her. And that's before she gets ruined when she's holding the nomination. They'll release wall street speeches as well and we'll also find out if she or an aide will take the fall for this fbi investigation.

I don't understand why the democratic party is potentially shooting itself in the face by supporting her.

ancapailldorcha

Pointing out Hilary's sins is akin to shooting fish in a barrel. No bother. However, many people who vote for her are doing so because she is the lesser of two evils not because they particularly like her.

Arghus

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you ever seen the devil's advocate? Well here's Hillary telling her story of getting a child rapist off on a technicality while laughing about it.. She says she lost faith in lie detectors because the rapist passed. It's all in her own words.

It's disgusting that a woman with this history might be president. Look up the girl's story after..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2f13f2awK4

Sanders wouldn't touch this stuff. Trump will. And lots of moderates will abstain and let him win. She's clearly fit to be a lawyer but America will know she's not fit for president.

Every poll has Sanders beating Trump more easily than her. And that's before she gets ruined when she's holding the nomination. They'll release wall street speeches as well and we'll also find out if she or an aide will take the fall for this fbi investigation.

I don't understand why the democratic party is potentially shooting itself in the face by supporting her.

I listened to the clip. Honestly, I don't hear a lot in that. She seems like a lawyer doing what she has to do for a client. She laughs while remembering some of the details, but mainly over the lengths she went to.

If I was in charge of the Trump PR campaign, I don't think it would be of much use to me.

Speedwell

Always good to check a reliable source of actual facts and unbiased analysis: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

Arghus

Arghus wrote: »

I listened to the clip. Honestly, I don't hear a lot in that. She seems like a lawyer doing what she has to do for a client. She laughs while remembering some of the details, but mainly over the lengths she went to.

If I was in charge of the Trump PR campaign, I don't think it would be of much use to me.

She sounds like a lawyer. Not a president.

Anyways, they'll have no shortage of material to get her with.. If people are scared of a Trump presidency, they're going with a risky candidate.

Aidric

Sanders is a credible candidate and encouragingly he has a lot of support with younger voters. Unfortunately younger voters the world over don't turn out to vote in sufficiently large numbers.

Just listening to Ryan's press conference now instills my view that the Republican party are woefully out of touch.

The_Kew_Tour

Love Saunders to win although little hope now.

If America wanted a perfect President then it be him

Speedwell

Speedwell wrote: »

Always good to check a reliable source of actual facts and unbiased analysis: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

And that's why she's screwed. Snopes is needed to try and make it not sound as bad.

And they don't even do that.

Plus I don't need Snopes when I'm listening to the woman firsthand. Just listen to the way she tells the story. If my own sister spoke so candidly about doing that, I don't think I could forgive her.

Speedwell

Just about killed me laughing. https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12795520_10102467793943508_1860941144696840448_n.jpg?oh=0f6501eecec1b7c2e6939ecbbc7ccef7&oe=57A640D5

Arghus

Deleted User wrote: »

She sounds like a lawyer. Not a president.

Anyways, they'll have no shortage of material to get her with.. If people are scared of a Trump presidency, they're going with a risky candidate.

But it's a clip from the eighties - when she was a lawyer - talking about a legal case. Surely, that's how she would have sounded - lawyer-like.

Are you suggesting that she should have tempered her opinions because she should have been conscious that she'd have a run at The Presidency three decades down the line?

BalcombeSt4

take everything wrote: »

I love this guy.
More and more, i'm finding myself hoping he becomes president.
The stuff he says goes against all my political views but still i 'd love to see him beat Hillary.

I'm reasoning first off that he doesn't mean any of the stuff he says (the wall etc). It's all just to get in.
And I actually do believe he gives a **** about America.
I also feel deep down he's a decent enough guy just playing the political system and having a fcuking great time. And he's hilarious.
Can't stump the trump videos on YouTube are brilliant BTW.

Just wanted to get an idea what ye think about The Donald.

He wants to murder entire families who did nothing wrong. Yeah he's hilarious.

SEPT 23 1989

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

He wants to murder entire families who did nothing wrong. Yeah he's hilarious.

Trump says he will do it but Mk2 Clinton has done it

Cienciano

Aidric wrote: »

I've noticed that there are some parallels between Trump voters and Brexit voters. If you ask them to articulate their views beyond populist noise they are rendered speechless.

Something something cuck sharia law cuck cuck cuck

BalcombeSt4

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

He wants to murder entire families who did nothing wrong. Yeah he's hilarious.

In fairness, murdering people, entire families sometimes too, who have done nothing wrong, is pretty par for the course as far as American foreign policy goes.

It's funny how offended people are by Trump's stance on muslims, when the US has spent the best part of the past 15 years blowing the ever living fcuk out of the middle east. Because of 9/11, of which there was heavy involvement from Saudi Arabian government officials (as seen in the recent leak), who in turn haven't had as much as a bullet fired in their direction.

Aidric

Cienciano wrote: »

Something something cuck sharia law cuck cuck cuck

In the case of Irish voters 'it's an absolute disgrace'.