Donald Trump

Wibbs

InTheTrees wrote: »

The prospect of a trump presidency is terrifying.

If trump wins the election gay marriage goes away. Abortion rights go away. Minority voting rights are at risk.

He's going to privatise pensions.

He will remove healthcare for over 14 million people by dismantling obamacare.

Any hope of gun control will be gone.

ANd he has no interest in campaign finance reform.

What other differences are there...?

If the Combover gets in and it's a big if, then pretty much none of the above will happen, of any of it. That's just the usual scaremongering IMH. Just as eff all will happen with Clinton Mk2. A couple of soundbite changes for the plebs, but actual change that could hit the bottom line? Nope.

Berserker

InTheTrees wrote: »

The prospect of a trump presidency is terrifying.

If trump wins the election gay marriage goes away. Abortion rights go away. Minority voting rights are at risk.

He's going to privatise pensions.

He will remove healthcare for over 14 million people by dismantling obamacare.

Any hope of gun control will be gone.

ANd he has no interest in campaign finance reform.

In response to your post :

• Same sex marriage won't go away. That current situation will continue whether Trump or Clinton becomes president. Trump isn't religious. He is just playing that card. My friends in Texas, who were hoping that Cruz would defeat him, don't buy his religious soundbites for one second.
  
• Obamacare has been incredibly unpopular and it's rollout has been littered with setbacks and issues. Many in the private sector are against it because it is an extra expensive on small companies and it is perceived to be a job killer. My friends in the USA who work in the private sector also consider it to be a intrusion into their personal affairs. They have their own private health insurance.
  
• Do you really think that Clinton is going to take on and defeat the NRA? She'll talk about doing something about gun control, just like Obama but she'll fail, just like he did.

Samaris

Wibbs wrote: »

If the Combover gets in and it's a big if, then pretty much none of the above will happen, of any of it. That's just the usual scaremongering IMH. Just as eff all will happen with Clinton Mk2. A couple of soundbite changes for the plebs, but actual change that could hit the bottom line? Nope.

Normally, I'd be inclined to agree, but I've seen some of the fallout from Bush's gutting of the science sector in the US. It's not as loud and obvious as wars and destruction, but the president -can- screw things up if he's disinclined to care/an idiot. And Trump does not strike me as a man with either the understanding or inclination to run a huge and complicated country, and he further doesn't strike me as a man to take advice if he's got his own twitter-bite opinion on "how it should be done!" That's a worrying combination.

If he gets in, I'd say there are (I really hope there are!) enough checks and balances to ensure he can't do anything really deranged, but he could do a lot of damage even so, mostly through sheer egotistical determination that Trump is Right.

PopePalpatine

Berserker wrote: »

In response to your post :

• Same marriage won't go away. That current situation will continue whether Trump or Clinton becomes president.

Ginsburg is going to retire from the Supreme Court following this election, and the vacancy left by Scalia's death is yet to be filled. While this will still leave a 4-3 advantage to the pro-marriage equality SCotUS justices, a Republican Congress with a Trump presidency will just put in 2 conservative justices to turn that into a 4-5 disadvantage to the pro-marriage equality SCotUS justices. Trump himself said he was looking for "someone in the mould of Scalia". Take a look at his potential picks list here.

Wibbs

Samaris wrote: »

I am unsure if Trump -can- take Hilary Clinton in the debates. He's not really a very good speaker, to be honest.

I don't think that's a s big a problem as some think. What was the quote around Brexit I think; "the people are tired of experts". Look what happened with Brexit. People voted with their feelz. Trump is all about feelz and he's a master of knowing what revs up and manipulates a pretty large chunk of the population. He's been (stupidly) compared to Hitler. The joke was Adolf was one helluva public speaker and yes had clear policies and consistency. Where they are similar is revving up the feelz.

That's where his detractors are missing the danger of someone like him. Decent arguments and nuanced debate are not the point. This goes double for US politics where for the general population keeping it as dumb as possible keeps it as popular as possible. As I said America and the Rep party went from Lincoln to this idiot.

Think about it. He's been laughed at from day one. He has gone on about building walls to stop Mexicans, called same rapists and killers, gone on about banning Muslims from traveling, has called for aggression towards detractors in the audience and has even said if he shot somebody he'd likely get away with it. All the while changing tack on damn near every policy point. He's been attacked from all sides, including his own party. This utter fcukwit is now the Republican candidate for the President of the United States of America. You still think content so important S?

A Little Pony

PopePalpatine wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Crooked Hillary Clinton is going to get destroyed. The Donald is too strong, too clever and knows how to use the media. He will walk all over her in the debates by just laying out her horrific record while in power.

A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man who will walk all over Hillary in the debates.

Just watch and see. Destroyed I'm telling you.

mzungu

Samaris wrote: »

I am unsure if Trump -can- take Hilary Clinton in the debates. He's not really a very good speaker, to be honest. And does anyone actually -know- what his platforms are? He mostly seems to be campaigning with a lot of wind and guff and insults and very little actual content.

It's honestly like an internet troll took a wrong turn and ended up in the running because people are that sick of The Establishment. So even if he continues to have no content, no real plans and not an ounce of potential common sense or courtesy when it comes to foreign affairs...he might still get people through just continuing to shout, I really don't know.

He will be obliterated in the debates. I can't for the life of me see him winning it. He may come close alright, but good sense will surely prevail when the people vote in November. TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

A Little Pony

mzungu wrote: »

Samaris wrote: »

I am unsure if Trump -can- take Hilary Clinton in the debates. He's not really a very good speaker, to be honest. And does anyone actually -know- what his platforms are? He mostly seems to be campaigning with a lot of wind and guff and insults and very little actual content.

It's honestly like an internet troll took a wrong turn and ended up in the running because people are that sick of The Establishment. So even if he continues to have no content, no real plans and not an ounce of potential common sense or courtesy when it comes to foreign affairs...he might still get people through just continuing to shout, I really don't know.

He will be obliterated in the debates. I can't for the life of me see him winning it. He may come close alright, but good sense will surely prevail when the people vote in November. TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

Hillary is too soft, he will go for the throat and he has no problem with getting into the gutter and honestly he will convince many thinking of voting for her to not do so. He will bring up all her corruption in the Clinton Foundation and her foreign policy.

Wibbs

mzungu wrote: »

TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

It says much about the feelings of quite a large chunk of the voting population, not much of it good.

Renegade Mechanic

InTheTrees wrote: »

Think about this...twenty five years of intense right wing scrutiny. Multiple partisan congressional investigations.

And what have the republicans ever got against her? SHe may or may not have sent official email from home.

And yes somehow people have this impression she's evil and horrible and terrible but they have trouble articulating exactly why.

Could it be a quarter century of republican trolls attacking her?

Allow me. I'm idle enough for a wall of ****e..
Your "president for women" took millions in donations from Saudi Arabia alone - the Clinton "Foundation" taking hundreds of millions over time from some of the worst human rights violators on the planet.

Let's start with the list of deaths around the Clintons - Because it's not just Hillary looking to get in, the Clintons are amongst the most "connected" people on the planet.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/647826/388529.jpg

If a quarter of those were real, it would still be more than you could hope to pin on the loudmouth.

List of organisations she's spoken to and the prices paid. While she goes on about struggling and unfair wage gaps...
https://theintercept.com/wp-uploads/sites/1/2016/01/Screen-Shot-2016-01-08-at-12.09.55-PM.png
And that's just banks, there are plenty more institutions besides.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/08/Bill%20Clinton%20Speeches%202013-2015_1.jpg
26 million from 2013 - 15.

Now lets look at the donors to her "foundation".
http://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Foreign-Country-Donations-To-The-Clinton-Foundation.jpg
Hundreds of millions raised - pocket change to her backers - from some of the worst human rights violators on the planet.

Just recently it was all but proven you "pay to play" on the Clinton Administration.
http://archive.is/zL8dO
Major donator placed in intelligence...


Ignoring the deaths and the scandals, the donors alone and their hatred of Trump is enough to make me like him. I don't care if he offends you or me - we don't matter one ounce of a **** in the bigger picture. They do.

Then we have the scandals/"hiccups" in no particular order.

The cattle futures fiddling.

Whitewater. - Throwing partners under the bus to save your skin 101. Granted they deserve it, but she should have followed them...

"Travelgate". - Staff fired to make way for cronies.

"Pardongate" - over 450 presidential pardons, one of whom had been convicted of racketeering and evading almost 50 million in taxes. I get that other presidents have pardoned, but they're not running. The Clintons are. 50 million dollars...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controversy

She was fired from the Watergate investigation over her dishonesty and ethics...
http://www.eohistory.info/2013/hillaryHistory.htm

Her deputy chiefs suspected ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.


"Filegate" - Accessing fbi files on known and "perceived" GOP enemies.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_FBI_files_controversy

The Clinton Administrations use of the IRS to target everyone but liberal public policy organisations.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/07/clintons-irs-chickens-come-home-to-roost/

Being told to return thousands worth of **** they took from the Whitehouse - I mean that's just arrogantly disrespectful.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/the-clinton-furniture-flap/


The tapes from her time as a lawyer.
https://youtu.be/Tor00iWUhDQ

"sniper fire"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1582795/Hillary-Clintons-Bosnia-sniper-story-exposed.html

"jogging around the wtc on 9/11"
http://mediamatters.org/research/2008/03/27/dick-morris-again-falsely-claimed-clinton-said/143018

"what difference at this point does it make"

Her and Obamas use of NATO to topple Libya.

There really are plenty more...

Nixon erased what, 9 minutes of data? And had to resign as president. Hillary erased 30,000 emails and is running for it...


But yeah, Trump is definitely the malignant one...

Ever wonder why they always ask Ivanka what she thinks of how her father treats women, yet never ask Chelsea the same?
Trump has skeletons in the closet but Clinton needs a warehouse for hers.
Or why its just "Trump" on the news and Clinton "in front of massive, screaming adoring fans".

Speaking of media **** ups, this is one of my favourites...

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

I didn't like Trump either but the sheer level of orchestration being leveled against the man at every level of business from local to media to elite has warmed him up to me. I like judging people by their enemies. And right now the people who hate Trump are your Bloombergs, Soros', Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Sunderlands, Sachs, Saudis, etc etc etc..

I don't expect him to win. I want him to, because Clinton is the alternative - I'd have preferred Carson personally. But I don't expect him to win. Clinton is backed by money that makes Trumps total worth look like pocket change.
At this point I just want to see the bugger get in, just to see what happens when he:

A: Does what every politician ever does; Renege on promises and kickstart a genuine rally against govt because he's riled people up more than I've seen and I don't think they're going to take another broken promise...

B: Actually starts working against the Federal Reserve - i really wanna see what happens there - and gets assassinated for doing so, just like Kennedy before him.. Again, I don't think people will take that this time round.

C: Does any of the things he's promised, just to see those salty tears, from the Starbucks huffer to the wall Street rat...

People don't need handouts, they need work opportunity. Which is why he has a lot more of the Hispanic vote than people realise - they're actually quite tired of being undercut by their illegal competition.
He's looking like the first person in a while to directly say that, instead of promising more handouts.

Berserker

mzungu wrote: »

He will be obliterated in the debates. I can't for the life of me see him winning it. He may come close alright, but good sense will surely prevail when the people vote in November. TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

Firstly, he held his own in the debates so far. Regarding the sentence in bold, would it be any different here, in the RoI?

RobertKK

If you like war and bombing, then Hillary Clinton is your woman, she has a 100% voting record:
Iraq - voted for it.
Libya - Obama was against but she and some of her fellow idiots changed his mind.
Syria -Hillary was for bombing Assad out of power, Obama proved he was not a fool by not doing as she wanted.

Leon Panetta has said Hillary will take further measures against Syria is elected.

Vote for war, vote for Hillary/Kaine.

mzungu

Berserker wrote: »

Firstly, he held his own in the debates so far. Regarding the sentence in bold, would it be any different here, the RoI?

FG were lambasted for the dodgy 'Lets Keep The Recovery Going' slogan that was trotted out ad nauseam during GE16. Most people saw through it and it generated a lot of anger. So we can see through vacuous slogans here. Granted, not all the time though.

On the second point, for the most part, insults aren't really part of Irish politics so I am not sure how well a Trump-esque figure would do if he ran for office here. I would guess they wouldn't do very well though.

Regarding the debates, from the ones I've seen he has sure blustered his way through. But he offered very little in the way of coherent policy. When it comes to one on one debates he is going to have to offer up a bit more than 'I'm going to build a wall' and 'crooked Hillary'.

Renegade Mechanic

Another reason I don't expect him to win.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/10/27/does-my-state-require-identification-to-vote/

Most states still accept votes without ID.
You would have to be comatose not to see the "advantages" therein. Bush's victory parade had to be cut short over protests, that many people had voted against him. Given Saddams booting of oil companies and dumping of dollars for euros, together with the implications of other countries possibly taking note, it was beyond paramount that the Bush oil family got into the Whitehouse.

If - not saying it will, just saying if - even more people vote against Clinton this time around, she might just have to forgo the victory laps altogether and just head straight to the hotseat.

mzungu

mzungu wrote: »

He will be obliterated in the debates. I can't for the life of me see him winning it. He may come close alright, but good sense will surely prevail when the people vote in November. TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

Clinton hasn't held a press conference in 2016 and she backed out of the last promised debate with Sanders.. I don't think there's a chance in hell she'll debate Trump. It'll either be an ill Bill or "I'm not going to debate a sexist racist."

InTheTrees

InTheTrees wrote: »

Think about this...twenty five years of intense right wing scrutiny. Multiple partisan congressional investigations.

And what have the republicans ever got against her? SHe may or may not have sent official email from home.

And yes somehow people have this impression she's evil and horrible and terrible but they have trouble articulating exactly why.

Could it be a quarter century of republican trolls attacking her?

The FBI says she was extremely careless in her handling of confidential documents and you turn that into "sending email from home". The stuff that has come out in the last year has got nothing to do with the Republicans.. She is legitimately screwing up everything she does.


The latest...

In March the FBI approached her about her presidential server being attacked.. Not her home one or the DNC's. They refused to allow the FBI to investigate or look at it because the "data was too sensitive" and this week, they said they got hacked.

So here's a question for you. If they got hacked after that in April, what would be your opinion of her? Would you defend her decision to not let the FBI investigate or would you say she was wrong?

El_Duderino 09

mzungu wrote:

He will be obliterated in the debates. I can't for the life of me see him winning it. He may come close alright, but good sense will surely prevail when the people vote in November. TBH I am shocked he has gotten this far with little more than insults and weak campaign slogans.

I'll bet you were shocked that he got as far as the primaries, then shocked that he didn't drop out after a couple of weeks, then shocked that he won the nomination.

He hasn't spoken about a viable policy yet but it hasn't hurt him. I bet hillary will show up to the debates with a decent policy on all the major points. Trump will have one half baked policy for going after Isis which will lead to rapturous applause e.g. bomb the hell
Out of them. The narrative from the debates will be 'Trump stole debate and showed a different side to himself by demonstrating policy skills over using insults'.

Trump is doing entertainment and hillary is doing politics. Politics is boring by comparison.

mzungu

Deleted User wrote: »

Clinton hasn't held a press conference in 2016 and she backed out of the last promised debate with Sanders.. I don't think there's a chance in hell she'll debate Trump. It'll either be an ill Bill or "I'm not going to debate a sexist racist."

I think it is pretty much a given that the candidates have a debate before the election (a good few of them) so I don't think either will back out there. It would be giving an open goal to their opponent. A different kettle of fish in the primaries where both had decent leads over their opponents.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'll bet you were shocked that he got as far as the primaries, then shocked that he didn't drop out after a couple of weeks, then shocked that he won the nomination.

He hasn't spoken about a viable policy yet but it hasn't hurt him. I bet hillary will show up to the debates with a decent policy on all the major points. Trump will have one half baked policy for going after Isis which will lead to rapturous applause e.g. bomb the hell
Out of them. The narrative from the debates will be 'Trump stole debate and showed a different side to himself by demonstrating policy skills over using insults'.

Trump is doing entertainment and hillary is doing politics. Politics is boring by comparison.

Indeed. However, in a one to one can Trump bluster away the costs of the wall, asking Russia to hack the US and all the countless other stuff? I am quite sure the soundbites will go down a treat among his supporters, but given the amount of voters he has alienated, I can't see him winning.

Samaris

Given some of the lunacy he's spouted so far, I really really hope he doesn't win, but entertainment vs politics is a sadly true point.

It is truly alarming that this guy has gotten so far with zero practical solutions and all the shouting and twitter-bites that range from the short-sighted (we shall throw out all illegal immigrants right away!") to the nutty (Just.."wall") to the downright illegal (Inviting moderately hostile foreign nations to hack into ..well, anything). Jesus, this is a COUNTRY, not a freaking TV show. The results kinda matter more after the election is ended than after The Apprentice finishes!

Renegade Mechanic

Samaris wrote: »

Given some of the lunacy he's spouted so far, I really really hope he doesn't win, but entertainment vs politics is a sadly true point.

It is truly alarming that this guy has gotten so far with zero practical solutions and all the shouting and twitter-bites that range from the short-sighted (we shall throw out all illegal immigrants right away!")

Doubt they'll be just thrown out, without being first given the cheaper opportunity to register as tax paying citizens. Plenty of people migrate legally. Plenty of people work legally and are tired of being undercut.

Samaris wrote: »

to the nutty (Just.."wall")

Yeah like those gat damned racist Mexicans want to! :pac:

Samaris wrote: »

to the downright illegal (Inviting moderately hostile foreign nations to hack into ..well, anything). Jesus, this is a COUNTRY, not a freaking TV show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNa2B5zHfbQ

To me, it looks more like he meant it in an off hand, "yeah, good luck with finding them" way.. I'd actually have more issue with the contradiction of not knowing Putin, when he supposedly met him during his Ms Universe thingy...

Let's say he did genuinely "request the Russians".
That's not treason. In fact it's not even illegal!

There is actually a cooperative treaty between the States and the Federation whereby the two are mandated to provide each other with mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, handing over evidence, arrested persons, etc.

Full:
https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/123676.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwibzO_yuJ3OAhUnLsAKHXT9DCkQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF1lsI-5v7ztltV-fLkPcmqjn1ssg

http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1469/65/1469655139965.jpg

https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/106th-congress/22

(Yeah, Snowden immediately jumped to mind, but he's not "arrested" or in custody as such, so the Russians aren't obligated to hand him over and this would apply vice versa)

Signed by none other than Bill Clinton himself.
As one person rather hilariously put it: 'This is the first time Bill screwed Hillary in decades'

Now, given that Hillary wiped the server, it no longer exists. There's nothing for the Russians to actually hack, so I think that might lend itself to the joke?
But it means Russian - if they're even involved - can only either have nothing, or actually have some or most of the emails in which case they are legally required to hand them over.

This is why the medias "Treeeeeasooooooon!!!!!"
screaming died down so quickly.

dr.bollocko

Trump has shown unwillingness to debate in his campaign. And recent tweets show he's leading up to do the same with Hillary.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/759222916387069952

Which is, of course a lie. Because they're set out by a non-partisan board. A year ago.

Trump also claims the NFL sent him a letter. Because they don't want to lose viewers and this is rigged in Hillarys favour somehow.

The NFL issued a statement confirming that they didn't send him a letter.

Do we even care that he just makes shït up on the fly? It's all a sideshow.

Samaris

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Do we even care that he just makes shït up on the fly? It's all a sideshow.

I think there's an element of just not taking him seriously still, as well as "this could not possibly be happening in an American presidential election. Surely someone would raise hell if a candidate was doing this, therefore they cannot be. Is it lunchtime yet?"

A Little Pony

He is so entertaining and has liberals and the media in uproar every day with just a few soundbites.

ebbsy

A Little Pony wrote: »

He is so entertaining and has liberals and the media in uproar every day with just a few soundbites.

Saves millions in advertising as well. Turn on the TV and there he is.

Widdershins

brevity wrote: »

I worry for the people who are voting for him.

Did you worry about them before ? If they didn't feel ignored they would not have backed Donald Trump. Sadly .

ScumLord

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Do we even care that he just makes shït up on the fly? It's all a sideshow.

I really don't understand how he's able to get away with just saying whatever pops into his head. It's like Americans don't realise this isn't a TV show.

El_Dangeroso

ScumLord wrote: »

I really don't understand how he's able to get away with just saying whatever pops into his head. It's like Americans don't realise this isn't a TV show.

He's already said he could shoot people in time square and not lose any supporters and he's right. The people that follow him are so unbelievably disgusted and alienated by the establishment that they ignore all the bad. To be fair you need to ignore some bad to support Hillary too..

I've even heard of mexican-Americans saying ya they don't like what he's saying about the wall but they are voting for him because they think he'll bring jobs.

He's probably the favourite to win in the polls right now and that's a dangerous precedent of what future presidential campaigns are likely to be whether or not he wins.

Say what you like about Trump but he has totally changed the game forevermore.

PopePalpatine

A Little Pony wrote: »

He is so entertaining and has liberals and the media in uproar every day with just a few soundbites.

Yawn. Anything to say about his competency for the role? This is a guy who started a mortgage company in 2006.

Arghus

It's going to be a very long time until November.

Samaris

A Little Pony wrote: »

He is so entertaining and has liberals and the media in uproar every day with just a few soundbites.

Neither of these are exactly resoundingly useful attributes for the president of the United States.