2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

26000 Elephants

Thomas_... wrote: »

Celtic Tiger, messed up by Bertie.

Ah, so you are saying the '77 Manifesto led to the Celtic Tiger?

OK.

Nody

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

What was the actual effect of brexit? There was the same talk, I never followed how it went after that?

About 5 to 10% below starting point if memory serves; started with a steep drop and then slowly climbed back up but never hit the same peak as before; this chart is one example but you'd also need to add in the GBP loss in value to it which is not included.

dinorebel

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

They'll be asked again.
Then they'll loose again, and loose Scotland also.
J.C. (Labour) will win the early general election as a result of this.

Trump will become Pope before Corbyn wins an election.

joe40

I have heard it said that every country gets the government they deserve. Surely the Americans don't deserve this though. I know his more extreme promises won't happen because the president is not all powerful, but even in a figure head role his whole attitude throughout the campaign was awful. Even the toxic Nigel Farrage did not come across as badly as trump. How he was elected is beyond me.

4068ac1elhodqr

dinorebel wrote: »

Trump will become Pope before Corbyn wins an election.

Trump is happy enough with becoming President for the time being.


The FTSE (100,250,350,Allshare) are all positive this morning so far, the FTSE Techmark is even up 2% positive, interesting....

vetinari

The biotechs are delighted because they'll make a fortune under President Trump. Hillary had been talking about curbing excessive profiteering.

Thomas_...

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

What was the actual effect of brexit? There was the same talk, I never followed how it went after that?

They'll be asked again.
Then they'll loose again, and loose Scotland also.
J.C. (Labour) will win the early general election as a result of this.

LOL! As Mrs May said regarding the resettlement of migrants from other EU member states to the UK "not in a thousand years".

jobbridge4life

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

Trump is happy enough with becoming President for the time being.


The FTSE (100,250,350,Allshare) are all positive this morning so far, the FTSE Techmark is even up 2% positive, interesting....

Its because they are hoping that this is enough to assuage his ego and that he reneges on all of his more extreme/bizarre positions and becomes a middle of the road typical republican president. Which is and always was a possibility even amidst all his ranting and hate.

The interesting part is what becomes of the anger and the will to discriminate that he engendered in order to capture the White House? Plenty of politicians have danced with that fire before and found themselves incinerated by it in the end.

Overheal

HensVassal wrote: »

Maybe sell one aircraft carrier? That should settle the infrastructure bill.

You mean sell out the military?? Never go for it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bass Reeves

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Don't be daft. Anti-gay marriage is not a movement in its own right outside a referendum campaign.

Lets be honest here. The people who voted No are probably mainly rural pensioners who are easily fobbed off with free fivers in the annual Budget.

They don't have the energy or the will to get behind any sort of crackpot Trump wannabe that might spawn on these shores.

Irish society has plenty of problems to deal with. All advanced economies do. But we are a lot more cohesive than most of our neighbours. There is a tradition in Ireland of pragmatic, non-ideological, consensus-building politics.

This has sometimes been a weakness, but it does filter out the crazies.

This is the exact mistake the political elite made in the US and the UK. They presumed that these people do not count that nobody will chase that section of the vote. It is wide open for some one to grab. We see mini versions of it where independents are elected who the Dublin liberal media deginerate and laugh at.

Blatter wrote: »

Yes all politicians have to essentially lie to get elected because if you speak with 100% honesty and integrity, much of what you say will be misinterpreted by the opposition (deliberately), media(deliberately and lack of understanding context) and a huge chunk of the electorate (lack of understanding of context). And you will not get elected. This means as a politician you have to account for this and rephrase your messages and compromising on certain policies in order to have a chance of getting elected.


To my mind, there is a BIG difference between the above, and what Donald Trump has done. Trump has out-rightly lied and blatantly manipulated much of the electorate.

To good politicians, lying is a necessary evil. To Trump, it WAS his strategy.

Did you read you post before you posted it

Thomas_... wrote: »

I think that to put it in general terms, the line to draw between a ultra conservative and a far-right party is a very tiny one and this also because you used the term "ultra" which also points out to the extreme of the political varieties.

Maybe I should not have used the word ultra. However the Irish political system has a nutty left, a mild left and two large centerists parties. No part has tried to occupy the conservative right, the PD did it from a business point but but were not socially conservative. As people get older they tend to get more conservative in there attitudes. Those that deginrate Trump call it pandering but is that what Richard Boyad Barret, Paul Murphy Ruth Copinger do on the left.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Of course it is. But I'm not trying to sell a candidate or a referendum here.

If this were a campaign I'd change my tone. I've always maintained that Brexit was lost because of arrogance and bluntness, even if it was often honest bluntness.

Trump voters were talked down to, and that just made them antagonistic. I think that was a massive mistake. But it doesn't obviate my belief that most of the uneducated, myopic white men who voted for Trump are complete idiots.

Not a natural-born US citizen, thank Christ!

In other words you would lie lie some are accusing Trump of doing

Jawgap wrote: »

The contractors are already lined up......

It funny but it also show a complete lack of respect for three people who were democratly elected.

joe40

joe40 wrote: »

I have heard it said that every country gets the government they deserve. Surely the Americans don't deserve this though. I know his more extreme promises won't happen because the president is not all powerful, but even in a figure head role his whole attitude throughout the campaign was awful. Even the toxic Nigel Farrage did not come across as badly as trump. How he was elected is beyond me.

Deserve what exactly? I'm interested... Brexit is a very defineable thing whereas the US Presidency isn't.

jobbridge4life

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It funny but it also show a complete lack of respect for three people who were democratly elected.

No one deserves respect for being elected. They deserve respect for what they do with that power.

Overheal

jobbridge4life wrote: »

No one deserves respect for being elected. They deserve respect for what they do with that power.

So far Trump comes elected as one of the least disliked presidents in history right off the bat and still incurring numerous lawsuits

26000 Elephants

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That is indeed the fraud that is the centre of the Trump presidency. The blue collar core who voted for him will realise this fairly soon, and I imagine the backlash will be swift and severe.

Interesting mid-terms coming up I'm sure.

Trump has no plan - the political establishment are going to throw him around like a rag doll.

vetinari

Can we stop saying we have to worry about respecting Trump's supporters.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's going to be interesting to read the post-election analysis regarding reasons for voting Trump.

I'm not convinced that the emails 'controversy' was a particularly important factor either way. I don't believe it was a game changer. Why would it be so offensive to Americans for the Secretary of State to use a personal email address in 2009, but not when a Republican Secretary of State did it in 2001? Why was it not seen by republicans as rendering George W Bush no longer fit for office for the same reason?

There are other more important factors at play here, whether that's gender, racial tensions, distribution of income, healthcare, unemployment, nostalgia, nationalism, demagoguery, or all of the above.

I really find it hard to believe that this election was lost because of an email address.

jobbridge4life

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And that all sounds wonderful except it is not reflected by the reality. Trump voters had higher income profile than Clinton's.

It also bears repeating that it looks like Clinton is on course to win the popular vote. So if anything it was the electoral college that was the factor... and funnily the last time a Republican won his first time he also lost the popular vote.

HensVassal

Thomas_... wrote: »

I fear that those "over the top democrats" were not exaggerating it. We'll see how it will work when he gets chumming with Putin, his "friend" and if one likes to believe it, they both say that this "friendship" is "mutual". Well, I have no doubts that both of them have each one for themselves a very big ego.

Somehow, despite what Hollywood might have you believe, I doubt there is any little red nuclear button in the Oval Office that the damn cleaning lady could drop her bottle of Windex on and launch 1000 minuteman missiles. There ought to be a few more safeguards and precautions that just one button to press like you're summoning the butler.

wes

jobbridge4life wrote: »

It also bears repeating that it looks like Clinton is on course to win the popular vote. So if anything it was the electoral college that was the factor... and funnily the last time a Republican won his first time he also lost the popular vote.

The loss of the popular vote (if it turns out that way), will imho impact things in 4 years time. Especially if Trump doesn't perform.

Hank Scorpio

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's going to be interesting to read the post-election analysis regarding reasons for voting Trump.

I'm not convinced that the emails 'controversy' was a particularly important factor either way. I don't believe it was a game changer. Why would it be so offensive to Americans for the Secretary of State to use a personal email address in 2009, but not when a Republican Secretary of State did it in 2001? Why was it not seen by republicans as rendering George W Bush no longer fit for office for the same reason?

There are other more important factors at play here, whether that's gender, racial tensions, distribution of income, healthcare, unemployment, nostalgia, nationalism, demagoguery, or all of the above.

I really find it hard to believe that this election was lost because of an email address.

It wasn't just an address, it was a server which was split off from the official network. Fairly obvious why they did it when you look into the Clinton Foundations corruption.. to hide things. Not only that, it was insecure meaning any foreign enemy could have hacked into it and stolen secret classified information.

It's a huge deal, both in incompetence and greed.

Hank Scorpio

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It wasn't just an address, it was a server which was split off from the official network. Fairly obvious why they did it when you look into the Clinton Foundations corruption.. to hide things. Not only that, it was insecure meaning any foreign enemy could have hacked into it and stolen secret classified information.

It's a huge deal, both in incompetence and greed.

Same as the Bush emails then.

No republicans called for 'Crooked George' to be sent to prison for that reason, as far as I recall.

Thomas_...

HensVassal wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

I fear that those "over the top democrats" were not exaggerating it. We'll see how it will work when he gets chumming with Putin, his "friend" and if one likes to believe it, they both say that this "friendship" is "mutual". Well, I have no doubts that both of them have each one for themselves a very big ego.

Somehow, despite what Hollywood might have you believe, I doubt there is any little red nuclear button in the Oval Office that the damn cleaning lady could drop her bottle of Windex on and launch 1000 minuteman missiles. There ought to be a few more safeguards and precautions that just one button to press like you're summoning the butler.

Sorry, but this is just a ridiculous post. Everybody knows that the President of the USA is in charge of it as the Supreme Commander of the American Forces and that is how I meant it. Just to remind you of that.
Oh, and somehow I can't avoid having the impression that you appear like some of the Putin supporters who are just too glad that Trump has won. This impression doesn't come from just the one post of yours which I've quote on here, it is the summaration from various posts you've posted on this thread.

Hank Scorpio

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Same as the Bush emails then.

No republicans called for 'Crooked George' to be sent to prison for that reason, as far as I recall.

Two wrongs and all that, and I doubt he was running a foundation receiving donations (many ILLEGAL) from places like Saudi Arabia, a country which funds ISIS. US would have ended up like Germany or France if she got in, probably worse.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Two wrongs and all that, and I doubt he was running a foundation receiving donations (many ILLEGAL) from places like Saudi Arabia, a country which funds ISIS. US would have ended up like Germany or France if she got in, probably worse.

Who is Trump assigning to investigate Bush? Justice should be blind unless it is a thinly veiled attempt to take out someone for opposing him. I mean they can be done at the same time. I mean is there a good reason not to investigate?

I am unsure what Saudi Arabia or presidential candidates selling out their country to Chinese business men has to do with the emails.

Sorry scratch the Chinese business man bit that wasn't Clinton...

constitutionus

so.

looks like i was right about michigan.

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

Who is Trump assigning to investigate Bush? Justice should be blind unless it is a thinly veiled attempt to take out someone for opposing him. I mean they can be done at the same time. I mean is there a good reason not to investigate?

I am unsure what Saudi Arabia or presidential candidates selling out their country to Chinese business men has to do with the emails.

Sorry scratch the Chinese business man bit that wasn't Clinton...

Bush did it, so that means Clinton can do it?

Could the average Joe in the private sector do it and not face serious repercussions?

Such a tiresome argument. That guy broke the law so I can too!

That's what cost Clinton the election, arrogance, and many of her supporters have it too.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Bush did it, so that means Clinton can do it?

Could the average Joe in the private sector do it and not face serious repercussions?

Such a tiresome argument. That guy broke the law so I can too!

That's what cost Clinton the election, arrogance, and many of her supporters have it too.

My argument is that both should be investigated. I state it quite clearly that investigators can be assigned to both. To do otherwise would be to raise questions over why you are investigating one and not the other. Thus if you believe wrong happened go after and imprison both.

TheDoctor

Clinton winning the popular vote but got destroyed in the Electoral College.

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

My argument is that both should be investigated. I state it quite clearly that investigators can be assigned to both. To do otherwise would be to raise questions over why you are investigating one and not the other. Thus if you believe wrong happened go after and imprison both.

FBI didn't see it that way. Personally I don't care. I think if she doesn't get nailed for the server it will be for the foundation. Nobody to protect her now.

Brian?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That's absolutely bag on the money.

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It wasn't just an address, it was a server which was split off from the official network. Fairly obvious why they did it when you look into the Clinton Foundations corruption.. to hide things. Not only that, it was insecure meaning any foreign enemy could have hacked into it and stolen secret classified information.

It's a huge deal, both in incompetence and greed.

And you've yet to answer how the Bush administration with the President, VP and all their staff doing the same thing with 22 million e-mails lost is not causing you the same outrage.

oscarBravo

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

FBI didn't see it that way.

So, if the FBI don't think there's a case to answer, that's the end of the matter for you?

HensVassal

Thomas_... wrote: »

Ah, you wouldn't expect Putin getting more of a free hand over Ukraine with Trump sitting in the WH, wouldn't you? If Putin would had it his way, he'd rather yesterday than tomorrow restore the territorial extent of the former SU and that includes the Baltic States. It isn't without reason why the Baltic States have called NATO for more support in order to deter Putin from land grabbing, like in Ukraine. With the USA withdrawing from NATO committments in Eastern Europe, it might watering Putins appetite. So, it couldn't be better for Putin than having Trump in the WH from January next year onwards.

You're absolutely dreaming. Putin will not be invading ANYWHERE so get that idea out of your head. It's propaganda fantasy. Putin was instrumental in the destruction of the USSR. Why the hell would he try to reconstitute it? It's as stupid a notion as all those people fearing that Sharia Law would be implemented in the US because Obama is a fucking Kenyan Arab.

A fucking Kenyan Arab!!! :pac:

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That's fair, I agree with that.

You ask what's the difference between 2001 and now -- well, the financial crisis, the bailouts, the Occupy movement, etc., all enhanced average Americans' sense that there is one set of rules for the wealthy and the politically connected, and another set of rules for everyone else.

Right, but nobody on the Trump campaign, or anywhere in the media, as far as I am aware, has suggested that Bush or Powell or their aides should be prosecuted, or be investigated alongside Hillary Clinton. Aside from doing the same thing, Powell was the one who told Hillary Clinton that this was best practice.

And if there is such anger that there is one rule for the wealthy, and another for everyone else, why did Americans elect a billionaire (supposedly a billionaire) who never stops telling people he's really really powerful. Trump even said he was 'smart' by avoiding taxes.

I've never lived in the US, I admit I don't understand Americans, so maybe there is no answer that I would even be capable of digesting; I really don't see any logic to the electorate's behaviour yesterday.

Hank Scorpio

oscarBravo wrote: »

So, if the FBI don't think there's a case to answer, that's the end of the matter for you?

No, DOJ is corrupt and pro Hillary. I've explained why like 20 / 30 posts back.

BorneTobyWilde

Energy is key
Instead of Trump saying he'd like to tap that ass, he will be saying I liked to tap that gas .
So many energy sources to tap into.
Wind
Gas
Oil
Need to tax imports to to put a balance on trade with China and Mecico

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

FBI didn't see it that way. Personally I don't care. I think if she doesn't get nailed for the server it will be for the foundation. Nobody to protect her now.

The fbi feel neither should be prosecuted and said as much before the election. However neither or Don believe that with regards to Hillary so if the new prez is going to get someone to reopen Hillary's investigation then why does he believe the fbi about Bush?

I really think Donald will be avoiding people looking too deep into their respective charities if he can help it.

Lastly before it is brought up Benghazi has been gone through 9 times without conviction and seems unlikely to succeed at the 10th attempt.

Hillary will not end up in prison. My guess is Donald will forget about it now the "lock her up" slogan has served it's purpose.

He was interested in getting elected, not justice.

BorneTobyWilde

Trump to get access to top secrets straight away.
Top level clearance , who shot JFK , where the roswel aliens are at so on .

TheOven

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Trump to get access to top secrets straight away.
Top level clearance , who shot JFK , where the roswel aliens are at so on .

He'll get to rewatch the Iran video too.

Jawgap

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I feel so bad for him stuck in that embassy. He must worry about his Family all the time. That "Rape" charge drawing him to Sweden is a big fat lie.

There's no doubts wikileaks helped Trump immensely exposing the corruption of Clinton and her cronies. #pizza

Would be great if Trump could help him.

So Hilary is guilty by reason of supposition, innuendo and circumstance, but Assange?

Overheal

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Trump to get access to top secrets straight away.
Top level clearance , who shot JFK , where the roswel aliens are at so on .

All the things that normally temper a campaigns rhetoric anyway.

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

Hillary will not end up in prison. My guess is Donald will forget about it now the "lock her up" slogan has served it's purpose.

He was interested in getting elected, not justice.

FBI was compromised with her as SOS. I think the foundation will cause her to get charged eventually, FBI investigations never "close" they're always ongoing. Money laundering is a big no no. I doubt Trump will do anything it would give him bad press and he might want to keep relations clean citing victory as good enough. We'll have to agree to disagree.

HensVassal

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Who should we blame then? Surely it's a tenet of democracy that the people take responsibility for the decisions they make?

This decision was a "FUCK YOU" decision and the only ones who are to blame are the establishment. They fleeced the public to line their own pockets and fielded a candidate to do the same thing for yet another 4-8 years and cry when the arrogance of their ruse blows up in their face.

To then condescend to lecture them about "how could they have done this? It's a disaster! Oh woe!" is the epitome of patronising.

Jawgap

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It funny but it also show a complete lack of respect for three people who were democratly elected.

Why on earth does anyone who is 'elected' deserve respect as an automatic right?

there are three people lampooned in that cartoon - at least 2 don't believe in climate change, one believes in God above controlling the weather, and another thinks driving a tractor with few pints is ok!

.....by the way, how much respect did Trump show to the Clintons who both held elected office, to John McCain, Ted Cruz, Rubio, Sanders......please, respect is earned by, in the first instance, giving it.

How much respect has Trump shown for women?

seamus

HensVassal wrote: »

This decision was a "FUCK YOU" decision and the only ones who are to blame are the establishment. They fleeced the public to line their own pockets and fielded a candidate to do the same thing for yet another 4-8 years and cry when the arrogance of their ruse blows up in their face.

To then condescend to lecture them about "how could they have done this? It's a disaster! Oh woe!" is the epitome of patronising.

But Trump is part of the establishment.

Jawgap

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

No, DOJ is corrupt and pro Hillary. I've explained why like 20 / 30 posts back.

All of the DoJ is corrupt?

Everyone.....from the interns to the A-G. I presume there will be a mass purge firing at least, if not show trials for conspiracy?

Hank Scorpio

Jawgap wrote: »

So Hilary is guilty by reason of supposition, innuendo and circumstance, but Assange?

There's literally emails on the foundation donations of people discussing how to hide the money. There's not circumstance, that's corruption.

Assange is already in prison, he can't step outside the door or he`ll be arrested and sent to Sweden, then extradited to the US. He doesn't even have a window.