|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 28, 2016 9:58:13 GMT
Looks now like this guy could well get the Republican nomination.
Is it possible that he could be elected President in November? What does that mean for the UK?
In the past, dire consequences were predicted when both Reagan and the younger Bush were elected. Both presidencies were problematic. Poverty in the US grew exponentially during Reagan's tenure and we are still dealing with Bush's stupidity in the middle east.
We are all still here though and the world didn't end.
Last night I was listening to him speak on his "America First" foreign policy. I noted him saying that US allies in future would have to pay for their defence under the US Nuclear umbrella.
How much would we have to pay I wonder? Is this policy a threat to NATO's existence?
If the future of NATO is in doubt, does that affect the European Referendum debate?
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 28, 2016 10:26:50 GMT
Of course, as a hand wringing liberal, I hope the sensible folk of America see sense and don't elect him.
If they do elect him then I hope it's all populist rhetoric and he's really a reasonable guy.
If he isn't then I hope he can be restrained by the checks and balances of the US political system and bureaucracy.
My finger is hovering over BUY IT NOW on this though.
www.preppersshop.co.uk/preppers-shop-ultimate-bug-out-bag-1878-p.asp
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Apr 28, 2016 15:14:44 GMT
The problem you have goes two ways. People are now so immersed in the politics of control ie PC, Pulling someone up for having an opinion etc that anyone who has different ideas is seen as an extremist etc. You alsohave controlledmedia that can spin anything out to discredit anyone. Sometimes if the control starts pissing people off then they look for alternatives, unless you are under control then you bend over and take it again and again. And those that follow the control method are usually the ones who dont actually realise it until its too late.
|
|
|
Post by andrewguk on Apr 28, 2016 15:38:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 16:28:32 GMT
Don't like the cut of the guy. Would rather he didn't succeed. Felt the same about the younger Bush, and I was right about him. Cowboy comes to mind!
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 28, 2016 16:43:08 GMT
The problem you have goes two ways. People are now so immersed in the politics of control ie PC, Pulling someone up for having an opinion etc that anyone who has different ideas is seen as an extremist etc. You alsohave controlledmedia that can spin anything out to discredit anyone. Sometimes if the control starts pissing people off then they look for alternatives, unless you are under control then you bend over and take it again and again. And those that follow the control method are usually the ones who dont actually realise it until its too late. Me - I'm old school PC mate. You don't call the disabled "cripples" etc. etc. Aside from that I don't like racists and fascists much. What's attracted my interest with Trump is this business about all US allies having to pay for the protection that the US nukes provide. "If you won't pay you defend yourself" is more or less what he said. How much will we have to pay? Will we pay? Can everyone pay? Will it break NATO up? Scary stuff. How does any threat to Nato affect the European Referendum? I know you will be interested in that desman. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on Apr 28, 2016 17:49:12 GMT
Trump is more a salesman than a statesman. Some of his rhetoric has been pure electioneering, unburdened by political philosophy, meant to get Americans into voting booths like he got them into his casinos.
That said, his desire to end conflict with Russia, his anti-establishment avoidance of special interests, and scepticism of global warming are all a welcome change. I don't think he's the nutcase some fear.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 28, 2016 17:55:17 GMT
The problem you have goes two ways. People are now so immersed in the politics of control ie PC, Pulling someone up for having an opinion etc that anyone who has different ideas is seen as an extremist etc. You alsohave controlledmedia that can spin anything out to discredit anyone. Sometimes if the control starts pissing people off then they look for alternatives, unless you are under control then you bend over and take it again and again. And those that follow the control method are usually the ones who dont actually realise it until its too late. Me - I'm old school PC mate. You don't call the disabled "cripples" etc. etc. Aside from that I don't like racists and fascists much. What's attracted my interest with Trump is this business about all US allies having to pay for the protection that the US nukes provide. "If you won't pay you defend yourself" is more or less what he said. How much will we have to pay? Will we pay? Can everyone pay? Will it break NATO up? Scary stuff. How does any threat to Nato affect the European Referendum? I know you will be interested in that desman. :-) If ever there was a statement guaranteed to encourage nuclear proliferation this was it . Pure stupidity from a politician who appeals to people's worst prejudices
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 28, 2016 18:12:04 GMT
Me - I'm old school PC mate. You don't call the disabled "cripples" etc. etc. Aside from that I don't like racists and fascists much. What's attracted my interest with Trump is this business about all US allies having to pay for the protection that the US nukes provide. "If you won't pay you defend yourself" is more or less what he said. How much will we have to pay? Will we pay? Can everyone pay? Will it break NATO up? Scary stuff. How does any threat to Nato affect the European Referendum? I know you will be interested in that desman. :-) If ever there was a statement guaranteed to encourage nuclear proliferation this was it . Pure stupidity from a politician who appeals to people's worst prejudices It seems to have gone by the board though. I'd have thought the implications of that policy would be top of the news this morning. No mention though. Did you hear him? It's possible I misunderstood him I suppose but I don't think so. Hopefully it's all rhetoric.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 28, 2016 18:16:24 GMT
If ever there was a statement guaranteed to encourage nuclear proliferation this was it . Pure stupidity from a politician who appeals to people's worst prejudices It seems to have gone by the board though. I'd have thought the implications of that policy would be top of the news this morning. No mention though. Did you hear him? It's possible I misunderstood him I suppose but I don't think so. Hopefully it's all rhetoric. Yes I know he said it . It's a scary prospect
|
|
|
Post by drjeffsdiscobarge on Apr 28, 2016 18:29:53 GMT
The guys a fucking idiot and a fucking danger.
Scaremongering at its worst.
And by the way, has anyone else noticed that the bastard can barely complete a sentence with interupting himself by saying "by the way"?!
C**t
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Apr 28, 2016 18:44:54 GMT
Not sure what it will mean for the UK, worried enough about what it will mean for the U.S.
the age of tolerance could be at an end. The nearest equivalent I can think of would be us electing Jeremy Clarkson. Some good ideas and an interesting character, some ideas so bad the nation could be set back decades.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 28, 2016 21:08:53 GMT
Republican nomination is going to go to the convention. Going to be very messy and very public.
|
|
|
Post by misterken on Apr 29, 2016 2:16:39 GMT
A lot of apprehension about him over here in US, but it seems to disappear when they get in the voting booth. This guy could go all the way. It's a scary thought.
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Apr 29, 2016 9:11:33 GMT
Dont think theres the slightest chance of him winning the election. Having said that, when the alternative is Hilary Clinton maybe he will.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2016 9:20:35 GMT
Thought this was about farting...gutted
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 10:15:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 10:16:23 GMT
Thought this was about farting...gutted It is - in a way
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Apr 29, 2016 12:53:49 GMT
Must admit to being slightly disappointed. Opened the thread thinking it would be anecdotes about farting.
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Apr 29, 2016 13:02:13 GMT
Thnkfully the US system would make him a lame duck from the start, he'd get so little support in either House from his own party let alone the Democrats.
Reagan was such a different case, we might have thought he was absurd in Europe but mainstream US Republicans never did, he had a long political pedigree as state governor etc.
Personally I still reckon Trump will be headed off at the pass by his own party if humanly possible, Cruz or a strong compromise candidate stands a chance of beating Hillary, whereas liberal and many simply non-redneck Republicans would vote for her simply to vote against Trump.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 13:28:00 GMT
Comes to summat if we are left hoping for a Cruz win. That prospect doesn't hold much appeal, particularly for secularists. I'd guess/hope either would lose to Ms Clinton.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Apr 29, 2016 15:06:36 GMT
Comes to summat if we left hoping for a Cruz win. That prospect doesn't hold much appeal, particularly for secularists. I'd guess/hope either would lose to Ms Clinton. Cruz is almost as scary as Trump.
|
|
|
Post by LDE76 on Apr 29, 2016 15:47:34 GMT
If Trump gets in, there'll be hell toupee.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Apr 29, 2016 15:48:48 GMT
The real worry, is if Trump is the republican nominee, then only a strong and honest democrat can potentially fight him off? What's that? Hillary Clinton? Fuck!
Trump is an absolute fucking moron, but with Clinton's repeated dishonesty, you can see why American's are actually backing Trump. It takes one to be considered worse than Trump, yet somehow Clinton manages that.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 16:24:35 GMT
If Trump gets in, there'll be hell toupee. Excellent. Top marks!
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 16:34:03 GMT
Comes to summat if we left hoping for a Cruz win. That prospect doesn't hold much appeal, particularly for secularists. I'd guess/hope either would lose to Ms Clinton. Cruz is almost as scary as Trump. I know. Isn't he backed by the Tea party lot?. And yet Palin backs Trump. American politics is a convoluted affair.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Apr 29, 2016 21:25:57 GMT
That said, his desire to (1) end conflict with Russia, his (2)anti-establishment avoidance of special interests, and (3)scepticism of global warming are all a welcome change. I don't think he's the nutcase some fear. Trump's an American version of Mussolini or Mugabe, Putin or Chavez though. He knows how to use propaganda and that hate and violence are powerful tools to give him power; his suggested changes in laws to muzzle the free press if they criticise him show that. (1) I don't want to fight with Russia, but Putin is a liar and invades somewhere to distract Russians every time his bungling screws up the economy. He's dangerous and some American involvement probably helps protect our allies so I dunno how I feel about this. (2) This is super important for me. I think one of the best things that could be done is to cut the funnel of cash from big businesses to politicians in America, it's obscene right now. I think Trump would only do a few token things for headlines though. (3) Trump wants to be president and can find scientific advice. Scientists have shown beyond reasonable doubt that recent global warming is real and caused mainly by us. A candidate like Trump who buys into special interest propaganda that attacks science or who is happy sacrificing all our progress since the enlightenment for a few votes is worthless IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Apr 29, 2016 21:54:31 GMT
That said, his desire to (1) end conflict with Russia, his (2)anti-establishment avoidance of special interests, and (3)scepticism of global warming are all a welcome change. I don't think he's the nutcase some fear. Trump's an American version of Mussolini or Mugabe, Putin or Chavez though. He knows how to use propaganda and that hate and violence are powerful tools to give him power; his suggested changes in laws to muzzle the free press if they criticise him show that. (1) I don't want to fight with Russia, but Putin is a liar and invades somewhere to distract Russians every time his bungling screws up the economy. He's dangerous and some American involvement probably helps protect our allies so I dunno how I feel about this. (2) This is super important for me. I think one of the best things that could be done is to cut the funnel of cash from big businesses to politicians in America, it's obscene right now. I think Trump would only do a few token things for headlines though. (3) Trump wants to be president and can find scientific advice. Scientists have shown beyond reasonable doubt that recent global warming is real and caused mainly by us. A candidate like Trump who buys into special interest propaganda that attacks science or who is happy sacrificing all our progress since the enlightenment for a few votes is worthless IMO. Mussolini in terms of bombast, preening and a deceivingly ridiculous air. Not so much of the corporate state about Trump though. The rest is bob on for me mate. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on Apr 29, 2016 22:57:40 GMT
That said, his desire to (1) end conflict with Russia, his (2)anti-establishment avoidance of special interests, and (3)scepticism of global warming are all a welcome change. I don't think he's the nutcase some fear. Trump's an American version of Mussolini or Mugabe, Putin or Chavez though. He knows how to use propaganda and that hate and violence are powerful tools to give him power; his suggested changes in laws to muzzle the free press if they criticise him show that. (1) I don't want to fight with Russia, but Putin is a liar and invades somewhere to distract Russians every time his bungling screws up the economy. He's dangerous and some American involvement probably helps protect our allies so I dunno how I feel about this. (2) This is super important for me. I think one of the best things that could be done is to cut the funnel of cash from big businesses to politicians in America, it's obscene right now. I think Trump would only do a few token things for headlines though. (3) Trump wants to be president and can find scientific advice. Scientists have shown beyond reasonable doubt that recent global warming is real and caused mainly by us. A candidate like Trump who buys into special interest propaganda that attacks science or who is happy sacrificing all our progress since the enlightenment for a few votes is worthless IMO. Please take my views with a pinch of salt - I have no evidence, just a lot of skepticism about Obama and the Clintons. What I suspect, based on what I hear and my general view on the world, is that the Democrats have sponsored a lot of dubious research and had it labelled as science. Carbon trading will make some people a lot of money...
|
|
|
Post by Mendicant on Apr 29, 2016 22:59:21 GMT
Trump's an American version of Mussolini or Mugabe, Putin or Chavez though. He knows how to use propaganda and that hate and violence are powerful tools to give him power; his suggested changes in laws to muzzle the free press if they criticise him show that. (1) I don't want to fight with Russia, but Putin is a liar and invades somewhere to distract Russians every time his bungling screws up the economy. He's dangerous and some American involvement probably helps protect our allies so I dunno how I feel about this. (2) This is super important for me. I think one of the best things that could be done is to cut the funnel of cash from big businesses to politicians in America, it's obscene right now. I think Trump would only do a few token things for headlines though. (3) Trump wants to be president and can find scientific advice. Scientists have shown beyond reasonable doubt that recent global warming is real and caused mainly by us. A candidate like Trump who buys into special interest propaganda that attacks science or who is happy sacrificing all our progress since the enlightenment for a few votes is worthless IMO. Please take my views with a pinch of salt - I have no evidence, just a lot of skepticism about Obama and the Clintons. What I suspect, based on what I hear and my general view on the world, is that the Democrats have sponsored a lot of dubious research and had it labelled as science. Carbon trading will make some people a lot of money... I formatted my post wrong, sorry didn't mean to include my comments in your original post.
|
|