PDA

View Full Version : Vote for a president of USA. 2016 election.



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

LeBrok
08-03-16, 01:55
Let's have some fun and see who Eupidia's members would elect the new president of US of America.

LeBrok
08-03-16, 02:39
I have to admit, I don't really like any of them. I voted Rubio, as the one closer to the center, still having some chance of winning if super delegates choose so, and as a lesser evil. I don't think any of them is a good material for a leader. I would rather pick Obama or Romney from last election. On brighter side we have one billion dollar worth of reality show for a whole year paid by candidates and their faithful.

Angela
08-03-16, 04:01
You forgot Kasich, who would be my first choice, but it doesn't matter because he doesn't stand a chance. Of the remaining ones which you have listed, Rubio is the least bad option for me as well.

As God is my judge, if it comes down to Hillary versus Trump, for the first time in my adult life I'll sit out an election. I couldn't bear to vote for either one. (Trump isn't right wing, for what it's worth; he's just a con man and a blowhard playing the xenophobe card; he gave money to and supported liberal causes his entire life. If I were the type to go in for conspiracy theories I'd say he and Hillary cooked this up together. If you feed people's fears and prejudices they'll vote for you even if it's blatantly obvious you're a liar and an opportunist.)

Fire Haired14
08-03-16, 05:54
As God is my judge, if it comes down to Hillary versus Trump, for the first time in my adult life I'll sit out an election. I couldn't bear to vote for either one. (Trump isn't right wing, for what it's worth; he's just a con man and a blowhard playing the xenophobe card; he gave money to and supported liberal causes his entire life. If I were the type to go in for conspiracy theories I'd say he and Hillary cooked this up together. If you feed people's fears and prejudices they'll vote for you even if it's blatantly obvious you're a liar and an opportunist.)

So true....

Maleth
08-03-16, 09:26
Rubio? Is he the one who got back to Trump for having small hands therefore a small penis? Is this the style of how future American presidents should lead the wealthiest nation on earth? - In my opinion Hillary with all her downfalls is the only person that can qualify. Trump is a sad sad story and bewlidered how so many American people can genuinely think he is fit for office.....very worrisome indeed. Another thing that show the political spectrum in the USA is changing is having a self confessed socialist like Sanders running for leader and not doing too badly. I thought socialism was a taboo word in the USA. Seems like not anymore. There must be some valid reason for it.

Maciamo
08-03-16, 09:58
I chose Bernie Sanders, although I would have preferred Michael Bloomberg if he had run (he just announced today that he wouldn't run). If not Sanders, then I'd go with Clinton.

I think that Ted Cruz is the worst candidate (fundamentalist Christian + too anti-government), followed by Trump.

The New York Times published (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/opinion/campaign-stops/all-politicians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html) an interesting comparison of the percentages of lies, truths and half-truths in the statements made by each of the candidates since 2007.

Here a chart showing where candidates stand on important issues.

http://www.endtime.com/wp-content/uploads/2016-president-issues.jpg


Like most Western/Northern Europeans, I am am in favour of abortion and same-sex marriage and of stricter gun control, so I could only vote for a Democrat.

Climate change is possibly the most important issue for this presidential election, and here is where Democratic candidates stand.

http://cleantechnica.com/files/2015/08/climate-goals2.png

Promenade
08-03-16, 14:18
Ahahaha, this really is an unfortunate pool of candidates, though I'm sure Canadians thought similarly with Harper and Trudeau for PM. In reality the executive branch here isn't as powerful as it is presented to be. This is a very important and interesting election though, we are seeing the revolt of populist forces in each party against the establishment. It would be fascinating to see what would happen if Trump or Sanders were elected. I'm sure some here may even consider either frightening but it really is a unique election. If you view this as a non partisan, the election so far has been very intriguing.

Neither Trump nor Sanders seem to be supported by any considerable establishment, Trump being self funded and Bernie being supported by mostly average people.(Although Bernie has been given money by Google and many Unions and Trump could arguably be called establishment himself. Still, the case could be made that he is a different type of "elite" than what is typical). Meanwhile, Kasich (who used to work for Lehman brothers) and Hillary have both been given large donations from George Soros (Greg Wendt and Mark Kvamme have certainly been much more important donors to Kasich). Hillary also has historical support from almost all companies represented on the DOW Jones. Rubio and Cruz have received large amounts from Goldman Sachs, in fact Cruz is even married to an employee. Rubio also seems to be getting cozy with the Koch brothers especially since he is Jeb Bush's protege.

Yet all this money and influence has been hijacked from two relative outsiders on both sides, its extraordinary to consider. I'm sure either would have a very hard time doing anything as president since the legislature would be incredibly hostile toward them. We probably wont ever see such a political revolt in America like this again if one is elected due to how little influence they'd have.

DuPidh
08-03-16, 14:39
Let's have some fun and see who Eupidia's members would elect the new president of US of America.

TRUMP for President!
Its the person that has most chances of being elected! America today has become Mexico's playground. Mexican women get pregnant like crazy in Mexico, in USA and deliver their babies in American soil dumping the financial responsibility of raising them, to the american public. Mexican drug dealers have caused and continue to cause thousand of victims daily. The way Mexicans are multiplying in USA has reached epidemic proportions and only a Wall resembling Chinese wall might slow it a bit down, but there is no way of stopping it!
Mexico is draining USA and only Trump with our support can do something about it. As Trump has said Mexicans are the worst rapists! America is at the moment being raped by Mexicans.
Muslims in the other hand are the worst! They have embraced terror and killed Americans.
Its the last chance to make a stand to protect America. If Democrats win this election cycle the process of mexicanisation of America is in full force ahead.
If you know somebody who votes in USA ask them to do the right thing: Vote TRUMP!

Angela
08-03-16, 15:48
TRUMP for President!
Its the person that has most chances of being elected! America today has become Mexico's playground. Mexican women get pregnant like crazy in Mexico, in USA and deliver their babies in American soil dumping the financial responsibility of raising them, to the american public. Mexican drug dealers have caused and continue to cause thousand of victims daily. The way Mexicans are multiplying in USA has reached epidemic proportions and only a Wall resembling Chinese wall might slow it a bit down, but there is no way of stopping it!
Mexico is draining USA and only Trump with our support can do something about it. As Trump has said Mexicans are the worst rapists! America is at the moment being raped by Mexicans.
Muslims in the other hand are the worst! They have embraced terror and killed Americans.
Its the last chance to make a stand to protect America. If Democrats win this election cycle the process of mexicanisation of America is in full force ahead.
If you know somebody who votes in USA ask them to do the right thing: Vote TRUMP!

My goodness, you're not a Mexican then? You're here masquerading under a false flag? Or are you a self-hating Mexican? Anyway, obviously you haven't seen the polls where Trump would lose in any head to head against either of the Democratic candidates.

Also as to Trump, he's employed foreign workers his entire life, because they're cheaper. He's a fake and a fraud. He's bilked his workers, the people he got to pay for his fake Trump University, and his creditors. You know what you call someone who knows all that and believes his promises? Stupid, that's what.

Every single one of the Republican candidates is against unregulated immigration; the difference is that the rest of them don't pretend that the American people would ever permit the wholesale rounding up and deportation of twelve million men, women, and children.

His voters are the same kind of blue collar, uneducated men (both Republicans and Democrats) who voted in Hitler and the Nazis. Fortunately, there's no way he could win in a general election. Unfortunately, if he's the nominee, and he may be, because he wasn't called out early enough, he'll guarantee the presidency to Hillary Clinton, who in addition to the very real possibility that she'll be indicted for misuse of security information, has, in order to secure the black vote, promised massive increases in welfare spending of various sorts.

Bernie Sanders is an honest man, but he's an out and out socialist whose biggest supporters are middle and upper class white college students living off their daddies who want lots of free stuff forever...them and people who've never run a business in their lives. *Well, I take that back. Ben and Jerry of Ben and Jerry ice cream fame are behind him...ex 60's drugged out hippies who turned to capitalism.

As for Ted Cruz, don't get me started. He's a brilliant guy, unlike Trump, but another snake oil salesman promising what he can't deliver. His voters have no real concept of how the system works. They're furious because they elected people to Congress running on a very conservative agenda and those people couldn't deliver the goods. What they're too emotional about the issues to understand is that in order to get laws passed you need control of both houses of Congress and a President who won't veto the laws you passed. In other words you don't need just the House of Representatives, which they had, but a Senate (which they got only very late in Obama's term) where they would have the 2/3 majority needed to over-ride a presidential veto. By voting for him in the primary they're once again guaranteeing a Democratic president who will block anything the conservatives want. In addition to all of that, anyone with a modicum of street smarts who has been paying attention can see that he's dishonest, and not a man of his word. That's why all his Republican colleagues hate him, not because of his ideas. He would be another Nixon, highly intelligent and capable, but a man with no code of ethics.

Meanwhile, the polls indicate that if there were a referendum today and Americans of both parties could choose the President, it would be John Kasich, which makes sense because he's the most centrist candidate. Unfortunately, he's too moderate for the Republican ideologues who vote in the Republican primaries for their candidate.

You know, the founding fathers had this right as well. George Washington warned against the dangers of the party system. I've read them very carefully, and have always marveled at their acumen, but I didn't pay enough attention to that. He was absolutely right. Too bad they didn't address it in some way.

bicicleur
08-03-16, 16:17
none of them are fit
it will be an interesting campaign

sparkey
08-03-16, 20:36
None of those listed. The reasonable candidates (Paul for Republicans, Webb for Democrats) dropped out already, leaving only ultra-nationalist Trump, ultra-conservative Cruz, ultra-hawk Rubio, clueless Kasich (who you forgot, lol), ultra-left Sanders, and ultra-corrupt Clinton. No thank you.

The only interesting contest for me is now the Libertarian Party contest between Gary Johnson and John McAfee.

sparkey
08-03-16, 20:42
You know, the founding fathers had this right as well. George Washington warned against the dangers of the party system. I've read them very carefully, and have always marveled at their acumen, but I didn't pay enough attention to that. He was absolutely right. Too bad they didn't address it in some way.

Parties arise naturally, regardless of whatever Washington wanted. The number of parties is dictated by the voting system. The problem in the United States isn't so much the existence of parties, but the existence of only two major parties. Multi-party systems encourage coalition building and agreement, which is why I'm in favor of changing the voting system to proportional representation. (Not to mention that I tend to be a third party voter anyway.)

Angela
08-03-16, 21:41
None of those listed. The reasonable candidates (Paul for Republicans, Webb for Democrats) dropped out already, leaving only ultra-nationalist Trump, ultra-conservative Cruz, ultra-hawk Rubio, clueless Kasich (who you forgot, lol), ultra-left Sanders, and ultra-corrupt Clinton. No thank you.

The only interesting contest for me is now the Libertarian Party contest between Gary Johnson and John McAfee.

No different than my staying home altogether...a totally thrown away vote.

You can see how multi-party countries work by looking at a state like Israel, although the same pattern can be observed in European countries. Wacko minority parties can hold the system hostage. (That's how the Nazi's were able to get power, and why modern Israel is imprisoned by antique religious laws.)

In some versions, there's complete paralysis. In others, each legislative crisis means that the whole coalition can collapse. You wind up getting leaders who are only supported by a small section of the voting public, leading to instability.

American democracy has been stable for so long because a two party system was conducive to moderation.

In fact, that's how we got Trump: too many contenders for the Republican nomination because they all thought Hillary Clinton would be easy to beat. So, even though Trump has a ceiling of about 35%, some of which, in some states, comes from Democratic ranks, he could win. Or, they can split it up, leading to a contested convention, which means deals and coalitions, with whose results nobody will be happy.

It's a recipe for disaster.

This is sort of poly sci 101.

Angela
08-03-16, 22:06
No different than my staying home altogether...a totally thrown away vote.

You can see how multi-party countries work by looking at a state like Israel, although the same pattern can be observed in European countries. Wacko minority parties can hold the system hostage. (That's how the Nazi's were able to get power, and why modern Israel is imprisoned by antique religious laws.)

In some versions, there's complete paralysis. In others, each legislative crisis means that the whole coalition can collapse. You wind up getting leaders who are only supported by a small section of the voting public, leading to instability.

American democracy has been stable for so long because a two party system was conducive to moderation.

In fact, that's how we got Trump: too many contenders for the Republican nomination because they all thought Hillary Clinton would be easy to beat. So, even though Trump has a ceiling of about 35%, some of which, in some states, comes from Democratic ranks, he could win. Or, they can split it up, leading to a contested convention, which means deals and coalitions, with whose results nobody will be happy.

It's a recipe for disaster.

This is sort of poly sci 101.

As for Ron Paul, he's a dangerously naive loon, and Webb was a total non-entity.

sparkey
08-03-16, 23:04
No different than my staying home altogether...a totally thrown away vote.

Somebody in New York, telling somebody in California that their Presidential vote won't matter? Our heads are getting counted toward the Democratic electoral vote totals, whether we vote Republican, Libertarian, or whatever. That's the way the American electoral college system works. So why not vote for the candidate we like best? If a third party candidate gets unexpectedly high percentages, at least the political world may take note, quite possibly more than if the losing major party got a smidgen more.


You can see how multi-party countries work by looking at a state like Israel, although the same pattern can be observed in European countries. Wacko minority parties can hold the system hostage. (That's how the Nazi's were able to get power, and why modern Israel is imprisoned by antique religious laws.)

In some versions, there's complete paralysis. In others, each legislative crisis means that the whole coalition can collapse. You wind up getting leaders who are only supported by a small section of the voting public, leading to instability.

Most multi-party countries are stable. Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, etc. Those that are unstable would still be unstable with FPTP, because they have additional internal issues, like ethnic or religious strife. The modern United States is a great candidate for a country that could support a stable multi-party system. We're more like the Netherlands than we are like Israel.


American democracy has been stable for so long because a two party system was conducive to moderation.

I don't know where to begin. America is not moderating, it's polarizing, and this has been measured. Also, we haven't exactly been stable, we've even had one of the largest civil wars ever.


In fact, that's how we got Trump: too many contenders for the Republican nomination because they all thought Hillary Clinton would be easy to beat. So, even though Trump has a ceiling of about 35%, some of which, in some states, comes from Democratic ranks, he could win. Or, they can split it up, leading to a contested convention, which means deals and coalitions, with whose results nobody will be happy.

It's a recipe for disaster.

This is sort of poly sci 101.

What? Clearly in a two-party system, somebody like Trump can take over a party, because, you know, it's happening. And in a multi-party system, you're more likely to have reasonable alternatives for those in the party who don't support such a person. How are you arguing for a two-party system here? Don't treat me like you're teaching me something if you can't even back up your own position.


As for Ron Paul, he's a dangerously naive loon, and Webb was a total non-entity.

Ron Paul wasn't running this year. I assume you mean Rand Paul. How is he "a dangerously naive loon"? His positions come across as largely well thought-out and within reason to me; I really only took issue with his immigration stance. He's not a conspiracy theorist or a historical revisionist or a demagogue or anything like that.

I can't disagree that Webb failed to make an impact, though. I think the Democratic Party has moved too far to the left for him.

Aaron1981
08-03-16, 23:06
Let's have some fun and see who Eupidia's members would elect the new president of US of America.

Some Canadians have far too much to say in other country's issues. Let's worry about that fool you elected in my wonderful country shall we?

LeBrok
08-03-16, 23:56
None of those listed. The reasonable candidates (Paul for Republicans, Webb for Democrats) dropped out already, leaving only ultra-nationalist Trump, ultra-conservative Cruz, ultra-hawk Rubio, clueless Kasich (who you forgot, lol), ultra-left Sanders, and ultra-corrupt Clinton. No thank you.

The only interesting contest for me is now the Libertarian Party contest between Gary Johnson and John McAfee.
No, I didn't forget. The only candidates listed are the once with reasonable chance of winning. As I said in my first posts, it's only for fun and for most rational people the election is between the bigger and lesser evil. The damage control mode.

sparkey
08-03-16, 23:59
No, I didn't forget. The only candidates listed are the once with reasonable chance of winning. As I said in my first posts, it's only for fun and for most rational people the election is between the bigger and lesser evil. The damage control mode.

They all look just about as evil as one another from where I'm standing. Better to go with the best candidate.

Angela
09-03-16, 00:03
@Sparkey,

I didn't make up the negatives of multi-party democracies; there's a lot written about it. If you're really interested you can google it.

When you vote for a Libertarian, or a leftist votes for a Ralph Nader, you or he may experience a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling because you voted for the person with whose opinions you most agree, but you're also taking the risk of helping to elect someone whose opinions are totally antithetical to yours. When Evangelical Christians and extreme conservatives stayed home during the last Presidential election, they elected Barack Obama. I don't think they're happy with the eight years that followed. (Not that I think they learned the right lessons from that.)

If it turns out to be a Trump/Clinton election, and there's any chance Trump would get elected, despite my threat I'd probably hold my nose and vote for Clinton. On top of everything else, the man doesn't have the temperament or self-control to be president.

If you're a Rand Paul supporter, then you probably tend toward isolationism. Nothing I say could ever sway you to see the danger in that. Politics is like religion; some people can't be persuaded to change their point of view once they're adults. They just want to fight. Under those circumstances, I don't.

@ Aaron,
I'm sorry, I think I missed something. It's not LeBrok's country as well?

@LeBrok,
As always, the voice of reason. :)

Now I think I'll turn on the news and get more depressed!

LeBrok
09-03-16, 00:34
Some Canadians have far too much to say in other country's issues. Let's worry about that fool you elected in my wonderful country shall we?
I elected?!!! I voted PC.

In international politics US has a leading roll in the West, the rest of the West, the loose coalition or NATO as whole, follows. It means that US can easily drag Canada into a war, like in case of Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan. Either you were for or against, it affected you and all of us. US is also our biggest trading partner and decisions made by its presidents affects us greatly. Many Canadians, directly through self investing or indirectly through pension plans, have their money invested in US economy. Internal polices of US president and his party can influence greatly wealth of Canadians. Environmental decisions, like recent Obama's veto on pipeline from Alberta to Texas was a hit for our oil economy and GDP. On these grounds it is utmost importance for Canadians to pay attention what is going on behind our Southern border.
Sure, we don't have any say in US election, but it affects us a lot. If you think you are insulated from it and shouldn't care, think again...

LeBrok
09-03-16, 00:56
They all look just about as evil as one another from where I'm standing. Better to go with the best candidate.
I would say it should be more of contextual choice. When two main candidates have same chance of winning and every vote counts, one should forget about voting for his own candidate, of third party, and try skewing vote for the lesser evil. When one candidate has a commanding lead, and your vote doesn't count in this case, vote for your own candidate of third party to make a statement.

LeBrok
09-03-16, 01:16
Ahahaha, this really is an unfortunate pool of candidates, though I'm sure Canadians thought similarly with Harper and Trudeau for PM.
I'm usually leftist on social issues, and conservative in fiscal ones. Having said that I believe that economy is the most important issue of all and I tend to vote conservative. Why? Because in good economy, when most people are well off, people turn to be more socially liberal. Other words, when people have a good life, they are more tolerant, inclusive, open minded, less aggressive, compassionate, sharing, etc.





Neither Trump nor Sanders seem to be supported by any considerable establishment, Trump being self funded and Bernie being supported by mostly average people.(Although Bernie has been given money by Google and many Unions and Trump could arguably be called establishment himself. Still, the case could be made that he is a different type of "elite" than what is typical). Meanwhile, Kasich (who used to work for Lehman brothers) and Hillary have both been given large donations from George Soros (Greg Wendt and Mark Kvamme have certainly been much more important donors to Kasich). Hillary also has historical support from almost all companies represented on the DOW Jones. Rubio and Cruz have received large amounts from Goldman Sachs, in fact Cruz is even married to an employee. Rubio also seems to be getting cozy with the Koch brothers especially since he is Jeb Bush's protege.
Interesting background, thanks for sharing. So everyone has big business behind them but Sanders.

sparkey
09-03-16, 01:18
I didn't make up the negatives of multi-party democracies; there's a lot written about it. If you're really interested you can google it.

That's not an argument. It's just you assuming that the reason I don't agree with you about this is that I haven't read enough about it.


When you vote for a Libertarian, or a leftist votes for a Ralph Nader, you or he may experience a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling because you voted for the person with whose opinions you most agree, but you're also taking the risk of helping to elect someone whose opinions are totally antithetical to yours. When Evangelical Christians and extreme conservatives stayed home during the last Presidential election, they elected Barack Obama. I don't think they're happy with the eight years that followed. (Not that I think they learned the right lessons from that.)

You're describing the major reason that anything outside the two most dominant, polarized viewpoints goes unrepresented in a plurality FPTP system, which I would like to see gone. But I've also already said why it doesn't apply to me right now, so I'm going to go ahead and vote third party unless something changes.


If it turns out to be a Trump/Clinton election, and there's any chance Trump would get elected, despite my threat I'd probably hold my nose and vote for Clinton. On top of everything else, the man doesn't have the temperament or self-control to be president.

You may as well stay home. New York is counting for Clinton. :thinking:


If you're a Rand Paul supporter, then you probably tend toward isolationism. Nothing I say could ever sway you to see the danger in that. Politics is like religion; some people can't be persuaded to change their point of view once they're adults. They just want to fight. Under those circumstances, I don't.

Yeah, I'm not interested in turning this into a foreign policy argument either. I obviously disagree that Rand Paul's foreign policy is dangerous, or even that it could meaningfully be described as "isolationism" (which implies protectionism--Trump is more of an isolationist than Paul). But this clarifies that your beef with him is on foreign policy.

LeBrok
09-03-16, 01:23
If it turns out to be a Trump/Clinton election, and there's any chance Trump would get elected, despite my threat I'd probably hold my nose and vote for Clinton.
I would guess that all democrats would go Clinton and half of conservatives too, just not to elect clown Trump. Plus the first woman president is an issue here too, giving an edge to Clinton. Unless most people dream of 4 years of top rated reality show, and nothing else matter. :)

LeBrok
09-03-16, 01:45
Rubio? Is he the one who got back to Trump for having small hands therefore a small penis? Yep, really immature and stupid of him. Obviously nobody wants a president with a small penis, lol.

Angela
09-03-16, 02:26
Yep, really immature and stupid of him. Obviously nobody wants a president with a small penis, lol.

I guess he got tired of being called "little Marco". :)

I think he'll come to regret it. That one struck a chord with men, in particular, and I think it will be remembered when the dozens of insults Trump has hurled will be forgotten. Trump also won't let it go, always devoting a good couple of minutes to it in each speech, "defending" himself. That tells a lot right there. Any minute I expect Trump to come out waving a certificate from his doctor saying it's "HUGE"! :)

As far as gender is concerned, I couldn't care less whether a candidate is a woman or not. Younger women care even less. The gender problem revolves around Trump; he does terribly with women voters not because they want to vote for a woman, but because they hate him. I know there are women who support him but there's a big gender gap in terms of men versus women where his support is concerned. Just speaking anecdotally, I don't know a single woman, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, minority, white or whatever, who can stand him.

Ed. This is the context:

Rubio: “He’s always calling me Little Marco. And I’ll admit he’s taller than me. He’s like 6’2″, which is why I don’t understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5’2″. Have you seen his hands? They’re like this. And you know what they say about men with small hands? You can’t trust them.”

Of course he also said Rubio couldn't have gotten into the Wharton School of Business (I wonder if Trump was a legacy admission or his father bought at chair?), and made fun of the fact that he often drinks from a water bottle during debates.

"Trump: “I have never seen a human being sweat like this man sweats. … It looked like he had just jumped into a swimming pool with his clothes on.” (Trump then splashed water onstage (http://time.com/4239357/donald-trump-marco-rubio-water-bottle-texas/) yelling, “It’s Rubio!”)"

Now admit it, you can't look away. It's exactly like a reality TV show. You're laughing and then feel guilty about having laughed.

Bottom line, though, while he hurt Trump, he also hurt himself.

LeBrok
09-03-16, 04:14
I guess he got tired of being called "little Marco". :)

I think he'll come to regret it. That one struck a chord with men, in particular, and I think it will be remembered when the dozens of insults Trump has hurled will be forgotten. Trump also won't let it go, always devoting a good couple of minutes to it in each speech, "defending" himself. That tells a lot right there. Any minute I expect Trump to come out waving a certificate from his doctor saying it's "HUGE"! :)

As far as gender is concerned, I couldn't care less whether a candidate is a woman or not. Younger women care even less. The gender problem revolves around Trump; he does terribly with women voters not because they want to vote for a woman, but because they hate him. I know there are women who support him but there's a big gender gap in terms of men versus women where his support is concerned. Just speaking anecdotally, I don't know a single woman, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, minority, white or whatever, who can stand him.

Ed. This is the context:

Rubio: “He’s always calling me Little Marco. And I’ll admit he’s taller than me. He’s like 6’2″, which is why I don’t understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5’2″. Have you seen his hands? They’re like this. And you know what they say about men with small hands? You can’t trust them.”

Of course he also said Rubio couldn't have gotten into the Wharton School of Business (I wonder if Trump was a legacy admission or his father bought at chair?), and made fun of the fact that he often drinks from a water bottle during debates.

"Trump: “I have never seen a human being sweat like this man sweats. … It looked like he had just jumped into a swimming pool with his clothes on.” (Trump then splashed water onstage (http://time.com/4239357/donald-trump-marco-rubio-water-bottle-texas/) yelling, “It’s Rubio!”)"

Now admit it, you can't look away. It's exactly like a reality TV show. You're laughing and then feel guilty about having laughed.

Bottom line, though, while he hurt Trump, he also hurt himself.I missed the context, as I don't watch the debates much. Trump might have indeed deserved Rubio's rebuttal. I just wish that candidates forgot about diminishing others and demagoguery, and concentrated on explaining their policy in detail. Explaining in simple but logical language too all, in good narrative style.
Would it work? For many like you and me yes, however debates are arranged having ordinary citizen in mind, and Trump, never mind how good businessman and president he could be, he seems to be a good salesman and a showman.

If it comes to Hillary and first female president, I'm with you on this issue. I'm just saying that many people will vote because they want this to happen finally and sooner the better. This might give few percentage point advantage to her over anyone else and cement her presidency.

DuPidh
09-03-16, 04:30
I would guess that all democrats would go Clinton and half of conservatives too, just not to elect clown Trump. Plus the first woman president is an issue here too, giving an edge to Clinton. Unless most people dream of 4 years of top rated reality show, and nothing else matter. :)

I think you either don't live in USA or are a leftist. Outsourcing of well paying jobs ( manufacturing) has reached monumental proportions. Nothing is manufactured in the USA. Even plane manufacturing is headed to china. Middle class is decimated. For every low paying job created there are 5 illegal Mexicans at ready. So an average American has to compete with low cost oversees competitors and illegal Mexicans at home. That's why Tramp has gained so much support. Its not like everyone went crazy and support the lunatic Trump. If Clinton is the Democratic nominee she does not stand a chance to win against Trump. She does not has a solid reputation among white Americans. Trump appeals to unions with his anti Mexico, anti China rhetoric. Tariffs that he is promising to impose on American companies who outsource jobs are music in unionists. So Trump is not running on social issues like abortion, gays, or government spending to alienate democrats. He is running on the issues that democrats are hurt most. If you live in the USA you have noticed a sense of urgency and anxiety among democrats. They say it open in the interviews. Trump is able to get a big chunk of democrats.

redeyednewt
09-03-16, 05:09
I am in the United States, and do not like any of the Presidential candidates.

Maciamo
09-03-16, 10:13
Parties arise naturally, regardless of whatever Washington wanted. The number of parties is dictated by the voting system. The problem in the United States isn't so much the existence of parties, but the existence of only two major parties. Multi-party systems encourage coalition building and agreement, which is why I'm in favor of changing the voting system to proportional representation. (Not to mention that I tend to be a third party voter anyway.)

A three party system like in the UK is probably better. However too many parties, like in Belgium, only causes confusion and forces parties into delicate coalitions, which sometimes makes it impossible to form a government.

sparkey
09-03-16, 21:13
A three party system like in the UK is probably better. However too many parties, like in Belgium, only causes confusion and forces parties into delicate coalitions, which sometimes makes it impossible to form a government.

I don't feel like the UK is a good example of an actual three party system, it's more of a two party system with some strong 3rd parties and regional parties. I also think that Belgium's problems extend far beyond it having multiple parties. But I get your point, and there are ways to discourage the number of parties from exploding without making a duopoly. Germany does that, for example. I'm not saying they have the perfect system, but it has that effect.

LeBrok
09-03-16, 23:39
Nothing is manufactured in the USA. If you have any interest of being threaded seriously, and before you fall in love with Trump (though this might be too late), please avoid making ridiculous statements like this, and read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_States
And if you cut america from cheap exports to protect local manufacturing, keep in mind that US is the second largest exporter in the world. Interesting ha? It means that things are not only made in US but also the surplus is exported. If you play protectionist game, other countries will reciprocate with tariffs on American goods, and these exporting jobs will be lost. Do you really want this?
There is another effect of American wealth being invested around the globe, in factories and production in particular. This makes people in poor countries richer, and guess what. When they have money, they buy US products like Coca Cola, Starbucks, paints, Windows, tools, medication, patents, etc.

If you really want a debate how protectionism is good for US, please start from giving us an example of well run and rich country with economy insulated from the rest of the world. Good luck.

Tomenable
09-03-16, 23:56
What is the attitude of each of those candidates to immigration ???

sparkey
10-03-16, 00:14
What is the attitude of each of those candidates to immigration ???

As I understand it:
Trump: Deport all illegals, ban all Muslims from entering, build a wall
Rubio: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Cruz: No potential citizenship for illegals, stricter enforcement, build a wall
Kasich: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Clinton: DREAM Act support, comprehensive reform
Sanders: Potential citizenship for illegals, DREAM Act support, no comprehensive reform (opposes guest workers)
Johnson: Increase legal immigration, but stricter enforcement of laws against existing illegals
McAfee: Increase legal immigration, potential citizenship for illegals

Twilight
10-03-16, 02:57
Meh, I'm disappointed with this election in general. I really can't tell whom is being racist, who has been slandered or what. I'm leaning towards Bernie Sanders because of his history with MLK so I think he has potential.

Tomenable
10-03-16, 03:13
As I understand it:
Trump: Deport all illegals, ban all Muslims from entering, build a wall
Rubio: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Cruz: No potential citizenship for illegals, stricter enforcement, build a wall
Kasich: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Clinton: DREAM Act support, comprehensive reform
Sanders: Potential citizenship for illegals, DREAM Act support, no comprehensive reform (opposes guest workers)
Johnson: Increase legal immigration, but stricter enforcement of laws against existing illegals
McAfee: Increase legal immigration, potential citizenship for illegals

Thanks!

==================================

Interesting video about Trump:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf3vW0e_Wgc

Tomenable
10-03-16, 03:14
That video is a response to this:


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

Maciamo
10-03-16, 12:56
As I understand it:
Trump: Deport all illegals, ban all Muslims from entering, build a wall
Rubio: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Cruz: No potential citizenship for illegals, stricter enforcement, build a wall
Kasich: Potential citizenship for illegals, enforce laws, comprehensive reform
Clinton: DREAM Act support, comprehensive reform
Sanders: Potential citizenship for illegals, DREAM Act support, no comprehensive reform (opposes guest workers)
Johnson: Increase legal immigration, but stricter enforcement of laws against existing illegals
McAfee: Increase legal immigration, potential citizenship for illegals


I see that America suffers from the same odd left-right cleavage on immigration as in Europe. I never understood why more rational, secular and liberal/libertarian parties, who favour abortion, gay rights, legalizing of soft drugs, fight global warming, and so on, are always so consistently in favour of letting poor immigrants flood the country. That doesn't make any sense. Most of the poor immigrants, be it Mexicans in the US, or Africans and Middle Easterners in Europe, are very religious and strongly against liberal values. So why would liberal politicians want to bring more of these people in their country ? That's total nonsense. If we want to become a fully liberated, secular and wealthy society, the first rule of immigration would be to ban poor, religious and socially conservative people. (The problem is that the US would lose more than half of its population, and it would be easier to just redraw the borders and integrate the Northeast and West Coast together with Canada).

If such a party existed in any Northwest European country it would be the most popular party. The closest I have found is the Vlaams Belang in Flanders, which are economically enlightened, liberal by American standards, but they take a too xenophobic approach against their fellow Europeans. Most anti-immigration parties (UK Independence Party, Front National in France, etc.) are very conservative socially and economically and anti-EU, just like the Republicans in the US. What people want is an anti-immigration party that is just the opposite on other issues (liberal, not conservative).

The main problem of the immigration debate anywhere, be it in Europe, America or Japan, is the lack of nuance. It is ridiculous to be simply for or against immigration. People see things in a too black or white manner. Most Japanese see all foreigners as gaijin, whether they are from Norway, China or Nigeria. It's an us against them mentality that does not allow nuance in political debates. Too many lower and middle class Europeans fall for the rhetoric of Far Right parties because they are fed up of Muslim immigrants. But these parties also want to take their country out of the EU and close their borders to everyone. Not rational or nuanced at all.

I personally have no problem, and even encourage migration within the EU and between developed countries. I also don't have any problem with granting work visas to qualified workers from developing countries where there is a need for it, but immigration policy should always favour workers from more secular countries (say China, Vietnam or Thailand) over religious and especially Muslim countries, because workers from the latter would have more problem integrating in a secular and liberal society.

The USA is a special case as it is the only Western country with "native" religious extremists (mostly evangelical Christians). The country has been split politically for many decades between the more European-like Northeast and West Coast, and the more religious and conservative/Republican rest of the country.

Northwest Europeans, and increasingly also Canadians, New Englanders and West Coast Americans are secular, socially liberal (favouring gay rights, abortion, etc.) and environmentally conscious. Yet a majority of them are also afraid of religious extremists because they threaten their values and lifestyle. So the only political party that could answer their needs is a secular, liberal, environmentally-conscious, (and pro-EU in Europe) party with a strong attitude against immigrants from poor, religious countries, but not against immigrants from other countries.

Boreas
10-03-16, 19:07
That video is a response to this:


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

I can summarise him as funny Erdogan

I laugh this so much :laughing:

7641

Angela
10-03-16, 19:49
People of European descent actually skew Republican. It's the opposite for Democrats. The reason the south still has decent returns for Democrats is because as former slaves states they still have huge numbers of black people.

"Republicans hold a 49%-40% lead over the Democrats in leaned party identification among whites. The GOP’s advantage widens to 21 points among white men who have not completed college (54%-33%) and white southerners (55%-34%). The Democrats hold an 80%-11% advantage among blacks, lead by close to three-to-one among Asian Americans (65%-23%) and by more than two-to-one among Hispanics (56%-26%)."

http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

Women also lean more Democrat than men.

Some of this is relatively recent as these things go. The south used to be solidly Democrat. As the Democrat party became increasingly affiliated with minority rights and high government spending on social welfare etc., the party affiliation in the south changed, especially because Republicans tend to favor local control over centralized bureaucracies.

Conversely, northeastern and midwestern states with large urban cities with high minority populations (people who went there from the south, usually, when these cities had a lot of factories) can skew Democrat because of black and Hispanic voting patterns, where middle class suburbs vote very differently. You can see this in the greater New York metropolitan area, where the inner city votes Democrat overwhelmingly, and the suburbs elect "moderate" Republicans quite often. Certain suburban counties are quite "Republican" as a matter of fact.

You do have people who vote Republican because they are small government, fiscal conservatives but social progressives to some extent.

Maleth
10-03-16, 19:54
Yep, really immature and stupid of him. Obviously nobody wants a president with a small penis, lol.

:grin: you are right...it seems the penis size issue has always been an important one in relation to business and power :grin:

764276437644

Maleth
10-03-16, 19:59
I don't feel like the UK is a good example of an actual three party system, it's more of a two party system with some strong 3rd parties and regional parties.

Indeed its only the election before the last there was some kind of coalition in the UK, which is very unusual at least the last decades. For the most part its Labour or Conservatives, with one or the other getting enough votes to govern independently.

Angela
10-03-16, 20:07
:grin: you are right...it seems the penis size issue has always been an important one in relation to business and power :grin:

764276437644

Someone should do a retrospective of padding in fashion. :) I had friends who used to stuff their bras with tissue paper. Then padded bras and push up bras became fashionable. In the late 19th century women's tops were cut low to show cleavage, and they wore bustles to give themselves more in the rear.

I used to wonder about the wedding night and the inevitable disappointment of some spouses. Of course, you were stuck. No getting out. Women, in particular, given how sheltered some of them were, had no point of comparison.

Off topic, but this is a funny story: My mother told me (after I was married) that she knew of a convent raised girl, the daughter of a local businessman, who on her wedding night barricaded herself in the bedroom and was screaming her head off that her husband was trying to do terrible things to her. They had to get her mother to go in and explain things. They clearly should have had a little talk before the wedding. Of course, farm raised girls would have learned the "facts of life" from the animals if not otherwise.

Maleth
10-03-16, 20:17
Someone should do a retrospective of padding in fashion. :) I had friends who used to stuff their bras with tissue paper. Then padded bras and push up bras became fashionable. In the late 19th century women's tops were cut low to show cleavage, and they wore bustles to give themselves more in the rear.

I used to wonder about the wedding night and the inevitable disappointment of some spouses. Of course, you were stuck. No getting out. Women, in particular, given how sheltered some of them were, had no point of comparison.

Off topic, but this is a funny story: My mother told me (after I was married) that she knew of a convent raised girl, the daughter of a local businessman, who on her wedding night barricaded herself in the bedroom and was screaming her head off that her husband was trying to do terrible things to her. They had to get her mother to go in and explain things. They clearly should have had a little talk before the wedding. Of course, farm raised girls would have learned the "facts of life" from the animals if not otherwise.

:grin: My oh my...I heard a few similar stories from my mum...it must have always been an issue. Defiantly not a modern phenomena. The medieval girdles come to mind...must have been pretty uncomfortable and not sure how they could breath, but had to look good....

LeBrok
10-03-16, 22:34
:grin: you are right...it seems the penis size issue has always been an important one in relation to business and power :grin:

764276437644My sarcastic remark didn't play well here. I was presenting side of electorate who shouldn't care about "hands" size of a president, but about size of his intellect. Obviously from point of view of a president who is a man, possibly a macho man, well even a gay man, it is a different story. :)

Maciamo
10-03-16, 22:58
If it turns out to be a Trump/Clinton election, and there's any chance Trump would get elected, despite my threat I'd probably hold my nose and vote for Clinton. On top of everything else, the man doesn't have the temperament or self-control to be president.

I like your pragmatic approach, Angela. I am like you, but probably with a touch more of cynicism


Now I think I'll turn on the news and get more depressed!

That's why I stopped watching the news (or TV except Netflix) long ago. I check the online news I am interested in, but don't care much about the local news, scandals, gossips or pointless political debates. Why waste my time on things that make me angry when I can concentrate and things that make me happy?

My view on presidential elections is that people with money and influence will get their way anyway (especially in the US) and whatever presidents is elected will only serve as a puppet for billionaires and conglomerates for issues that matter. Democracy nowadays is essentially an illusion used to tame the masses and distract them from the real economic stakes (which most voters can't understand anyway).

Maciamo
10-03-16, 23:11
You do have people who vote Republican because they are small government, fiscal conservatives but social progressives to some extent.

I don't think there is anything like small government in the USA. It's surely the country where government agencies are the best informed about the population and have the most (non-despotic) power over their citizens. As a European I am often amazed at the number of government agencies for everything in the US. There are 16 agencies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community) for intelligence alone! (among which the NSA, CIA and FBI) There is no way Republicans are less inclined to make use of such agencies than Democrats. If anything Republicans are more favourable to tough enforcement of the law, which requires big government. That's one of the great contradictions of the Republican Party. And because the Republicans also have a history of cutting the taxes of big corporations and making the rich richer, they also indirectly favour big government. Big corporations like to have their say in government matters, change the law in their favour, meddle with government agencies in a way that suits them. So the more control government has over its citizens, the more control corporations have too.

Tomenable
11-03-16, 00:53
"Republicans hold a 49%-40% lead over the Democrats in leaned party identification among whites. The GOP’s advantage widens to 21 points among white men who have not completed college (54%-33%) and white southerners (55%-34%). The Democrats hold an 80%-11% advantage among blacks, lead by close to three-to-one among Asian Americans (65%-23%) and by more than two-to-one among Hispanics (56%-26%)."

Out of curiosity - what advantage do the Democrats have among black men who have not completed college ???

Greater or smaller than the black average of 80%-11%?

Athiudisc
11-03-16, 03:22
I'm voting for either Sanders or Trump. They're largely diametrically-opposed, but my purpose is less to support either of them and more to encourage the fracturing of the current system. They both want to buck the two-party establishment, just in different ways. Ideally, I'd like a more European-style "coalition of parties" form of government. It's not like the current model was either intended or inherent. Historically, I've generally voted for whatever outsider party looks to have the most support (socialist, green, Nazi, communist, People's Martian Irredentist Movement, I don't really care).

If it ends up with the two of them running against each other (which I doubt), I'll simply make some popcorn.

Angela
11-03-16, 03:32
Out of curiosity - what advantage do the Democrats have among black men who have not completed college ???

Greater or smaller than the black average of 80%-11%?

I've never looked up the statistics on it. Strictly based on my experience I'd say virtually everyone in that 11% is either in the professional class or they're small business owners. I know a few black lawyers who are Republicans, for example, and two black judges who run on the Republican ticket in the area.

Most Black professionals are Democrats, of course. I think I'd be safe in saying that without exception the members of the black underclass vote Democrat.

I don't know if it's only a coincidence, but all the black Republicans I know are Catholics who came from good homes and went to integrated Roman Catholic schools.

They've spent their lives being called Oreos after the cookies that are black on the outside but have a white cream filling.

@Republicans generally want local control. So, many of them are against national educational directives. They want a lot of authority to remain with local parent run school Boards, and if necessary have the state control certain aspects, not some federal bureaucracy. Same goes with abortion rights, marriage etc. (which has traditionally been a state matter). You have to understand that the U.S. is a republic. The pressures of modern life have required that more and more control be given to federal authorities and laws through very broad interpretations of the Commerce Clause, but "elasticity" only goes so far before you're going against the spirit and meaning of the Constitution.

Maleth
11-03-16, 13:13
My sarcastic remark didn't play well here. I was presenting side of electorate who shouldn't care about "hands" size of a president, but about size of his intellect. Obviously from point of view of a president who is a man, possibly a macho man, well even a gay man, it is a different story. :)

Mine is sarcastic too ;)........as you say the whole thing is so childish, i believe nothing like we have seen before. I haven't decided if I should be sad or simply entertained :/

Maleth
11-03-16, 17:22
Oh!, Now Trump mellows down, and endorsed by Ben Carlson, the saga continuous.........

LeBrok
11-03-16, 18:01
Most famous celebrities support Hillary

http://i2.wp.com/socawlege.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Hillary-celebrity-endorsements-.png?resize=500%2C932

http://socawlege.com/the-biggest-celebrity-endorsements-for-2016-presidential-candidates/

sparkey
11-03-16, 19:06
Trump is dominating our little poll here, I'm surprised. I always hear about how Europeans would only ever vote Democrat.

Maciamo
11-03-16, 19:48
Trump is dominating our little poll here, I'm surprised. I always hear about how Europeans would only ever vote Democrat.

Yes, I am surprised too. Not just that so many members voted Republicans, but that the majority chose Trump of all people ! If I had to vote Republican it would be Rubio or Kasich.

Angela
11-03-16, 22:42
I don't know of any statistics to back this up, but in my experience a lot of Europeans who come to America and get citizenship become Republicans.

Entrepreneurs, small business owners, are usually Republicans.

There are trends depending on "white ethnic group" as well. Traditionally, when the Irish came to the U.S. they were helped by the Democrat Party bosses in the large cities, while the "natives" were more Republican, unless it was the south.So, perhaps partly for that reason, the Irish skew Democrat although there are a lot of Irish Republicans as well. It's different for Italians. During the 30s, most of them were just starting up the ladder, so they were all Roosevelt supporters. As time has gone on they have increasingly moved right, so that nowadays they tend to skew Republican rather than Democrat. A number of New York suburbs are really bastions for Republicans, a lot of whom are Italian-Americans. I don't think it's a coincidence that two of the most conservative Supreme Court Justices were Italian-Americans: Scalia and Alito. On the other hand you have the Cuomo and Pelosi families who are Democrats

https://books.google.com/books?id=4OxnR6exPo8C&pg=PA206&dq=Party+affiliation-Italian+Americans&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwidtMyWqLnLAhWMMj4KHZDIAHUQ6AEIJjAA#v=on epage&q=Party%20affiliation-Italian%20Americans&f=false
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160373/democrats-racially-diverse-republicans-mostly-white.aspx

Part of what is fueling Trump is the fact that blue collar workers, many of whom have traditionally been Democrats because of the support of Democrats for the unions, are increasingly restive in the Democrat party. They resent the taxes taken out of their pay for welfare benefits they feel disproportionately go to minorities, they're afraid that Hispanic immigrants are driving down wages, they're against free trade because they're losing jobs to third world countries. They're being lied to, in my opinion...most of those factory jobs are never coming back.

Democrats are racially diverse, while probably 90% of Republicans are white.

There are some other "trends" I've noticed over the years, like the fact that women are often more "liberal" and "Democrat" than men.

LeBrok
12-03-16, 00:07
They resent the taxes taken out of their pay for welfare benefits they feel disproportionately go to minorities, they're afraid that Hispanic immigrants are driving down wages, they're against free trade because they're losing jobs to third world countries.I wouldn't be surprised if most Mexicans vote for Trump. First of all they are religious and conservative/traditional. Second, if Trump blocked the border and stops illegal emigration from Mexico, this will secure jobs for legal Mexicans in US. Their farming jobs, service jobs and labour jobs are on line being taken away by cheaper illegal Mexicans.


They're being lied to, in my opinion...most of those factory jobs are never coming back.
Some factories are already coming back but don't create many workplaces for typical factory line workers. Line automation and robotics are taking over these jobs in America, and actually also in China. These jobs are never coming back, period. Well, not in any substantial volume.

Maciamo
12-03-16, 08:35
I wouldn't be surprised if most Mexicans vote for Trump. First of all they are religious and conservative/traditional. Second, if Trump blocked the border and stops illegal emigration from Mexico, this will secure jobs for legal Mexicans in US. Their farming jobs, service jobs and labour jobs are on line being taken away by cheaper illegal Mexicans.

That would be odd. Trump is Presbytarian, not Catholic, while all the other main Republican candidates (Rubio, Cruz, Kasich) are Catholic. Then Trump is probably the least religious of the four. And more importantly Trump says he will send back all Mexicans to Mexico (http://notallowedto.com/donald-trump-says-i-will-send-all-mexicans-back-to-mexico/) (as unrealistic as that sounds). So I really don't see how that would entice Mexican voters to vote for him.

Angela
12-03-16, 16:59
Violent, organized protests forced the cancellation of a Trump rally in Chicago last night.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/11/politics/donald-trump-chicago-protests/

It's sad on so many levels. Violent protests to shut down opposing views are totally abhorrent. On the other hand, Trump isn't blameless. No political candidate should be saying he wants to punch protestors or screaming at them to go get a job. He has created a toxic, uncontrolled environment.

We'll see whether this drives his numbers up or down.

LeBrok
12-03-16, 17:02
That would be odd. Trump is Presbytarian, not Catholic, while all the other main Republican candidates (Rubio, Cruz, Kasich) are Catholic. Then Trump is probably the least religious of the four. And more importantly Trump says he will send back all Mexicans to Mexico (http://notallowedto.com/donald-trump-says-i-will-send-all-mexicans-back-to-mexico/) (as unrealistic as that sounds). So I really don't see how that would entice Mexican voters to vote for him.
It would be mostly grounded in economic base, job security base. Being a christian is a bonus, and also creates a protection against Muslim invasion/immigration or atheist democrat Sanders.


Donald Trump (http://thehill.com/people/donald-trump) won among Hispanic voters in Nevada, according to entrance polls released from Tuesday night's caucuses, fulfilling an oft-repeated campaign pledge.
ADVERTISEMENT

The GOP presidential front-runner, who coasted to an easy victory in the Silver State, won 44 percent of the Hispanic vote, according to MSNBC's entrance polls, topping Marco Rubio (http://thehill.com/people/marco-rubio)'s 29 percent and Ted Cruz (http://thehill.com/people/ted-cruz)'s 18 percent.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/270547-entrance-poll-trump-wins-with-nevada-hispanics

Maleth
12-03-16, 19:54
We'll see whether this drives his numbers up or down.

The way I see it, Donald Trump has said so many inappropriate things already, including inciting violence to punch people and get them out on a stretcher without making him any less popular. Apart that he is incredibly unstable in what he says. Also the media in General was not very kind to him either. ALL of this does not seem to have made any difference to his supporters and I don't think that this incident is going to make any either. If anything it will make them stauncher and reason something to the tune it serves them right bla bla bla. The way he bitches and boasts personally makes me sick, but his behavior and what he says sounds like sweet music to a good chunk of American society. Thats the reality. He is unstopable in the Republican race. I hope he will be stoppable in the General elections. If not my take is we are going to see a much more turbulent world then we have experienced recently. I wish that I am very wrong.

DuPidh
12-03-16, 21:31
Violent, organized protests forced the cancellation of a Trump rally in Chicago last night.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/11/politics/donald-trump-chicago-protests/

It's sad on so many levels. Violent protests to shut down opposing views are totally abhorrent. On the other hand, Trump isn't blameless. No political candidate should be saying he wants to punch protestors or screaming at them to go get a job. He has created a toxic, uncontrolled environment.

We'll see whether this drives his numbers up or down.

Angela! You appear to be a respected voice in science but you are socially brainwashed.
From a well rounded scientist like you more realistic approach to social phenomena is expected.! Its millions of people voting Trump across America, and assuming that, that mass of men and women many with PhD in science are stupid or ignorant, or angry, or disillusioned is trying to hide the reality. The reality is that american worker is under pressure to feed millions of Mexicans, blacks and asians and the back of American worker is broken. That's why they flood Trumps rallies! Trump has just scratched the wound its not him who opened those wounds!
I was participating in Chikago rally and I saw myself the protesters! They were inner city people who are afraid of losing free food that they are getting from the government now, in return they have promised not to break the buses or windows glasses! How much more the american worker can take? Many try to blame Trump why did he not try to hide the truth, like the other candidates are doing! Is that what you want, hiding the truth or resolving the problems? If you want problems resolved do yourself a favor: Vote Trump!

LeBrok
12-03-16, 22:05
Vote Trump!
Which one? His friends say their are two Trumps. Supposedly there is one "cerebral", wise and thoughtful at home, only seen by the inner circle of friends and associates. Second one is the showman hypocrite on stage selling "the make believe savior president" to scared and disappointed Americans. I hope you vote for the right one, lol.

Do you think he will also "close the boarders" to robotics and automation, technology in general, which steals more American factory jobs than Mexicans and Chinese together?

Sile
12-03-16, 23:00
Many Americans ( republicans and democrats ) I know state that they will vote for trump because there was no change to the banking/financial laws after many many families lost their homes and jobs from 2008. They just want an overhaul of the American Oligarchy system.

The system is the same as the Russian system IMO without the Hispanics and Negroes.

DuPidh
12-03-16, 23:17
Which one? His friends say their are two Trumps. Supposedly there is one "cerebral", wise and thoughtful at home, only seen by the inner circle of friends and associates. Second one is the showman hypocrite on stage selling "the make believe savior president" to scared and disappointed Americans. I hope you vote for the right one, lol.

Do you think he will also "close the boarders" to robotics and automation, technology in general, which steals more American factory jobs than Mexicans and Chinese together?


He is not promising protectionism. Borders will be closed to Mexico. There are 6 million children of Mexican descent living on US workers shoulders!, The cost of every one of them could be as high as $ 100 000. Free food, free medical care, free education, well-fare for their parents! Only by closing the borders could be saved as much as $300 billion a year. Not to mention the quality of life will change if Mexicans are forced to leave!

Boreas
13-03-16, 06:57
Many Americans ( republicans and democrats ) I know state that they will vote for trump because there was no change to the banking/financial laws after many many families lost their homes and jobs from 2008. They just want an overhaul of the American Oligarchy system.

The system is the same as the Russian system IMO without the Hispanics and Negroes.

"People hope that Millonaire Trump will change financial system for these people"

:confused2: Really???

Boreas
13-03-16, 07:39
...Many try to blame Trump why did he not try to hide the truth, like the other candidates are doing! Is that what you want, hiding the truth or resolving the problems? If you want problems resolved do yourself a favor: Vote Trump!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ[/QUOTE]

Watch it again, you can begin 2.20sec

The 76% of words which comes from his mouth is lie.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FC8JDTIkJ8M/Vm3N1LjJnqI/AAAAAAAABts/LsjcteIk9Ao/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2015-12-13%2Bat%2B11.47.20%2BAM.png

Even there is no true and he has the higgest record of "pants on the fire"

So let's be careful, when we call someone as brainwashed :grin:

You can be sick of OBAMA policies, but a liar is not your medicine.

By the way, I don't know did you notice but top 5 liars are republician :lmao:

Maleth
13-03-16, 07:52
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzSjSfFIQbM

Can anyone spot the similarities between Trump and Hitler rhetoric? It was the Jews then...who is it now?

better here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzSjSfFIQbM

bicicleur
13-03-16, 10:29
the popularity of Trump is not because he offers real solutions, it is because he breaches so many taboos

there are to many taboos correct politicians don't want to discuss

it is not the victory of Trump, it is the defeat of correct politicians

comparing Trump with Hitler means you don't want to discus these subjects with him because you know you'll loose if you don't breach these taboos

Boreas
13-03-16, 10:32
the popularity of Trump is not because he offers real solutions, it is because he breaches so many taboos

there are to many taboos correct politicians don't want to discuss

it is not the victory of Trump, it is the defeat of correct politicians

comparing Trump with Hitler means you don't want to discus these subjects with him because you know you'll loose if you don't breach these taboos

This is the way of how the Erdogan win the first two elections.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 11:24
This is the way of how the Erdogan win the first two elections.

Erdogan is a few stages further than Trump.

Erdogan owns half of the press has the power to shut down the other half.
He rules by writing his own decrees.
He has special forces like the 'Lions of Allah' and uses terror to his own people.
He tells the Turks that want to hear it that they are a superior nation and that Ottoman Empire should be restored.

Boreas
13-03-16, 12:07
Erdogan is a few stages further than Trump.

Not during his first two elections. West was idolizing him as saver of Turkey from millitary coups.



He tells the Turks that want to hear it that they are a superior nation and that Ottoman Empire should be restored.

Oh yes Trump is more different.

"I won't accept Muslim to America
I will build wall to Mexico-USA border."

Let's check Trumps camping
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FWTbNiV-L._SX450_.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2016

I am not stupid my friend :good_job:

Maleth
13-03-16, 12:35
comparing Trump with Hitler means you don't want to discus these subjects with him because you know you'll loose if you don't breach these taboos

Thats another great similarity between Trump and Hitler. He became popular for exactly the same reason and his followers went euphoric and loved the guy that spoke his mind.....any more similarities observed?

bicicleur
13-03-16, 13:35
Not during his first two elections. West was idolizing him as saver of Turkey from millitary coups.



yes the west is stupid and naive to think their democratic system can work in other parts of the world

bicicleur
13-03-16, 13:41
Oh yes Trump is more different.

"I won't accept Muslim to America
I will build wall to Mexico-USA border."

Let's check Trumps camping
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FWTbNiV-L._SX450_.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2016

I am not stupid my friend :good_job:

Trump says there is a lot of hatred of Muslims against America.

That is the truth.
There are 1.6 billion Muslims.
I just don't know whether 10 million, 100 million or 1 billion Muslims hate America.

Yet everybody reacts in a cramp when Trump says such things.

I am confident that the majority of the American Muslims don't hate America.
But their only reaction they can think of is to be angry at Trump.
They should admit that Trump is correct, there are many Muslims that hate America.
They should distantiate themselves and condemn that kind of Muslims.
But it is a taboo for them to condemn other Muslims.
This taboo allows Trump to create hatred against them.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 13:47
Thats another great similarity between Trump and Hitler. He became popular for exactly the same reason and his followers went euphoric and loved the guy that spoke his mind.....any more similarities observed?

This is not a similarity between Trump and Hitler. It is a similarity between the oponents of Trump and the oponents of Hitler.

Maleth
13-03-16, 14:13
Trump says there is a lot of hatred of Muslims against America.

But it is a taboo for them to condemn other Muslims.
This taboo allows Trump to create hatred against them.

I believe the 5 million Palestinian refugees issue that are still living in 'camps' is also a taboo issue....and I think its very well linked to what you are mentioning. But hey! who wants to talk about that? ;)

Maleth
13-03-16, 14:17
This is not a similarity between Trump and Hitler. It is a similarity between the oponents of Trump and the oponents of Hitler.

I sincerly do not understand what you mean

Angela
13-03-16, 14:44
The way I see it, Donald Trump has said so many inappropriate things already, including inciting violence to punch people and get them out on a stretcher without making him any less popular. Apart that he is incredibly unstable in what he says. Also the media in General was not very kind to him either. ALL of this does not seem to have made any difference to his supporters and I don't think that this incident is going to make any either. If anything it will make them stauncher and reason something to the tune it serves them right bla bla bla. The way he bitches and boasts personally makes me sick, but his behavior and what he says sounds like sweet music to a good chunk of American society. Thats the reality. He is unstopable in the Republican race. I hope he will be stoppable in the General elections. If not my take is we are going to see a much more turbulent world then we have experienced recently. I wish that I am very wrong.

I don't think it will lessen the support of his core voters. It just reinforces the beliefs that fueled their anger in the first place, including their sense that the left believes in free speech only for themselves, and that, to Bicicleur's point, things that are obviously true can no longer be said.

The question for me is whether these attempts to shut him down will so infuriate other Republicans (and cross over Democrats) that they will give him enough votes in the remaining primaries to get him the Republican nomination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrljcmIyOuk

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

Up to now I thought he could be stopped since he was stalled at about 35% in the primaries and a good chunk of that was from cross-over Democrats (That's the insanity, imo, of having "open" primaries, where non party members can vote or register party affiliation on the day of the primary.).

If the anger over scenes like this works in his favor, he might defeat Kasich in his home state despite a 78% approval rating, and also Rubio in Florida, and he might then take the nomination given that the remaining states are ones where the winner takes all the delegates (no proportional representation) despite never getting above 40% of the votes cast.

@Boreas,
Please source your material. If that chart comes from Media Matters or The New York Times it's useless.

@Bicileur,

You're right. He offers no solutions. It's just slogans that appeal to the emotions of people who don't like what is happening to their lives and to the country in general and feel powerless to change it. He either doesn't know anything about the issues he's addressing, or the things he promises can't be done. One laughable example: when he was asked how he would handle some foreign conflict his response was that he's such a great negotiator that he'd just get everybody to agree. I mean, it's ludicrous. It's as if these people have suspended all logic. It's in this way that his campaign is disturbingly reminiscent of Hitler's. He's giving impassioned speeches that speak not to reason but to emotion, and those speeches can drive division and the scapegoating of minority groups.

That he's even running as a Republican is strange. He's been against second amendment gun rights, has been for universal health care, unlimited abortion rights, etc. He's a totally irreligious man with a string of divorces behind him. His knowledge of the Constitution could fit into a thimble, and he would probably appoint very liberal judges. The only issues on which he could be held to be on the right are support of the military and issues of national security and foreign policy. Well, he's also a supporter of capitalism, of course, and against socialism.

To be fair to him, I've never heard of anything to the effect that he's personally bigoted in any way against any "group", and he's a very known quantity here in New York: a lot of people have rubbed shoulders with him. I mean, his wives have been foreigners, his daughter converted to Judaism on her marriage, I don't think he gives a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, I've never heard of him exhibiting any racism etc.

I wonder if he really understands the kind of whirlwind he's unleashed. Most of his supporters wouldn't hurt a fly, but there's no denying that a minority of them hold opinions that would probably horrify him. That elicits a response from "bad actors" on the other side.

I honestly don't know how this will end. It's true that in the early primaries he got some support from a percentage of Hispanics(Mexican Americans) just based on economics and his promises to improve the economy (in Nevada, for example). We'll see if that continues as the rhetoric heats up. I'll tell you that the Hispanics around me, Puerto Ricans and Central Americans, the latter of whom all have illegals in their families, hate him like poison. It's a mistake to treat Hispanics as a monolithic block. I'll tell you another thing, if he comes to be viewed as some sort of white supremacist he'll go down and he'll trash the Republican Party in the process and then there will be no opposing force to extreme liberalism. There just aren't enough white people who would vote for him.

Another thing, the organizers of the protests are the moveon.org crowd, who are anarchists and/or communists, in my opinion, and black groups like "black lives matter".

bicicleur
13-03-16, 19:04
I believe the 5 million Palestinian refugees issue that are still living in 'camps' is also a taboo issue....and I think its very well linked to what you are mentioning. But hey! who wants to talk about that? ;)

For correct politicians both are taboo because they fear los of voters.
They think that :

For Muslim voters Muslim fundamentalism is taboo.
For Jewish voters Palestinian refugees are taboo.

But Palestinain refugees is not even an issue for the 2016 election.
American voters are much more concerned with fundamentalism.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 19:11
I sincerly do not understand what you mean

Frankly, I don't see any similarities between Trump and Hitler.
And it is stupid to look for it.
Comparing Trump with Hitler won't make him less popular, on the contrary, because you'll loose all credibility by doing so.
Trump speak half truths and half lies.
If you want to reason with him and his followers you first have to acknowledge his half truths and then tear down his lies.
But there are so many taboos around, there are to many truths politicians can't acknowledge without breaking the taboos.

As a matter of facts, I like what is going on.
These taboos should have been questioned already long time ago.
But it didn't happen, it takes a clown like Trump to do it.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 19:23
I don't think it will lessen the support of his core voters. It just reinforces the beliefs that fueled their anger in the first place, including their sense that the left believes in free speech only for themselves, and that, to Bicicleur's point, things that are obviously true can no longer be said.

The question for me is whether these attempts to shut him down will so infuriate other Republicans (and cross over Democrats) that they will give him enough votes in the remaining primaries to get him the Republican nomination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrljcmIyOuk

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

Up to now I thought he could be stopped since he was stalled at about 35% in the primaries and a good chunk of that was from cross-over Democrats (That's the insanity, imo, of having "open" primaries, where non party members can vote or register party affiliation on the day of the primary.).

If the anger over scenes like this works in his favor, he might defeat Kasich in his home state despite a 78% approval rating, and also Rubio in Florida, and he might then take the nomination given that the remaining states are ones where the winner takes all the delegates (no proportional representation) despite never getting above 40% of the votes cast.

@Boreas,
Please source your material. If that chart comes from Media Matters or The New York Times it's useless.

@Bicileur,

You're right. He offers no solutions. It's just slogans that appeal to the emotions of people who don't like what is happening to their lives and to the country in general and feel powerless to change it. He either doesn't know anything about the issues he's addressing, or the things he promises can't be done. One laughable example: when he was asked how he would handle some foreign conflict his response was that he's such a great negotiator that he'd just get everybody to agree. I mean, it's ludicrous. It's as if these people have suspended all logic. It's in this way that his campaign is disturbingly reminiscent of Hitler's. He's giving impassioned speeches that speak not to reason but to emotion, and those speeches can drive division and the scapegoating of minority groups.

That he's even running as a Republican is strange. He's been against second amendment gun rights, has been for universal health care, unlimited abortion rights, etc. He's a totally irreligious man with a string of divorces behind him. His knowledge of the Constitution could fit into a thimble, and he would probably appoint very liberal judges. The only issues on which he could be held to be on the right are support of the military and issues of national security and foreign policy. Well, he's also a supporter of capitalism, of course, and against socialism.

To be fair to him, I've never heard of anything to the effect that he's personally bigoted in any way against any "group", and he's a very known quantity here in New York: a lot of people have rubbed shoulders with him. I mean, his wives have been foreigners, his daughter converted to Judaism on her marriage, I don't think he gives a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, I've never heard of him exhibiting any racism etc.

I wonder if he really understands the kind of whirlwind he's unleashed. Most of his supporters wouldn't hurt a fly, but there's no denying that a minority of them hold opinions that would probably horrify him. That elicits a response from "bad actors" on the other side.

I honestly don't know how this will end. It's true that in the early primaries he got some support from a percentage of Hispanics(Mexican Americans) just based on economics and his promises to improve the economy (in Nevada, for example). We'll see if that continues as the rhetoric heats up. I'll tell you that the Hispanics around me, Puerto Ricans and Central Americans, the latter of whom all have illegals in their families, hate him like poison. It's a mistake to treat Hispanics as a monolithic block. I'll tell you another thing, if he comes to be viewed as some sort of white supremacist he'll go down and he'll trash the Republican Party in the process and then there will be no opposing force to extreme liberalism. There just aren't enough white people who would vote for him.

Another thing, the organizers of the protests are the moveon.org crowd, who are anarchists and/or communists, in my opinion, and black groups like "black lives matter".

Trump is smart enough to play the public.
And I think he is even smart enough to realise that what he offers are not real solutions, but it sells.
If he would become president, I think he would be smart enough not to do some of the things he is selling to the public now.
Which does not mean he'll do smart things as a president.

But we don't know.
I remember when Reagan came to power, the criticism that 'a second rate actor' and 'a cowboy' now came to rule the most powerful naion in the world.
To me, Reagan was one of the best presidents America has had recently.

Oh, and the 'black lives matter' movement certainly helped and will help Trump become much more popular, because they focus on only one thing without mentioning the related and much bigger problem of black violence. Because no decent politician nor the press ever dared to criticize this, they left a big market open for Trump.

LeBrok
13-03-16, 19:38
This is the way of how the Erdogan win the first two elections. Putin too. They present themselves as saviours of the nation, and protector of national pride. In order to do that, you base your program on already existing fears, no matter valid or not. Introduce new fears to double the effect. Promis people to protect them and restore the greatness of the nation, and soon you might be a president. Then perhaps a dictator. Hitler created a fear was Jews and countries they lost WW1 to, for Putin it was the West, Nato, and billionaire oligarchs, for Chavez the capitalism, for Trump the Mexicans, Muslims and Chinese, and that America is not great anymore.
Trump the saviour!

LeBrok
13-03-16, 19:44
Thats another great similarity between Trump and Hitler. He became popular for exactly the same reason and his followers went euphoric and loved the guy that spoke his mind.....any more similarities observed? Exactly. Also a common trait for bullies, the sadistic individuals. Hurting others is a pleasure.

LeBrok
13-03-16, 19:49
yes the west is stupid and naive to think their democratic system can work in other parts of the worldExactly what most Americans were saying about Europe before WW2! Democracy won't work in Europe, because every attempt of democracy ended up in a mess with fascism, revolution and domestic wars. Yet, unlike you, people believed that it could be done, and it was done, and we can enjoy it today.

LeBrok
13-03-16, 19:55
I believe the 5 million Palestinian refugees issue that are still living in 'camps' is also a taboo issue....and I think its very well linked to what you are mentioning. But hey! who wants to talk about that? ;)Good point. People confuse a taboo with a simple lack of interest in a matter.

Boreas
13-03-16, 21:32
But it is a taboo for them to condemn other Muslims.
This taboo allows Trump to create hatred against them.

Wow what a miracle, his 76% of speech is lie, but he is destroing American Taboo so Good reason to Vote.

We called it he says what American wants to see and as the Erdoğan big Ottoman dream, he is using dream of Great America. You are seeing Erdogan playbook but not Trumps which is totally same with Erdoğan ???

bicicleur
13-03-16, 21:37
Putin too. They present themselves as saviours of the nation, and protector of national pride. In order to do that, you base your program on already existing fears, no matter valid or not. Introduce new fears to double the effect. Promis people to protect them and restore the greatness of the nation, and soon you might be a president. Then perhaps a dictator. Hitler created a fear was Jews and countries they lost WW1 to, for Putin it was the West, Nato, and billionaire oligarchs, for Chavez the capitalism, for Trump the Mexicans, Muslims and Chinese, and that America is not great anymore.
Trump the saviour!

But in America there is still free press.
All they should do is have the courage to break some taboos.
It is ridiculous to compare Trump with Erdogan, Putin or Chavez.
You do so because you don't like what he says.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 21:40
Wow what a miracle, his 76% of speech is lie, but he is destroing American Taboo so Good reason to Vote.

We called it he says what American wants to see and as the Erdoğan big Ottoman dream, he is using dream of Great America. You are seeing Erdogan playbook but not Trumps which is totally same with Erdoğan ???

again, Erdogan shuts down the press, writes his own decrees, says Muslims are superior in everything, has his own 'Lions of Allah' storm troops , etc.

ridiculous comparison

and, by the way I never said I would vote for Trump
but I like what he does, kicking correct politicians and press on their ass

bicicleur
13-03-16, 21:53
Exactly what most Americans were saying about Europe before WW2! Democracy won't work in Europe, because every attempt of democracy ended up in a mess with fascism, revolution and domestic wars. Yet, unlike you, people believed that it could be done, and it was done, and we can enjoy it today.

What a twist of the truth. You're better than Trump.
All Western European countries execept Germany were democratic before and after the war. They fought against Hitler alongside America and the other allies.
In 1945 Germany was in ruins, bombarded into pieces, split in 2 and completley powerless, and it was occupied for ten years, till 1955.
So tell me, how are you going to install democracy in countries that never knew democracy and are not ripe for that?
Do you realy think that simply eliminating Khadafi, Sadam Houssein and Sadat will bring democracy and prosperity to these countries?

LeBrok
13-03-16, 22:01
But in America there is still free press.
All they should do is have the courage to break some taboos.What taboos?

It is ridiculous to compare Trump with Erdogan, Putin or Chavez.
You do so because you don't like what he says. All of them are egoistic megalomans and demagogues, overblowing external and internal threats to scare people and promising to rebuild greatness. All better salesmen than leaders, leader who actually care for people. They just want to be loved and admired by millions. (Tramp showbiz carrier confirms this.) The longest the admiration the better, hens they all become dictators.

bicicleur
13-03-16, 22:06
What taboos?
All of them are egoistic megalomans and demagogues, overblowing external and internal threats to scare people and promising to rebuild greatness. All better salesmen than leaders, leader who actually care for people. They just want to be loved and admired by millions. (Tramp showbiz carrier confirms this.) The longest the admiration the better, hens they all become dictators.

So you don't think American democracy can work?
A good salesman can overthrow it and seize power?

I think most established politicians are more hypocrite than good salesmen.

Taboos, allready a few have been mentioned here, Muslim fundamentalism, the Palestinian problem, the black lives matter movement ...

LeBrok
13-03-16, 22:33
What a twist of the truth. You're better than Trump.
All Western European countries execept Germany were democratic before and after the war. They fought against Hitler alongside America and the other allies.
In 1945 Germany was in ruins, bombarded into pieces, split in 2 and completley powerless, and it was occupied for ten years, till 1955.Well, and Austria.
Spain, dictator Franco
Italy, dictator Mussolini
Russia, dictatorship of one party
Technically, england is still not a full democracy. "Presidential" office is inherited not elected.
How many revolutions and turmoils France went through before becoming Democratic? How different is Lybia in this regard?

That's for the big players, I'm not too familiar with smaller countries history, but I'm sure their process of democratisation was quite messy too.

What was the year women voted first time in Switzerland? 1971! Well, in Tunisia women vote from 1957.


So tell me, how are you going to install democracy in countries that never knew democracy and are not ripe for that?
It is about time you learned history of Europe. Answers are all their!

bicicleur
13-03-16, 22:39
Well, and Austria.
Spain, dictator Franco
Italy, dictator Mussolini
Russia, dictatorship of one party
Technically, england is still not a full democracy. "Presidential" office is inherited not elected.
How many revolutions and turmoils France went through before becoming Democratic? How different is Lybia in this regard?

That's for the big players, I'm not too familiar with smaller countries history, but I'm sure their process of democratisation was quite messy too.

What was the year women voted first time in Switzerland? 1971! Well, in Tunisia women vote from 1957.

It is about time you learned history of Europe. Answers are all their!

yes it took Europe 600 years, and it could have gone the other way too
so, very little chance it will work in countries that are not secular and don't have democratic history

and if you want to live the French revolution all over, a lot of people will be massacred

LeBrok
13-03-16, 22:43
So you don't think American democracy can work?What taboos?

A good salesman can overthrow it and seize power?Not yet. We'll see after election.


I think most established politicians are more hypocrite than good salesmen.
What is your point? You like Trump because he lies like a good politician?


Taboos, allready a few have been mentioned here, Muslim fundamentalismNope, lots to read and hear in news here. Especially in relation to IS and local muslim terrorists. For interested you can rent and watch every possible documentary made about this, and read everything on a net and print. Nobody is hiding anything and nobody censors anything.



, the Palestinian problem, the black lives matter movement ...Nope, nobody hides it. It is not covered much recently with lack of viewers interest. This conflict is too long and too boring for ordinary people. It comes back in news every time there is a rocket shot into Israel or Israel bomb kills Palestinian, especially a kid. No will to change it, no changes in view, equals boring for media.

LeBrok
13-03-16, 22:49
yes it took Europe 600 years, and it could have gone the other way too
so, very little chance it will work in countries that are not secular and don't have democratic historyThat's why it didn't work in Europe till 100 years ago! Imagine this though, now it works?
Did people genetically changed or was it a slow cultural, educational and economic process?


and if you want to live the French revolution all over, a lot of people will be massacredAsk French people if it was worth it. It is not your choice.

Maleth
13-03-16, 22:54
I don't think it will lessen the support of his core voters. It just reinforces the beliefs that fueled their anger in the first place, including their sense that the left believes in free speech only for themselves, and that, to Bicicleur's point, things that are obviously true can no longer be said.

The question for me is whether these attempts to shut him down will so infuriate other Republicans (and cross over Democrats) that they will give him enough votes in the remaining primaries to get him the Republican nomination.

Up to now I thought he could be stopped since he was stalled at about 35% in the primaries and a good chunk of that was from cross-over Democrats (That's the insanity, imo, of having "open" primaries, where non party members can vote or register party affiliation on the day of the primary.).

If the anger over scenes like this works in his favor, he might defeat Kasich in his home state despite a 78% approval rating, and also Rubio in Florida, and he might then take the nomination given that the remaining states are ones where the winner takes all the delegates (no proportional representation) despite never getting above 40% of the votes cast.

@Boreas,
Please source your material. If that chart comes from Media Matters or The New York Times it's useless.

@Bicileur,

You're right. He offers no solutions. It's just slogans that appeal to the emotions of people who don't like what is happening to their lives and to the country in general and feel powerless to change it. He either doesn't know anything about the issues he's addressing, or the things he promises can't be done. One laughable example: when he was asked how he would handle some foreign conflict his response was that he's such a great negotiator that he'd just get everybody to agree. I mean, it's ludicrous. It's as if these people have suspended all logic. It's in this way that his campaign is disturbingly reminiscent of Hitler's. He's giving impassioned speeches that speak not to reason but to emotion, and those speeches can drive division and the scapegoating of minority groups.

That he's even running as a Republican is strange. He's been against second amendment gun rights, has been for universal health care, unlimited abortion rights, etc. He's a totally irreligious man with a string of divorces behind him. His knowledge of the Constitution could fit into a thimble, and he would probably appoint very liberal judges. The only issues on which he could be held to be on the right are support of the military and issues of national security and foreign policy. Well, he's also a supporter of capitalism, of course, and against socialism.

To be fair to him, I've never heard of anything to the effect that he's personally bigoted in any way against any "group", and he's a very known quantity here in New York: a lot of people have rubbed shoulders with him. I mean, his wives have been foreigners, his daughter converted to Judaism on her marriage, I don't think he gives a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, I've never heard of him exhibiting any racism etc.

I wonder if he really understands the kind of whirlwind he's unleashed. Most of his supporters wouldn't hurt a fly, but there's no denying that a minority of them hold opinions that would probably horrify him. That elicits a response from "bad actors" on the other side.

I honestly don't know how this will end. It's true that in the early primaries he got some support from a percentage of Hispanics(Mexican Americans) just based on economics and his promises to improve the economy (in Nevada, for example). We'll see if that continues as the rhetoric heats up. I'll tell you that the Hispanics around me, Puerto Ricans and Central Americans, the latter of whom all have illegals in their families, hate him like poison. It's a mistake to treat Hispanics as a monolithic block. I'll tell you another thing, if he comes to be viewed as some sort of white supremacist he'll go down and he'll trash the Republican Party in the process and then there will be no opposing force to extreme liberalism. There just aren't enough white people who would vote for him.

Another thing, the organizers of the protests are the moveon.org crowd, who are anarchists and/or communists, in my opinion, and black groups like "black lives matter".

I tried to look for something I would not agree on but in my opinion what you stated is very balanced and factual indeed!

Maleth
13-03-16, 23:13
For correct politicians both are taboo because they fear los of voters.
They think that :

agreed, but Trump is breaking some and happy to keep other what they are....A taboo.


For Muslim voters Muslim fundamentalism is taboo.
For Jewish voters Palestinian refugees are taboo.But Palestinain refugees is not even an issue for the 2016 election.
American voters are much more concerned with fundamentalism.


They are one and intertwined.........Mr Trump is an obvious liar and opportunist and has got a crowd hailing him for it. He even claimed he did not even know who David Duke was and he said he does not know who the KKK are......Mr. Trump said he needs to block all Muslims out until he finds out what why do they have so much hate for America. Where was Mr. Trump living all these years?. Mr Trump will start doing his homework when he get elected president. He is going to start finding things out. Mr. Trump want to be president of the USA. Are you people Trump fans for real?!!

Maleth
13-03-16, 23:27
Comparing Trump with Hitler won't make him less popular, on the contrary, because you'll loose all credibility by doing so.

Are you sure? read well between the lines. No need for a PHD :)........both guys blame specific groups in arrogant provocative speeches (which are new in the case of the USA never seen before) and promise to remove them from their society with the logo to make their countries great (again). They both preach hate wrapped in arrogance and sarcasm claiming popular movements from all spheres of society.

oops had to add:- and that is for starters

Maleth
13-03-16, 23:49
It is about time you learned history of Europe. Answers are all their!

Indeed, the middle east is at least 70 / 150 years backwards from the main democracies in the world today. Very few people remember what Europe went through to earn what it has today. Europe was as Religiously fundamentalist as much as the middle east is today and has seen atrocities MUCH bigger (no matter how horrible it may be) then we see in the middle east today. This is the truth for those who can take it. There will be a time when the great civilizations will be revived and they will be the new destinations where mass tourism will flow........but it will take time.

bicicleur
14-03-16, 00:54
Indeed, the middle east is at least 70 / 150 years backwards from the main democracies in the world today. Very few people remember what Europe went through to earn what it has today. Europe was as Religiously fundamentalist as much as the middle east is today and has seen atrocities MUCH bigger (no matter how horrible it may be) then we see in the middle east today. This is the truth for those who can take it. There will be a time when the great civilizations will be revived and they will be the new destinations where mass tourism will flow........but it will take time.

what is the difference between ISIS and what happened in the darkest middle ages?

as I mentioned above, it took Europe 600 years to evolve from there

besides .. we're going seriously off-topic here

bicicleur
14-03-16, 00:55
Are you sure? read well between the lines. No need for a PHD :)........both guys blame specific groups in arrogant provocative speeches (which are new in the case of the USA never seen before) and promise to remove them from their society with the logo to make their countries great (again). They both preach hate wrapped in arrogance and sarcasm claiming popular movements from all spheres of society.

oops had to add:- and that is for starters

yes I'm sure, and your answer is completley beside my point

you'll have to find better arguments to fight him

his followers are fed up with the half truth of political correctness
do you realy believe calling Trump a Hitler will convince them?
first handle the other half of truth nobody wanted to talk about

DuPidh
14-03-16, 01:11
I don't think it will lessen the support of his core voters. It just reinforces the beliefs that fueled their anger in the first place, including their sense that the left believes in free speech only for themselves, and that, to Bicicleur's point, things that are obviously true can no longer be said.

The question for me is whether these attempts to shut him down will so infuriate other Republicans (and cross over Democrats) that they will give him enough votes in the remaining primaries to get him the Republican nomination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrljcmIyOuk

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

Up to now I thought he could be stopped since he was stalled at about 35% in the primaries and a good chunk of that was from cross-over Democrats (That's the insanity, imo, of having "open" primaries, where non party members can vote or register party affiliation on the day of the primary.).

If the anger over scenes like this works in his favor, he might defeat Kasich in his home state despite a 78% approval rating, and also Rubio in Florida, and he might then take the nomination given that the remaining states are ones where the winner takes all the delegates (no proportional representation) despite never getting above 40% of the votes cast.

@Boreas,
Please source your material. If that chart comes from Media Matters or The New York Times it's useless.

@Bicileur,

You're right. He offers no solutions. It's just slogans that appeal to the emotions of people who don't like what is happening to their lives and to the country in general and feel powerless to change it. He either doesn't know anything about the issues he's addressing, or the things he promises can't be done. One laughable example: when he was asked how he would handle some foreign conflict his response was that he's such a great negotiator that he'd just get everybody to agree. I mean, it's ludicrous. It's as if these people have suspended all logic. It's in this way that his campaign is disturbingly reminiscent of Hitler's. He's giving impassioned speeches that speak not to reason but to emotion, and those speeches can drive division and the scapegoating of minority groups.

That he's even running as a Republican is strange. He's been against second amendment gun rights, has been for universal health care, unlimited abortion rights, etc. He's a totally irreligious man with a string of divorces behind him. His knowledge of the Constitution could fit into a thimble, and he would probably appoint very liberal judges. The only issues on which he could be held to be on the right are support of the military and issues of national security and foreign policy. Well, he's also a supporter of capitalism, of course, and against socialism.

To be fair to him, I've never heard of anything to the effect that he's personally bigoted in any way against any "group", and he's a very known quantity here in New York: a lot of people have rubbed shoulders with him. I mean, his wives have been foreigners, his daughter converted to Judaism on her marriage, I don't think he gives a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, I've never heard of him exhibiting any racism etc.

I wonder if he really understands the kind of whirlwind he's unleashed. Most of his supporters wouldn't hurt a fly, but there's no denying that a minority of them hold opinions that would probably horrify him. That elicits a response from "bad actors" on the other side.

I honestly don't know how this will end. It's true that in the early primaries he got some support from a percentage of Hispanics(Mexican Americans) just based on economics and his promises to improve the economy (in Nevada, for example). We'll see if that continues as the rhetoric heats up. I'll tell you that the Hispanics around me, Puerto Ricans and Central Americans, the latter of whom all have illegals in their families, hate him like poison. It's a mistake to treat Hispanics as a monolithic block. I'll tell you another thing, if he comes to be viewed as some sort of white supremacist he'll go down and he'll trash the Republican Party in the process and then there will be no opposing force to extreme liberalism. There just aren't enough white people who would vote for him.

Another thing, the organizers of the protests are the moveon.org crowd, who are anarchists and/or communists, in my opinion, and black groups like "black lives matter".


Angela! You have Italian heritage and I guess you follow Italian politics as well. You need to be reminded that there are more than 2 parties in Italy. There are far left, left, center left parties and the same for the right wing parties. Why on the world would you think in USA are only left and right parties. Republican Party has no choice but to split since the moderation does not work anymore. Change of demographics has made the 2 party system very cumbersome. Here is why: Take Republicans. They have a demographic deficit to win elections in the current form. Their leadership has called for opening the party to other than whites. But they also host the far right in their ranks. Do you think their far right which could be as much as 25% of their membership will happily embrace Mexicans in their ranks? So again, Wake up, its not Trump as you are saying that will destroy the party no matter what his success will be in elections. Its the new social alignment happening in the US as the result of demographic changes.
Or take Democrats: So far its been blacks who have benefited the lion share of free things that government distributes. Among others the affirmative actions. Haven't you noticed that the most adamant opposition for affirmative actions does not come from whites? Its Asians that whenever they get a chance they spill the venom against. Do you really think that when Hispanics reach 100 million as the projections say will not have their own Hispanic Party to squeeze more benefits for their " La Raza"?
So no matter what Trump will do or not do, he is just heralding the new social alignment in American politics. This will be more vocal after November elections. Republicans are already two parties. What is Tea Party a Republican;
Trump is doing Republican Party a great service. He is the messenger of change. He is telling Republicans that Gay marriage is not a topic to excite anyone anymore, he is telling them to soften their abortion stance or abandoning it altogether. He is telling them look to the poor, not just the rich they have looked so far.

Angela
14-03-16, 02:55
Angela! You have Italian heritage and I guess you follow Italian politics as well. You need to be reminded that there are more than 2 parties in Italy. There are far left, left, center left parties and the same for the right wing parties. Why on the world would you think in USA are only left and right parties. Republican Party has no choice but to split since the moderation does not work anymore. Change of demographics has made the 2 party system very cumbersome. Here is why: Take Republicans. They have a demographic deficit to win elections in the current form. Their leadership has called for opening the party to other than whites. But they also host the far right in their ranks. Do you think their far right which could be as much as 25% of their membership will happily embrace Mexicans in their ranks? So again, Wake up, its not Trump as you are saying that will destroy the party no matter what his success will be in elections. Its the new social alignment happening in the US as the result of demographic changes.
Or take Democrats: So far its been blacks who have benefited the lion share of free things that government distributes. Among others the affirmative actions. Haven't you noticed that the most adamant opposition for affirmative actions does not come from whites? Its Asians that whenever they get a chance they spill the venom against. Do you really think that when Hispanics reach 100 million as the projections say will not have their own Hispanic Party to squeeze more benefits for their " La Raza"?
So no matter what Trump will do or not do, he is just heralding the new social alignment in American politics. This will be more vocal after November elections. Republicans are already two parties. What is Tea Party a Republican;
Trump is doing Republican Party a great service. He is the messenger of change. He is telling Republicans that Gay marriage is not a topic to excite anyone anymore, he is telling them to soften their abortion stance or abandoning it altogether. He is telling them look to the poor, not just the rich they have looked so far.

What new alignment? I just saw a poll which shows that 67% of Americans (all Americans, of any or no party) find Trump unacceptable as president. Do you get it? 67%! Let me make it clearer. That means 33% find him acceptable, would ever even consider voting for him. The highest I've ever seen him poll is 38%. I think even Goldwater did better than that. What is it that you don't understand here? That isn't enough to win.

Italian politics are a total disaster. Why would I want to import that kind of dysfunction here?

Oh, and good luck finding a Trump supporter with a PHD. His core supporters skew male, blue collar, and lack a college education. Look it up before talking through your hat.

DuPidh
14-03-16, 03:33
What new alignment? I just saw a poll which shows that 67% of Americans (all Americans, of any or no party) find Trump unacceptable as president. Do you get it? 67%! Let me make it clearer. That means 33% find him acceptable, would ever even consider voting for him. The highest I've ever seen him poll is 38%. I think even Goldwater did better than that. What is it that you don't understand here? That isn't enough to win.

Italian politics are a total disaster. Why would I want to import that kind of dysfunction here?

Oh, and good luck finding a Trump supporter with a PHD. His core supporters skew male, blue collar, and lack a college education. Look it up before talking through your hat.


What polls do you read? The polls are cooked in TV studios. According to the polls Trump should not have been a presidential contender at all! But in a crowded field of contenders, under a barrage of liberal TV assaults he is still unbeatable. Even if 67% of Americans find him unacceptable I am not impressed since he is running as a republican. Of course Blacks and Hispanics find him unacceptable since he is promising to build a wall and they will have to climb after that.( which they are lazy to do). Its not true that his supporters have no education. I do have a masters in science and I support him. Is the Sicilian Christ Christy (The governor of New Jersey) uneducated? The governor of Maine? The governor of Arizona? Its a new alignment of political forces in USA as the result of demographic changes. Get used to with it!

LeBrok
14-03-16, 06:19
( which they are lazy to do)I advise you against demeaning any ethnicity here on Eupedia.


I do have a masters in science and I support him.I'll be damned, you tricked us with your posts full of "facts and substance".

Why are you hiding behind Mexican flag? Your IP says New York.

Maleth
14-03-16, 06:26
what is the difference between ISIS and what happened in the darkest middle ages?

as I mentioned above, it took Europe 600 years to evolve from there

besides .. we're going seriously off-topic here

Its all very well related bicicleur forget off topic. there is no difference between Isis and what happened even 70 years ago in Europe (forget the atrocities of the middle ages inquisition and the burning at stake for religious heracy).

Maleth
14-03-16, 06:53
yes I'm sure, and your answer is completley beside my point

are they really? probably you just would not like to hear it.....as I said it all there for all to see. Its not like im making it up. One has a right to wear blinkers and think what they want.


you'll have to find better arguments to fight him

I didnt know I was fighting Trump:rolleyes2: I thought Im debating logic and common sense. I am really glad he is not running in my country but unfortunately who runs the USA will effect the whole world


his followers are fed up with the half truth of political correctness

lol and you really believe that Trump is saying full truth and breaking taboos by taking the piss out of handicapped people. I think this will be a point when rational debating will not work anymore. Anyone can believe that father xmas comes downthrough a chimmney. Its a free world


do you realy believe calling Trump a Hitler will convince them?
first handle the other half of truth nobody wanted to talk about

Thats their problem not mine. I very much doubt if any of his supports know how Hitler rose to power and what his arguments were. Probably they think its a far fetched thing and see themselves as Nationalists and Patriots, but Hitlers supporters were exactly the same. Thats the naked truth for those who can take it.

bicicleur
14-03-16, 09:55
Its all very well related bicicleur forget off topic. there is no difference between Isis and what happened even 70 years ago in Europe (forget the atrocities of the middle ages inquisition and the burning at stake for religious heracy).

you relate ISIS with what happened 70 year ago in Europe?
I guess you mean the Balkan wars
congratulations, you have as much fantasy as Trump
but you are not so good a salesman

bicicleur
14-03-16, 09:59
are they really? probably you just would not like to hear it.....as I said it all there for all to see. Its not like im making it up. One has a right to wear blinkers and think what they want.



I didnt know I was fighting Trump:rolleyes2: I thought Im debating logic and common sense. I am really glad he is not running in my country but unfortunately who runs the USA will effect the whole world



lol and you really believe that Trump is saying full truth and breaking taboos by taking the piss out of handicapped people. I think this will be a point when rational debating will not work anymore. Anyone can believe that father xmas comes downthrough a chimmney. Its a free world



Thats their problem not mine. I very much doubt if any of his supports know how Hitler rose to power and what his arguments were. Probably they think its a far fetched thing and see themselves as Nationalists and Patriots, but Hitlers supporters were exactly the same. Thats the naked truth for those who can take it.

no you're not debating logic and common sense in this thread here
this thread is about the 2016 American election campaign

besides you are overestimating logic and common sense
there is nothing common about it
everybody has his own logic and common sense in these matters, including you
if you say it is common sense, you mean nobody is allowed another opinion than yours

Maciamo
14-03-16, 10:15
That he's even running as a Republican is strange. He's been against second amendment gun rights, has been for universal health care, unlimited abortion rights, etc. He's a totally irreligious man with a string of divorces behind him. His knowledge of the Constitution could fit into a thimble, and he would probably appoint very liberal judges. The only issues on which he could be held to be on the right are support of the military and issues of national security and foreign policy. Well, he's also a supporter of capitalism, of course, and against socialism.

To be fair to him, I've never heard of anything to the effect that he's personally bigoted in any way against any "group", and he's a very known quantity here in New York: a lot of people have rubbed shoulders with him. I mean, his wives have been foreigners, his daughter converted to Judaism on her marriage, I don't think he gives a damn about anyone's sexual orientation, I've never heard of him exhibiting any racism etc.


I have to admit that I haven't watched any speech (yet) during this presidential campaign and my interest is one of a distant observer, not being American and having a limited interest in politics nowadays.

My negative opinion of Trump comes mostly from all his inflammatory and irresponsible comments, his blatant lies and his demagogic rhetoric, which, as you rightly mentions appeals not to reason but to emotions, just like Hitler.

Nevertheless, what you wrote here (passage quoted above) goes a long way in improving my image of the man. If all you said is true, his speeches are just a façade to attract a large part of the electorate that would not otherwise have voted for a reasonable, liberal candidate. It's indeed quite a wonder that he campaigns as a Republican if he is in favour of unlimited abortion, gun control and universal health care, and that on top of that he is not religious.

All these socially liberal values combined with a tough stance on crime and immigration is exactly what I would look for in a politician, be it in the US or in Western Europe (illegal immigration not being a major issue in countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand or even eastern Europe).

So perhaps Trump really is just a Democrat parading as a Republican and making wildly inflammatory speeches on purpose just to steal the widest share possible of the Republican electorate that would not have voted for the Democrats. In that scenario, if he wins the Republican primaries, you can be sure a Democrat will end up in the White House. And actually, if his true colours are those that you described, and all the speeches are just part of the campaign tactics, then I wouldn't mind Trump over Clinton or even Sanders as a president. However I think he went too far with the hate speeches to be elected as president (hence the 67% of Americans that you mention find him an unacceptable choice). So it looks like Hilary Clinton will be the next president.

Maciamo
14-03-16, 10:24
Why are you hiding behind Mexican flag? Your IP says New York.

Correct. I have changed his flag to USA. And DuPidh's writing style has strong Irish undertones.

Maciamo
14-03-16, 10:31
Trump is smart enough to play the public.
And I think he is even smart enough to realise that what he offers are not real solutions, but it sells.
If he would become president, I think he would be smart enough not to do some of the things he is selling to the public now.
Which does not mean he'll do smart things as a president.

But we don't know.
I remember when Reagan came to power, the criticism that 'a second rate actor' and 'a cowboy' now came to rule the most powerful naion in the world.
To me, Reagan was one of the best presidents America has had recently.


Agreed. Reagan's success was in no small part because he was not a career politician. As an outsider he would have relied more to an entourage of trusted advisors than on his personal opinions. And when it comes to leading such a huge and complex country as the USA it is far better to listen to specialists in each field that to think that you know better than everyone else. A good president should act more like a company's chairman and delegate as much as possible to specialists. Trump being a good businessman, he could actually make a good Reagan-style president. I really don't think he could turn into a Putin or Erdogan, least of all a Hitler. He would have too much too lose as a billionaire if the people and businesses (especially in New York) were to turn against him in protest.

Maleth
14-03-16, 12:38
you relate ISIS with what happened 70 year ago in Europe?
I guess you mean the Balkan wars
congratulations, you have as much fantasy as Trump
but you are not so good a salesman

I have fantasy? you never heard of world war 2 and how many millions of people died besides the devastation in Europe?...........ok some things are getting more and more clear now. :thinking:

bicicleur
14-03-16, 13:49
I have fantasy? you never heard of world war 2 and how many millions of people died besides the devastation in Europe?...........ok some things are getting more and more clear now. :thinking:

you are the one comparing Trump with Hitler here
do you think he will mobilise an army to do the same?

Maleth
14-03-16, 14:47
you are the one comparing Trump with Hitler here
do you think he will mobilise an army to do the same?

Well...he is arrogant, short tempered, he is jealous that Mexico and China GDP are growing and said this has to stop, he finds it ok to punch people and get them out on a stretcher, he mimics handicapped people, he insulted women many times but they are ok if they got a good piece of ass, he said he dosent know who David Duke is......Lots of traits that resembel the Führer. (I dont think the Fuhrer ever insulted women so much tho) You just need a number of bad incidents to mobilise an army and he got all the ingredients. But if you agree with him in everything he will organise a party and be very nice to you and might also tell you he loves you. :grin:

bicicleur
14-03-16, 15:03
Well...he is arrogant, short tempered, he is jealous that Mexico and China GDP are growing and said this has to stop, he finds it ok to punch people and get them out on a stretcher, he mimics handicapped people, he insulted women many times but they are ok if they got a good piece of ass, he said he dosent know who David Duke is......Lots of traits that resembel the Führer. (I dont think the Fuhrer ever insulted women so much tho) You just need a number of bad incidents to mobilise an army and he got all the ingredients. But if you agree with him in everything he will organise a party and be very nice to you and might also tell you he loves you. :grin:

Do you think I agree with him after all I told here?
But you should stop comparing anyone you don't like with Hitler.
Like I told you before, you're losing all credibility like that.
Unless of course, if you're a salesman like Trump.
Furthermore you're insulting the real victims of Hitler and the like.

Angela
14-03-16, 16:49
What polls do you read? The polls are cooked in TV studios. According to the polls Trump should not have been a presidential contender at all! But in a crowded field of contenders, under a barrage of liberal TV assaults he is still unbeatable. Even if 67% of Americans find him unacceptable I am not impressed since he is running as a republican. Of course Blacks and Hispanics find him unacceptable since he is promising to build a wall and they will have to climb after that.( which they are lazy to do). Its not true that his supporters have no education. I do have a masters in science and I support him. Is the Sicilian Christ Christy (The governor of New Jersey) uneducated? The governor of Maine? The governor of Arizona? Its a new alignment of political forces in USA as the result of demographic changes. Get used to with it!

There you have some of the core Trump supporters. Scratch the surface and the racism bubbles up. For those who vote for Trump, you really want to get in bed with these people?

As for polls, they've in fact given Trump higher percentages, in most cases, to how he actually does at the ballot box. Get your facts straight.

Some points for clarity. Blacks don't have to climb a fence to get here...they've been here virtually since the establishment of the country. Most of the Hispanics I come across are hard workers, cleaning houses, doing yard work, pouring concrete, working in fast food restaurants. Out west they're picking crops. Stop maligning people who are, for the most part, just trying to provide for their families.

Chris Christie is half Sicilian and half Irish, a lethal combination if you get in his way, but someone who acts before he thinks. He lived to regret hugging Obama after the hurricane, and he'll live to regret this.

Christie is a typical Northeast moderate Republican. He's no aggressive secularist (indeed he's a practicing Catholic, albeit a typical "cafeteria" style one) or believer in late term abortions, but he's moderate in his stance on social issues, including abortion, gun control, gay marriage etc. At the same time he's an economic conservative, for keeping taxes as low as possible, helping small businesses, cutting welfare fraud, curbing the excesses of some unions, maintaining law and order, having a strong defense. He even has some of Trump's pugnacity. He's actually much like Trump, minus the fame and recognition that being a reality star gave Trump, and minus his skills at playing the crowds and the media. That he endorsed Trump was not a surprise.

His main problem as a candidate was that he destroyed himself with a lot of Republicans by a single gesture: embracing Obama when he came to New Jersey to inspect the hurricane damage. His other problem is the same problem that dogs all moderate Republicans. They're not far enough to the "right" in terms of "social" issues to satisfy the other wing of the Republican Party, although they'd fare better in general elections. That's why Obama won in the first place: the most die hard extreme right Republicans stayed home rather than vote for Romney. It's a death wish as far as I'm concerned. Oh, and since he's been a governor for so long he didn't have the "outsider" appeal.

Ed. Neither has there ever been any indication that he's a racist of any kind.

LeBrok
14-03-16, 17:03
Well...he is arrogant, short tempered, he is jealous that Mexico and China GDP are growing and said this has to stop, he finds it ok to punch people and get them out on a stretcher, he mimics handicapped people, he insulted women many times but they are ok if they got a good piece of ass, he said he dosent know who David Duke is......Lots of traits that resembel the Führer. (I dont think the Fuhrer ever insulted women so much tho) You just need a number of bad incidents to mobilise an army and he got all the ingredients. But if you agree with him in everything he will organise a party and be very nice to you and might also tell you he loves you. :grin:There might be a case that Trump is a mild psychopath. It seems that he enjoys hurting people, like a bully.

Fire Haired14
14-03-16, 17:26
@If Trump is Hitler, then 99% of humans are Hitler.

Everyone thinks with their emotions before their mind. Our pride or friends are important to us, so when someone insults them or competes against them, we want to attack them. Everyone, doesn't matter what your gender or age or personality, can turn into a savage animal when something important to them is threatened. When someone dis agrees with our politics or sports teams, the same emotions kick in.

The left and right is full of people high on emotion and ready to kill(not literally) their enemies(people who dis agree). The left has portrayed violence plenty of times. An "anti-violence" activist in Chicago was caught on camera throwing punches at a Trump supporter.

Trump uses these emotions for support. But to say these emotions are unique to Trump(I don't think he has them, I think he uses them for votes) or the right, is absolutely crazy.

bicicleur
14-03-16, 17:37
His main problem as a candidate was that he destroyed himself with a lot of Republicans by a single gesture: embracing Obama when he came to New Jersey to inspect the hurricane damage. His other problem is the same problem that dogs all moderate Republicans.

Embracing Obama? At least that is a mistake I think Trump will never make.

Boreas
14-03-16, 17:53
again, Erdogan shuts down the press, writes his own decrees, says Muslims are superior in everything, has his own 'Lions of Allah' storm troops , etc.

ridiculous comparison

and, by the way I never said I would vote for Trump
but I like what he does, kicking correct politicians and press on their ass

and By time way, I am comparing Erdoğan's attitude in his first two general election (I told it a few times in the previous posts) and Trump, not his current situation :good_job:

before using strong words as ridiculous, be sure that you got it well my friend.

Maleth
14-03-16, 18:03
Do you think I agree with him after all I told here?
But you should stop comparing anyone you don't like with Hitler.
Like I told you before, you're losing all credibility like that.
Unless of course, if you're a salesman like Trump.
Furthermore you're insulting the real victims of Hitler and the like.

I think instead of attacking me personally in each and every post repeating the same thing, it would be more interesting to explain of how you see nothing similar between Trumps attitude and that of Hitlers. Its ok to disagree but giving reasons will be helpful.

PS As far as I know I don't compare anyone I dont like with Hitler. Im not comparing Mr. Trump with Hitler because I dont like him, because I sincerely believe they have similar traits in their behavior. Why does it irritate you so much?

Maleth
14-03-16, 18:07
There might be a case that Trump is a mild psychopath. It seems that he enjoys hurting people, like a bully.

It did pass from my mind, but what is worrisome is that you have a big number of people who actually applauds the behavior. :/

Fire Haired14
14-03-16, 18:23
It did pass from my mind, but what is worrisome is that you have a big number of people who actually applauds the behavior. :/

Everyone has a little psychopath in them. Bullies are technically psychopaths, and there are billions of bullies in the world. Not everyone who has characteristics that fall under psychopaths automatically are horrible people. Trump is a dush though, I'm not defending him, just saying the word psychopath is miss used for normal behavior.

Maleth
14-03-16, 18:35
Everyone has a little psychopath in them. Bullies are technically psychopaths, and there are billions of bullies in the world. Not everyone who has characteristics that fall under psychopaths automatically are horrible people. Trump is a dush though, I'm not defending him, just saying the word psychopath is miss used for normal behavior.

Well lets put it this way, not all bullies have a chance to be president of the USA which is the richest country and most heavily armed country in the world and yet its termed not great. When you bite your lips with anger because your neighbor has a growing GDP, but still much poorer anyway. One needs to be extra careful when your finger is on a nuclear bomb button.

Angela
14-03-16, 18:55
Embracing Obama? At least that is a mistake I think Trump will never make.

Well, he may not embrace him, but he's given him campaign contributions to the best of my recollection. He's certainly given a lot of money to Hillary and Bill in the past. He says he was just playing the game. Was he? If I were the type to believe in conspiracy theories I'd wonder if he's in cahoots with Hillary.

Anyway, here is the photo. I didn't hold it against him. It was a very human moment when the President was consoling him for the devastation wreaked on his state.

http://i.imgur.com/veH0CJe.jpg

Almost everything in life, including human personality traits, exist on a continuum. Nobody is totally emotional and nobody is totally rational, but most people are more one than the other.

There's also a difference in terms of knowledge about economics, geo-politics, even basic civics knowledge, far less any knowledge or commitment to the constitution. There's a section of the electorate called the "low information voters". They vote more for Trump than for the other Republican candidates. A much larger percentage of the Democratic Party has no clue about any of these things.

Oh, I was right, unfortunately. The organized disruption of Trump's rallies is increasing his support. Americans don't like this sort of thing, whether it's by "Black Lives Matter" or Moveon.org anarchists and communists.

LeBrok
14-03-16, 19:16
It did pass from my mind, but what is worrisome is that you have a big number of people who actually applauds the behavior. :/If he attracts same minded people, behaviour wise, this might indicate the level of psychopathy in the nation. Could be the same crowd who is attracted to American Wrestling, where the goal is to hurt someone, or re enactment of violence wrapped in bad acting.
I wonder if someone did study of what is a favorite show of violent offenders?

LeBrok
14-03-16, 19:22
Well, he may not embrace him, but he's given him campaign contributions to the best of my recollection. He's certainly given a lot of money to Hillary and Bill in the past. He says he was just playing the game. Was he? If I were the type to believe in conspiracy theories I'd wonder if he's in cahoots with Hillary.What if he was? Are their any criminal consequences for such person, for pretending to be a candidate for a president, or conspiring against a political party? Any such occurrences in the past?

bicicleur
14-03-16, 20:01
Almost everything in life, including human personality traits, exist on a continuum. Nobody is totally emotional and nobody is totally rational, but most people are more one than the other.



That is what politics is about isn't it?
It's a big theater play.

Angela
14-03-16, 20:12
What if he was? Are their any criminal consequences for such person, for pretending to be a candidate for a president, or conspiring against a political party? Any such occurrences in the past?

First of all, if Hillary and Trump had a conversation one day, who would know or be able to prove it? Second of all, you need an overt act. Talk isn't enough.

I'm not aware of anything like that occurring although there have been plenty of dirty tricks. Thomas Jefferson, vice-president at the time, paid pamphleteers to write scurrilous reports that John Adams, the then President, was in negotiations to take America into war. He got hoist with his own petard when the man he hired, who didn't get the position he wanted, proceeded to publicize that Jefferson held a part black woman in concubinage and had fathered lots of his own slaves. Even the Lincoln-Douglas contest for the Republican nomination got nasty. Lincoln's supporters called Douglas "The Little Giant", proclaiming that he was five foot nothing tall and about as wide. Douglas supporters and the supporters of the Democrat candidates retaliated by saying Lincoln looked like a freakishly tall skeleton, a bundle of bony arms and legs, and was the ugliest man alive, or that he looked like an ape. Perhaps it's partly because of my admiration, even love for Lincoln, but I don't know how anyone could look at him and not see the compassion, the understanding, the humanity of the man, as well as the intelligence and wit. A man like that draws you in no matter the cast of his features or his skinniness.

Anyway, I tend not to believe in conspiracy theories. I think Donald's ego got him into this, and I wouldn't be surprised if on some level he doesn't regret it. As he said recently, "Do I really need this"?

When you go to the extent of trying to steal the other sides' campaign secrets, as Nixon operatives did, then you can be prosecuted.

LeBrok
14-03-16, 20:30
First of all, if Hillary and Trump had a conversation one day, who would know or be able to prove it? Second of all, you need an overt act. Talk isn't enough.

I'm not aware of anything like that occurring although there have been plenty of dirty tricks. Thomas Jefferson, vice-president at the time, paid pamphleteers to write scurrilous reports that John Adams, the then President, was in negotiations to take America into war. He got hoist with his own petard when the man he hired, who didn't get the position he wanted, proceeded to publicize that Jefferson held a part black woman in concubinage and had fathered lots of his own slaves. Even the Lincoln-Douglas contest for the Republican nomination got nasty. Lincoln's supporters called Douglas "The Little Giant", proclaiming that he was five foot nothing tall and about as wide. Douglas supporters and the supporters of the Democrat candidates retaliated by saying Lincoln looked like a freakishly tall skeleton, a bundle of bony arms and legs, and was the ugliest man alive, or that he looked like an ape. Perhaps it's partly because of my admiration, even love for Lincoln, but I don't know how anyone could look at him and not see the compassion, the understanding, the humanity of the man, as well as the intelligence and wit. A man like that draws you in no matter the cast of his features or his skinniness.

Anyway, I tend not to believe in conspiracy theories. I think Donald's ego got him into this, and I wouldn't be surprised if on some level he doesn't regret it. As he said recently, "Do I really need this"?

When you go to the extent of trying to steal the other sides' campaign secrets, as Nixon operatives did, then you can be prosecuted.
I know, it was a hypothetical question, what if. I was wondering if regulations are in place to discourage and punish perpetrators for making mockery out of democratic election.

Fire Haired14
14-03-16, 21:32
Well lets put it this way, not all bullies have a chance to be president of the USA which is the richest country and most heavily armed country in the world and yet its termed not great. When you bite your lips with anger because your neighbor has a growing GDP, but still much poorer anyway. One needs to be extra careful when your finger is on a nuclear bomb button.

Agreed.....

Goga
14-03-16, 21:42
All candidates are clowns.

But the only person between them I do really hate is Hillary Clinton. She is a vampire, a bloodsucker, a child murderer. ISIS/Daesh/Muslim lover-supporter.

Yetos
14-03-16, 22:32
All candidates are clowns.

But the only person between them I do really hate is Hillary Clinton. She is a vampire, a bloodsucker, a child murderer. ISIS/Daesh/Muslim lover-supporter.


I agree, I leave Americans to decide who they want,
but that Hillary? come on she is at politics since she was 'first lady'
what is going on? USA does not have any other women?

Goga
15-03-16, 00:36
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=claY2UU9-5c

Goga
15-03-16, 01:16
this post has been deleted by the user

Maleth
15-03-16, 10:35
If he attracts same minded people, behaviour wise, this might indicate the level of psychopathy in the nation. Could be the same crowd who is attracted to American Wrestling, where the goal is to hurt someone, or re enactment of violence wrapped in bad acting.
I wonder if someone did study of what is a favorite show of violent offenders?

Thats a very interesting observation and merits a discussion of its own. Probably this is not just a specific USA problem but one that is growing world wide. Not sure if this is off topic but this can be somehow related to your question and increasing aggressive behavior as a norm and admirable and only way how to settle things, while being polite could be perceived as unfashionable, week and hawkish. (Trump very often use these terms against his adversaries) "The shooter, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, spent most of his time playing both violent and non-video games alone in his home." http://www.zmescience.com/research/technology/violent-video-games-child-aggression-0534/

Hitler used to make sure he looked very strong and powerful especially with his aggressive speeches he knew his audience loved it, but in reality he was a very very sick man and riddled with anxiety.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DJr5q4Bf_s

Maleth
15-03-16, 10:50
If he attracts same minded people, behaviour wise, this might indicate the level of psychopathy in the nation. Could be the same crowd who is attracted to American Wrestling, where the goal is to hurt someone, or re enactment of violence wrapped in bad acting. I wonder if someone did study of what is a favorite show of violent offenders?

Thats a very interesting observation and merits a discussion of its own. Being polite seems to be being more and more perceived as weak, hawkish and low energy. These are terms continuously used very much by Mr. Trump against his adversaries. I dont want to go off topic although it can be related in regards to your question. Here is something interesting but in regards to violent video games.

http://www.zmescience.com/research/technology/violent-video-games-child-aggression-0534/

Hitler also perceived himself to be aggressive and loved the notion that people love the strength and determination he preached, but in fact he became a very sick man and riddled with anxiety. Humans are always humans no matter how invincible they like to think they are.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DJr5q4Bf_s

bicicleur
15-03-16, 11:14
I agree, I leave Americans to decide who they want,
but that Hillary? come on she is at politics since she was 'first lady'
what is going on? USA does not have any other women?

to the disadvantage of Hillary is her present job as responsable for external affairs
she has to do what she is imposed by Obama, which means nothing and let things rotten

and in her campaign she doesn't dare to criticisize her current employer

bicicleur
15-03-16, 11:16
Thats a very interesting observation and merits a discussion of its own. Being polite seems to be being more and more perceived as weak, hawkish and low energy. These are terms continuously used very much by Mr. Trump against his adversaries. I dont want to go off topic although it can be related in regards to your question. Here is something interesting but in regards to violent video games.

http://www.zmescience.com/research/technology/violent-video-games-child-aggression-0534/

Hitler also perceived himself to be aggressive and loved the notion that people love the strength and determination he preached, but in fact he became a very sick man and riddled with anxiety. Humans are always humans no matter how invincible they like to think they are.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DJr5q4Bf_s

you're obsessed with it, aren't you?
you can't stop compairing Trump with Hitler
in a polite way of course

Maleth
15-03-16, 11:36
you're obsessed with it, aren't you?
you can't stop compairing Trump with Hitler
in a polite way of course

Apart from only discussing your opinion about me...do you have anything to offer on the subject?:smile:

bicicleur
15-03-16, 11:52
Apart from only discussing your opinion about me...do you have anything to offer on the subject?:smile:

you're very interested in me, but maybe you haven't read what I told about the subject in this thread
and you are typical of a group that does not understand the frustration the half truth of political correctness created by many people
now somebody else tells the other half truth and completes it with is own lies
so, yes this is still about the subject

Maleth
15-03-16, 12:16
you're very interested in me,

Im interested in anyone who posts on these threads and their opinions. There is always so much to learn. Of course like everybody else I seem to be inspired by some more then others. But we are all like that


but maybe you haven't read what I told about the subject in this thread

I did I did. But what I notice then when I mentioned Hitler you became very irritated and started calling me stupid and all that. I am not sure why it had this reaction on you.


and you are typical of a group that does not understand the frustration the half truth of political correctness created by many people
now somebody else tells the other half truth and completes it with is own lies
so, yes this is still about the subject

I have freely wrote about my frustrations on these threads, but I am not consoled by a man who lies more then any other and has many traits similar to Hitler. Im not sure why you try to shut me up continuously. Can you kindly explain why am i stupid to discuss the similarities? I read all your posts on this thread and have not found out why the two should not be compared in their behavior. If you tell me you never know. I might change my mind. ;)

bicicleur
15-03-16, 12:49
You have read all my posts and didn't find the answer. I rest my case.

Maleth
15-03-16, 13:21
Frankly, I don't see any similarities between Trump and Hitler.
And it is stupid to look for it.
Comparing Trump with Hitler won't make him less popular, on the contrary, because you'll loose all credibility by doing so.
Trump speak half truths and half lies.
If you want to reason with him and his followers you first have to acknowledge his half truths and then tear down his lies.
But there are so many taboos around, there are to many truths politicians can't acknowledge without breaking the taboos.

As a matter of facts, I like what is going on.
These taboos should have been questioned already long time ago.
But it didn't happen, it takes a clown like Trump to do it.

That is a pity to rest your case :(. This is the closest thing you suggested for Trump not to be compared to Hitler just by saying its stupid. But you never really explained why its stupid? I am not discussing this with Trump supporters, Eupidia is not CNN or Fox news. There are hardly 10 people contributing to this. I stated an opinion with an argument, and all you you could say its stupid without ever mentioning why the two should not be compared. Some others have made rational comments. Maybe when you decide to lift up your case and give the reasons I will be more then happy to read what you have to say.

Angela
15-03-16, 15:07
That is a pity to rest your case :(. This is the closest thing you suggested for Trump not to be compared to Hitler just by saying its stupid. But you never really explained why its stupid? I am not discussing this with Trump supporters, Eupidia is not CNN or Fox news. There are hardly 10 people contributing to this. I stated an opinion with an argument, and all you you could say its stupid without ever mentioning why the two should not be compared. Some others have made rational comments. Maybe when you decide to lift up your case and give the reasons I will be more then happy to read what you have to say.

I'm very disturbed by Trump's rhetoric as well, Maleth, and the atmosphere that it creates. It is absolutely out of bounds to say of protestors that in the old days they would have been carried out on stretchers, or to say that you'll pay the legal fees of a man who ****** punched a demonstrator.

Still, it's a far cry from that to the situation in Europe in the twenties and to Hitler. Americans are not the Europeans of that period, and Trump isn't Hitler. He's not advocating taking away the civil rights of minorities or legal immigrants. The vast majority of his backers are not violent racists. He's not even Mussolini; he's not advocating the violent overthrow of a republic.

The thuggery is coming from the left by and large, and mirrors what the left has been doing on college campuses and in the media for decades, which is to say trying to shut down speech with which they disagree. Trump supporters aren't going to Sanders rallies to disrupt them. In fact, as I said, I think that kind of leftist thuggery is going to fuel more support for Trump, as does calling Trump a Hitler and his supporters Nazis. It's over-reach; most Americans know that isn't the case and claims like that just make Trump more sympathetic.

One factor that hasn't been much discussed is that Trump was on TV for years and years. I didn't watch his show but millions of people did; people think they know him and most of the other candidates are just names to them.

I just saw another interesting stat. In states with open primaries, 55% of Trump's vote comes from Democrats, the so-called "Reagan Democrats", blue collar, more nationalistic Democrats.

Maleth
15-03-16, 18:47
I'm very disturbed by Trump's rhetoric as well, Maleth, and the atmosphere that it creates. It is absolutely out of bounds to say of protestors that in the old days they would have been carried out on stretchers, or to say that you'll pay the legal fees of a man who ****** punched a demonstrator.

Firstly thank you for your rational arguments. One can debate without insulting which is a breath of fresh air. On the above post I believe you know thats not the only ultra negative thing that Trump had said and there is a whole list that have been highlighted by the media over and over again which are probably much more serious statements not only concerning people living in America but also his perception of the outside world. I dont think I need to go into detail.


Still, it's a far cry from that to the situation in Europe in the twenties and to Hitler. Americans are not the Europeans of that period, and Trump isn't Hitler. He's not advocating taking away the civil rights of minorities or legal immigrants. The vast majority of his backers are not violent racists. He's not even Mussolini; he's not advocating the violent overthrow of a republic.

well well...this is a very new thing for America. Americans are less and less attached their mother homelands and in 2016 there is much more of a sense of a 'roothed' nation if you know what I mean. This is the kind of rhetoric NEVER heard or seen in America before. There is always a first, and in my sincere opinion it should not be underestimated. It seems that all Trumps supporters say. Oh yes its true he said that about women about this and that...BUT....


The thuggery is coming from the left by and large, and mirrors what the left has been doing on college campuses and in the media for decades, which is to say trying to shut down speech with which they disagree. Trump supporters aren't going to Sanders rallies to disrupt them. In fact, as I said, I think that kind of leftist thuggery is going to fuel more support for Trump, as does calling Trump a Hitler and his supporters Nazis. It's over-reach; most Americans know that isn't the case and claims like that just make Trump more sympathetic.

Now lets see the whole picture. Shutting down speech is bad, even when its insulting and arrogant, because at least there are a good number of people who want to hear it and no one can deny that right to the supporters. But we also know that at least Sanders was quick to condemn this behavior and never encouraged this behavior in any of his rallies. This is very much to the contrary to what we get (example) from Trump with his body language with what he says and states that he does not know who the KKK is. (CNN interview with Trump).


One factor that hasn't been much discussed is that Trump was on TV for years and years. I didn't watch his show but millions of people did; people think they know him and most of the other candidates are just names to them.

I am not familiar with Trump I can only observe and comment on what I see now. His contradictions are incredible if you did not hear them with your own ears. (example he has nothing against Mexicans because many bought appartments from him and nearly with the same breath they are rapists drug dealers and dont know what else. Same thing he said on the Chinese besides the total ban on Muslims...you know all of them want to blow up America. I would love to know what his foreign policy is going to be? This is unheard in USA politics. And if he is president he will get everyone to agree because he said he is good at it. I think I need a break


I just saw another interesting stat. In states with open primaries, 55% of Trump's vote comes from Democrats, the so-called "Reagan Democrats", blue collar, more nationalistic Democrats.

Well that is something very debatable and similar scenario to what we have locally and elsewhere. The chunk of swinging voters probably has now become bigger then the hard core loyalist on both ends, so its going to be very difficult to put a title on someone as a sworn Democrat thats voting Republican and the other way round. Which is a good thing. People swing according to the necessity of the day and not necessarily according to a sworn allegiance to any party. I remember in the 70's (and probably more prior to that) that politics was like Religion, people would not marry into each other families unless they were BLUE or RED. Thats a long forgotten scenario.

Angela
15-03-16, 20:50
The biggest predictor of a vote for Donald Trump: a white man who hasn't even graduated from high school.

Nearly half of Trump voters live in trailer parks.

That tells you a lot.

This man may be the worst thing to ever happen to American politics.

The Republicans could have put up virtually anyone and defeated Hillary Clinton. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

Maleth
15-03-16, 21:36
The Republicans could have put up virtually anyone and defeated Hillary Clinton. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

Indeed, I always believe that two terms of the same party is enough, even if they do everything right which is next to impossible. Corruption and bad governance seems to find fertile ground when that happens. (Not saying that it always happens. Japan and some Scandinavian countries had the same goverment even for 20 years I think) A change of government normally brings about a fresh round of enthusiasm and ideas.

I have been all in all very disappointed with the Republican nominations. There was a time I was thinking Rubio could have been appealing before his childish attacks on Trump, he should not have stooped so low as Trump does. The debates were more focused on attacking each other personally rather then convincing the public of who had the best way forward.

Hillary Clinton with all her downfalls simply seem more mature and has much more experience then all of them put together, and the fact that she might be the first female president in the USA might also find some sympathy votes. Sanders who is a socialist is something too much of a novelty in the US, and I am very surprised how well he is dong relatively speaking. Anyhow in the case that Hillary become president, she will be having a very rough ride as the undercurrents will remain unusually strong and the probability is that she will not serve a second term.

The political landscape in the US is really changing in many aspects. One only hopes for the best.

bicicleur
15-03-16, 23:42
Anonymous collective declares ‘total war’ on Donald Trump, again

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/15/anonymous-declares-total-war-on-donald-trump-again

Let me guess ..

Trump will be hindered in his logistics for a few days.
But he'll gain popularity through this.

America will become more polarised.

And anonymous will get the press once more and become more popular with its followers.

What a theater.

bicicleur
15-03-16, 23:51
The biggest predictor of a vote for Donald Trump: a white man who hasn't even graduated from high school.

Nearly half of Trump voters live in trailer parks.

That tells you a lot.

This man may be the worst thing to ever happen to American politics.

The Republicans could have put up virtually anyone and defeated Hillary Clinton. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

It shows how emptyheaded politicians are nowadays.

The only thing they are interested in is how they look in the press.
And so they have lost connection with reality.

DuPidh
16-03-16, 01:33
Agreed.....

Its not about military adventures!!! Americans are tired and angry of Bush's adventures in Asia. Republicans are fired up because Trump has touched important domestic problems that every american knows are true. You have 65 million Americans born abroad. Most of them are dead weight on the American economy. You have Mexican nationals that deliver their babies in USA and place the financial burden of raising them on working Americans. You have Muslims who not only rely on welfare but also bring their habits with them, their dress code, their social code which many times are in opposite with american way of life. Simply the cultures the emigrants are bringing are forming their enclaves and not fusing with each other. You have Muslim professors who dress according their codes discarding the facts that they are suppose to teach american kids! And many other clashes that multiculturalism brings. Simply as in Europe multiculturalism is failing and that what is fanning the revolt of American voter! Its not Trump!

DuPidh
16-03-16, 01:42
I'm very disturbed by Trump's rhetoric as well, Maleth, and the atmosphere that it creates. It is absolutely out of bounds to say of protestors that in the old days they would have been carried out on stretchers, or to say that you'll pay the legal fees of a man who ****** punched a demonstrator.

Still, it's a far cry from that to the situation in Europe in the twenties and to Hitler. Americans are not the Europeans of that period, and Trump isn't Hitler. He's not advocating taking away the civil rights of minorities or legal immigrants. The vast majority of his backers are not violent racists. He's not even Mussolini; he's not advocating the violent overthrow of a republic.

The thuggery is coming from the left by and large, and mirrors what the left has been doing on college campuses and in the media for decades, which is to say trying to shut down speech with which they disagree. Trump supporters aren't going to Sanders rallies to disrupt them. In fact, as I said, I think that kind of leftist thuggery is going to fuel more support for Trump, as does calling Trump a Hitler and his supporters Nazis. It's over-reach; most Americans know that isn't the case and claims like that just make Trump more sympathetic.

One factor that hasn't been much discussed is that Trump was on TV for years and years. I didn't watch his show but millions of people did; people think they know him and most of the other candidates are just names to them.

I just saw another interesting stat. In states with open primaries, 55% of Trump's vote comes from Democrats, the so-called "Reagan Democrats", blue collar, more nationalistic Democrats.


Now you are getting the facts straight. Its the democratic vote for Trump that has made the Democratic establishment nervous. He is no longer a joke. The presidency is well within his reach. Do not discard his leadership abilities. He has a lot more knowledge about economy because of his training and business dealings.

Maciamo
16-03-16, 08:32
The biggest predictor of a vote for Donald Trump: a white man who hasn't even graduated from high school.

Nearly half of Trump voters live in trailer parks.

That tells you a lot.

This man may be the worst thing to ever happen to American politics.

The Republicans could have put up virtually anyone and defeated Hillary Clinton. Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

That's exactly why I think it is plausible that the Democrats recruited Trump and asked him to run for the Republicans, snatching as many of the "Redneck" votes as possible (the uneducated whites that you describe) with demagogic rhetoric that speak to the emotions of these low-brow masses, who unfortunately make up a huge part of the electorate. Once Trump is elected as the Republican candidate nothing can stop Clinton from winning.

Maciamo
16-03-16, 08:39
Simply as in Europe multiculturalism is failing and that what is fanning the revolt of American voter! Its not Trump!

How is multiculturalism failing in Europe. I live in the EU capital, where half of the population is of foreign origin, with EU workers from all 28 member states, and I can tell you that relations between Europeans seen from Brussels are very good indeed. The only thing that is failing is the integration of Muslims, and above all Moroccans, as the two terrorist attacks in Paris last year reminded those who were in denial. But multiculturalism between non-Muslims isn't just something that works in Brussels. Go to London, Amsterdam, Berlin, Vienna or other major cities with lots of other EU nationals and you will see that multiculturalism flourishes. Europeans have never spoken so many foreign languages and never married more often people from other EU countries. In Brussels over half of the couples I know are international.

This is why I can't understand why there isn't any major political party in Europe that is staunchly pro-EU and anti-Islam at the same time. Politicians still haven't understood that words like immigration and foreigners have no meaning if we don't specify the country or region of origin (or more importantly the religious groups).

It's probably not something Americans would understand as most of the Arabs in the USA are Christians, and the most vilified group of foreigners, namely the Mexicans, are Westerners culturally (Spanish speakers and Christians) who belong to the dominant religious group in the USA (Catholicism) and to top it all are generally hard-working and well-integrated. You have no idea what it is to have 5 to 10% of the population (25% in Brussels, although mostly packed up in the north-west neighbourhoods where they rest of the population hardly ever goes) who are very poorly integrated Muslims who contribute little to the economy (unlike the hard-working and well-integrated Eastern European and Latin American immigrants here). It's not just that they are poor and religious like the Mexicans.

After two or three generations in Europe, most Moroccans and Algerians, and to a lower extent also Pakistanis (+ a small proportion of the Bangladeshi and Turkish immigrants), are still living in ghettoes and remain poor, uneducated and unemployed, often living off social security. They just can't fit in modern European society because their Muslim values and behaviour clash too much with ours. In contrast, they are plenty of Brazilians and Polish workers who came to Brussels in the last 10 to 20 years, and the economy wouldn't run without them. I have never heard of integration problems with these new immigrants, but Moroccan families who have been here since the 1950's or 60's still look like (and speak like) they just got off the plane from Marrakesh. There is simply nothing comparable in the US.

bicicleur
16-03-16, 12:46
After two or three generations in Europe, most Moroccans and Algerians, and to a lower extent also Pakistanis (+ a small proportion of the Bangladeshi and Turkish immigrants), are still living in ghettoes and remain poor, uneducated and unemployed, often living off social security. They just can't fit in modern European society because their Muslim values and behaviour clash too much with ours. In contrast, they are plenty of Brazilians and Polish workers who came to Brussels in the last 10 to 20 years, and the economy wouldn't run without them. I have never heard of integration problems with these new immigrants, but Moroccan families who have been here since the 1950's or 60's still look like (and speak like) they just got off the plane from Marrakesh. There is simply nothing comparable in the US.

I can confirm that. I've seen these neighbourhoods. I've even done some bussiness there.
IMO this cannot exist in America, but the overgenerous social security system in Europe attracts and maintains these people as they are.
It is because of the mentality of these people, but also because social security does not force them to change.
To tell this is a taboo, you're labelled racist.
To get back to the subject ...
If Trump were in Europe, he would have a perfect subject here for his audience.
And who do you have to blaim then? Trump or the ones who made this subject a taboo?
It is taboos like this that give people like Trump - and much worse - an audience.

Angela
16-03-16, 13:47
Its not about military adventures!!! Americans are tired and angry of Bush's adventures in Asia. Republicans are fired up because Trump has touched important domestic problems that every american knows are true. You have 65 million Americans born abroad. Most of them are dead weight on the American economy. You have Mexican nationals that deliver their babies in USA and place the financial burden of raising them on working Americans. You have Muslims who not only rely on welfare but also bring their habits with them, their dress code, their social code which many times are in opposite with american way of life. Simply the cultures the emigrants are bringing are forming their enclaves and not fusing with each other. You have Muslim professors who dress according their codes discarding the facts that they are suppose to teach american kids! And many other clashes that multiculturalism brings. Simply as in Europe multiculturalism is failing and that what is fanning the revolt of American voter! Its not Trump!

Immigration was last on the concerns of voters yesterday. Only 8-10% of voters in each state cited it as their primary issue. What is driving this phenomenon is concern over the economy and a belief that most professional politicians have let them down. Immigration only factors in as part of the concern over jobs by blue collar workers who believe that Mexicans and Central Americans are taking their jobs and if not, driving down wages.

Trump voters have watched way too much tv, and obviously don't read very much. They think that being able to make money in real estate and running a reality show about business means that you know how to fix the economy in the face of global headwinds. It ain't necessarily so. They also are a very trusting bunch. At least with politicians you have their past actions as a guide. At this point I have no idea what Trump really believes.

One thing that African-Americans believe and fear, although it has not been part of the campaign rhetoric, is that some of this Trump vote is from people who also resent that a disproportionate share of the people on welfare are African-Americans, welfare that is subsidized, they believe, by their hard earned dollars. I do think that is probably part of the subtext. Crime rates in African-American ghettos also is a factor, and things like the "Black Lives Matter" movement. To Bicicleur's point, those "taboos" have not been broken. No one has introduced that into the discussion.

The Ohio returns are interesting. In the state where they really know him, and his lack of millionaires willing to fund his campaign wasn't a factor, Kasich has won over Trump by more than 15 points. On the all important question of the economy he trumped Trump by way more than that. He also beat him on honesty, which is important to me, at least. He's a very decent guy, Kasich. I'd be more than happy to vote for him, but if things are looking good for Trump, and Cruz looks like he's the only one who could knock him out, I'd hold my nose and vote for him too.

Does that mean I think he has a path? Not really. Even if campaign money were to start to flow to him now, it's too late.

bicicleur
16-03-16, 15:49
I realise now, there is a lot of this campaign I miss.
European press of course only covers the most controversial issues.

LeBrok
16-03-16, 17:20
The Ohio returns are interesting. In the state where they really know him, and his lack of millionaires willing to fund his campaign wasn't a factor, Kasich has won over Trump by more than 15 points. On the all important question of the economy he trumped Trump by way more than that. He also beat him on honesty, which is important to me, at least. He's a very decent guy, Kasich. I'd be more than happy to vote for him, but if things are looking good for Trump, and Cruz looks like he's the only one who could knock him out, I'd hold my nose and vote for him too.
.There is growing uncertainty in me that I didn't do the smartest decision not including Kasich in the poll. To update the poll would mean losing all the votes so far. On other hand I'm tempted to allow vote changing, and this would mean that people could change votes, change their minds, and vote for remaining candidates till the president is elected. Other words we would see how voting pattern changes with time.

sparkey
16-03-16, 17:45
There is growing uncertainty in me that I didn't do the smartest decision not including Kasich in the poll. To update the poll would mean losing all the votes so far. On other hand I'm tempted to allow vote changing, and this would mean that people could change votes, change their minds, and vote for remaining candidates till the president is elected. Other words we would see how voting pattern changes with time.

Well, yesterday, Kasich was mathematically eliminated from getting enough delegates to get the nomination on his own. Maybe a bigger mistake was including Rubio. :embarassed:

Maybe wait and make another poll for the general election once the candidates are nominated? (And don't forget the third parties this time!) I did something like that in 2012, not so many responses though: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27672-Who-do-you-want-to-win-the-2012-US-presidential-election

LeBrok
16-03-16, 18:05
Well, yesterday, Kasich was mathematically eliminated from getting enough delegates to get the nomination on his own. Maybe a bigger mistake was including Rubio. :embarassed:

Maybe wait and make another poll for the general election once the candidates are nominated? (And don't forget the third parties this time!) I did something like that in 2012, not so many responses though: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27672-Who-do-you-want-to-win-the-2012-US-presidential-election
You must have picked a boring election. :)

LeBrok
17-03-16, 21:00
Trump adds ammunition for people seeing him as a rude, violent, dictatorial, or even Hitler like material:

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has warned of riots if he is denied the party's presidential nomination for the November 8 United States election.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-17/donald-trump-warns-riots-if-no-white-house-nod/7253076

Seems like a scare tactic and type of extortion aimed against delegates of Republican Party who could overturn his nomination. I think this is scary.

LeBrok
18-03-16, 05:33
Trump is considered one of 10 biggest danger to world's economy by The Economist magazine.
https://gfs.eiu.com/Archive.aspx?archiveType=globalrisk


April 2016

https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_20.pngChina experiences a hard landing (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2871)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngRussia's interventions in Ukraine and Syria precede a new "cold war" (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2872)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngCurrency volatility culminates in an emerging markets corporate debt crisis (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2873)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.pngBeset by external and internal pressures, the EU begins to fracture (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2874)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.png"Grexit" is followed by a euro zone break-up (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2875)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngDonald Trump wins the US presidential election (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2876)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngThe rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilises the global economy (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2877)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngThe UK votes to leave the EU (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2878)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngChinese expansionism prompts a clash of arms in the South China Sea (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2879)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_4.pngA collapse in investment in the oil sector prompts a future oil price shock (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2880)

LeBrok
18-03-16, 05:35
Putin "endorses" Trump:

Putin praises Trump: He’s a really brilliant and talented person
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/263555-putin-praises-trump-hes-a-really-brilliant-and-talented-person
Well, one dictator knows another.

Maleth
18-03-16, 09:55
Putin "endorses" Trump:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/263555-putin-praises-trump-hes-a-really-brilliant-and-talented-person
Well, one dictator knows another.

....and China calls him a "racist clown".........and they are still in the nomination race:rolleyes2:........just a taster for things to come

bicicleur
18-03-16, 10:50
Trump is considered one of 10 biggest danger to world's economy by The Economist magazine.
https://gfs.eiu.com/Archive.aspx?archiveType=globalrisk


April 2016

https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_20.pngChina experiences a hard landing (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2871)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngRussia's interventions in Ukraine and Syria precede a new "cold war" (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2872)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngCurrency volatility culminates in an emerging markets corporate debt crisis (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2873)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.pngBeset by external and internal pressures, the EU begins to fracture (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2874)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.png"Grexit" is followed by a euro zone break-up (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2875)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngDonald Trump wins the US presidential election (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2876)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngThe rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilises the global economy (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2877)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngThe UK votes to leave the EU (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2878)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngChinese expansionism prompts a clash of arms in the South China Sea (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2879)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_4.pngA collapse in investment in the oil sector prompts a future oil price shock (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2880)



Trump likes that, he got the press again.
And for the press, Trump has become a good selling item.
Officialy though, they hate each other.

The press makes the theater continue, it is their bread and butter.

Maleth
18-03-16, 12:09
Rabbis, Jewish leaders plan boycott of Donald Trump at AIPAC


http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/17/politics/donald-trump-aipac-boycott-protest-rabbis-jewish-leaders/index.html

Jews can easily embrace Trumps rhetoric with his position on Muslims. In return he can use the situation in a number of ways. Well done. They should be commended for this bold position.

LeBrok
18-03-16, 16:09
....and China calls him a "racist clown".........and they are still in the nomination race:rolleyes2:........just a taster for things to comeThey say that Trump is the proof that democracy doesn't work.

Angela
18-03-16, 18:55
While 60% of Republicans don't support Trump as the nominee of the Republican Party, and 40% at least say they'd be willing to vote for a third party even if it meant electing Hillary Clinton, what is happening in Europe might just fuel support for Trump in the next primaries.

I even read that Trump had been planning to run for maybe a decade but waited until there was a crowded field so that the forces against him would be fractured.

This is turning into the perfect storm.

@LeBroc,
Yeah, like living under one authoritarian regime after another like the people in Russia and China has been so great.

Boreas
19-03-16, 06:44
Canada should prepare ownself for American immigration :thinking:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/02/29/celebrities-say-theyll-leave-country-if-donald-trump-wins

bicicleur
19-03-16, 11:30
Trump is considered one of 10 biggest danger to world's economy by The Economist magazine.
https://gfs.eiu.com/Archive.aspx?archiveType=globalrisk


April 2016

https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_20.pngChina experiences a hard landing (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2871)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngRussia's interventions in Ukraine and Syria precede a new "cold war" (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2872)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngCurrency volatility culminates in an emerging markets corporate debt crisis (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2873)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.pngBeset by external and internal pressures, the EU begins to fracture (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2874)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.png"Grexit" is followed by a euro zone break-up (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2875)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngDonald Trump wins the US presidential election (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2876)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngThe rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilises the global economy (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2877)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngThe UK votes to leave the EU (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2878)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngChinese expansionism prompts a clash of arms in the South China Sea (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2879)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_4.pngA collapse in investment in the oil sector prompts a future oil price shock (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2880)



for what it is worth :

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/faber-id-vote-trump-because-165933151.html

Faber: I'd vote for Trump because 'Hillary Clinton will destroy the whole world'
Faber is nicknamed 'Dr Doom'.

There are a lot of Dr Dooms around, here on this forum and elsewhere.

Maciamo
19-03-16, 11:49
for what it is worth :

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/faber-id-vote-trump-because-165933151.html

Faber: I'd vote for Trump because 'Hillary Clinton will destroy the whole world'


Faber is nicknamed 'Dr Doom'.

There are a lot of Dr Dooms around, here on this forum and elsewhere.


The problem is that he doesn't explain why he thinks Hilary will destroy the whole world. I am not following the campaign closely, but I still don't understand what's terribly wrong about Hilary Clinton, apart from the known corruption charges (inevitable in top politicians, so I don't think other candidates would fare any better).

Maleth
19-03-16, 11:49
While 60% of Republicans don't support Trump as the nominee of the Republican Party, and 40% at least say they'd be willing to vote for a third party even if it meant electing Hillary Clinton, what is happening in Europe might just fuel support for Trump in the next primaries.

Indeed Angela, but yet the likes of Trump did not even show up in any of the parties when nearly 3000 Americans where killed in September 11, 15 years ago. I dont think Trump supporters will be greatly influenced on what happens in Europe. I did notice however how Trump talks about Paris and Europe, he is more then willing to gives the impression that everyone is locked up in their houses and paralysed in fear which is not the case. Its easy to play on peoples imagination especially on those who never got a plane and traveled out the country. Neither was New York after those horrendous attacks. People were defiant but cautions but the rhythm picked up faster then anyone expected.

bicicleur
19-03-16, 13:15
The problem is that he doesn't explain why he thinks Hilary will destroy the whole world. I am not following the campaign closely, but I still don't understand what's terribly wrong about Hilary Clinton, apart from the known corruption charges (inevitable in top politicians, so I don't think other candidates would fare any better).

My point is there are a lot of unexplained comments here.

Yet Faber alludes at the Middle East politics of Clinton, I can think of a few things :
- failure of Arabic spring, once aplauded and supported by the west
- cooperation with Erdogan and the Saudis who deny all respect for democracy, freedom of press and human rights

It is a big mess and the west seems uncapable of or not willing to changing its Middle East policies.

Trump may not offer a solution, but neither do established politicians.

IMO it is time for some 'Realpolitik'.

ElHorsto
19-03-16, 14:59
Trump is considered one of 10 biggest danger to world's economy by The Economist magazine.
https://gfs.eiu.com/Archive.aspx?archiveType=globalrisk


April 2016

https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_20.pngChina experiences a hard landing (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2871)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngRussia's interventions in Ukraine and Syria precede a new "cold war" (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2872)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_16.pngCurrency volatility culminates in an emerging markets corporate debt crisis (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2873)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.pngBeset by external and internal pressures, the EU begins to fracture (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2874)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_15.png"Grexit" is followed by a euro zone break-up (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2875)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngDonald Trump wins the US presidential election (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2876)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_12.pngThe rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilises the global economy (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2877)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngThe UK votes to leave the EU (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2878)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_8.pngChinese expansionism prompts a clash of arms in the South China Sea (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2879)
https://gfs.eiu.com/images/icons/smallrisk/globalRisk_4.pngA collapse in investment in the oil sector prompts a future oil price shock (https://gfs.eiu.com/Article.aspx?articleType=gr&articleId=2880)



They forgot North Korea and Iran. Else this list of scapegoats is pretty much complete.

Angela
19-03-16, 17:16
Hillary Clinton has been an extremely polarizing figure in American politics for decades. Her recent and obvious misuse of security documents and blatant lies about it just reinforce already existing attitudes toward her. I'm going to have a severe crisis of conscience if I wind up having to vote for her.

LeBrok
19-03-16, 17:34
The problem is that he doesn't explain why he thinks Hilary will destroy the whole world. I am not following the campaign closely, but I still don't understand what's terribly wrong about Hilary Clinton, apart from the known corruption charges (inevitable in top politicians, so I don't think other candidates would fare any better).Exactly. We can assume that Clinton economic policy will be a continuation of Obama's. As we know, US economy is doing quite good, actually one of the best of established and big economies in the world. Clinton might be a good bet for everyone wanting to maintain status quo and is afraid of uncertainty of Trum presidency. Keeping status quo till there is a better choice in 4 years.

Angela
19-03-16, 21:45
A group of about fifty protestors tried to close down a main road to a Trump event. These kinds of attempts to shut down free speech just enrage his followers all the more and the organizers run the very real risk of making him even more popular. I'm starting to get really pissed off myself. His supporters also have the right to go to his rallies.

There were also a few thousand people marching on the Trump Tower in Manhattan. They didn't have a permit but were marching down the middle of the street, blocking traffic. When the police tried to get them out of the street and onto the sidewalks, they rushed the police. They've also been rushing the barricades around Trump Tower. From what I can see, the police are being very cautious and finely treading the line between the right to protest versus the rights of other citizens. However, when these professional protestors start throwing things or attacking the police they should be hauled off to jail.

Twilight
19-03-16, 23:22
A group of about fifty protestors tried to close down a main road to a Trump event. These kinds of attempts to shut down free speech just enrage his followers all the more and the organizers run the very real risk of making him even more popular. I'm starting to get really pissed off myself. His supporters also have the right to go to his rallies.

There were also a few thousand people marching on the Trump Tower in Manhattan. They didn't have a permit but were marching down the middle of the street, blocking traffic. When the police tried to get them out of the street and onto the sidewalks, they rushed the police. They've also been rushing the barricades around Trump Tower. From what I can see, the police are being very cautious and finely treading the line between the right to protest versus the rights of other citizens. However, when these professional protestors start throwing things or attacking the police they should be hauled off to jail.

As much as I love free speech, I can't help but notice how divided the news system is. One set of news groups say that Trump is kicking out the entire Mexican people out of America and the KKK spam calls people. The other side says that Trump is just kicking out only illegal immigrants. One side of Bernie says he's a socialist yet the other says that he wants to create a greener America.

So yes, a lot of confusion and fingerpointing.

Fire Haired14
20-03-16, 00:07
There were also a few thousand people marching on the Trump Tower in Manhattan. ....From what I can see, the police are being very cautious and finely treading the line between the right to protest versus the rights of other citizens. However, when these professional protestors start throwing things or attacking the police they should be hauled off to jail.

I wonder if America's obsession with freedom-fighters, democracy, and the people is responsible. We see injustice where there is none and have temper-tantrum when ever someone dis agrees with our protests, and wrongly view them as evil authoritarian figures. I think this could be why idiot protesters recently have been, swearing at Police officers, pushing against police officers, and destroying their cities.

Do you think these type of pointless and violent protests have been more popular in recent years than in the past? IMO, American children need to learn to respect authority more than their parents do. This is especially a problem for Black and Hispanic kids.

You'll hear 50%+ of Black teenagers cry about Ferguson, then the next day with their pants hanging down, dis respecting their teachers and shoot other Black teenagers. It's sick. Our country can't continue to treat the cry baby protesters and thugs as victims.

DuPidh
20-03-16, 00:55
Immigration was last on the concerns of voters yesterday. Only 8-10% of voters in each state cited it as their primary issue. What is driving this phenomenon is concern over the economy and a belief that most professional politicians have let them down. Immigration only factors in as part of the concern over jobs by blue collar workers who believe that Mexicans and Central Americans are taking their jobs and if not, driving down wages.

Trump voters have watched way too much tv, and obviously don't read very much. They think that being able to make money in real estate and running a reality show about business means that you know how to fix the economy in the face of global headwinds. It ain't necessarily so. They also are a very trusting bunch. At least with politicians you have their past actions as a guide. At this point I have no idea what Trump really believes.

One thing that African-Americans believe and fear, although it has not been part of the campaign rhetoric, is that some of this Trump vote is from people who also resent that a disproportionate share of the people on welfare are African-Americans, welfare that is subsidized, they believe, by their hard earned dollars. I do think that is probably part of the subtext. Crime rates in African-American ghettos also is a factor, and things like the "Black Lives Matter" movement. To Bicicleur's point, those "taboos" have not been broken. No one has introduced that into the discussion.

The Ohio returns are interesting. In the state where they really know him, and his lack of millionaires willing to fund his campaign wasn't a factor, Kasich has won over Trump by more than 15 points. On the all important question of the economy he trumped Trump by way more than that. He also beat him on honesty, which is important to me, at least. He's a very decent guy, Kasich. I'd be more than happy to vote for him, but if things are looking good for Trump, and Cruz looks like he's the only one who could knock him out, I'd hold my nose and vote for him too.

Does that mean I think he has a path? Not really. Even if campaign money were to start to flow to him now, it's too late.

Your writings about DNA, or history or science in these forums are enjoyable, full of substance which I have enjoyed reading. Your political writings however lack objectivity. They resemble the writings of school teacher who is aware that her writings might be read by the superiors and should be in line with social engineering policy that has been in play for many years. (short: Politically correct)
But you know Trump is rising not because idiots are his supporters, but because he is on the side of the truth. Is Trump going to win? Possibly. Clinton has no strengths to overwhelm Trump. She could not beat Obama who was easily beatable at that time, why is she now going to shock the world by decimating Trump!

Maleth
20-03-16, 10:44
Clinton has no strengths to overwhelm Trump. She could not beat Obama who was easily beatable at that time, why is she now going to shock the world by decimating Trump!

Never underestimate a woman's strength. So if Obama was easily beatable at the time, how come both John McCain and later Joe Biden missed beating him in the General Elections? Just trying to understand the logic.

bicicleur
20-03-16, 11:16
we know the rhetoric Trump uses to get the Repblican nomination, it is in full swing
I wonder what rhetoric he will use against Clinton
he might sing a completely different tune

Angela
20-03-16, 14:43
I wonder if America's obsession with freedom-fighters, democracy, and the people is responsible. We see injustice where there is none and have temper-tantrum when ever someone dis agrees with our protests, and wrongly view them as evil authoritarian figures. I think this could be why idiot protesters recently have been, swearing at Police officers, pushing against police officers, and destroying their cities.

Do you think these type of pointless and violent protests have been more popular in recent years than in the past? IMO, American children need to learn to respect authority more than their parents do. This is especially a problem for Black and Hispanic kids.

You'll hear 50%+ of Black teenagers cry about Ferguson, then the next day with their pants hanging down, dis respecting their teachers and shoot other Black teenagers. It's sick. Our country can't continue to treat the cry baby protesters and thugs as victims.

Being an American isn't about being a member of a certain ethnic or racial or religious group. It's about a shared commitment to a certain set of ideals, ideals embodied in a certain history and in certain founding documents, the most important of which are the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. Democracy and concern for the rights of all the people are part of the fabric of those documents. From my perspective, therefore, if you're not "obsessed" with those things you're not an American at all.

From that same perspective, there are two competing sets of rights at these rallies, both of which have to be accommodated imo. One is the right to publicly espouse political ideas which some people may find objectionable. The other is the right of the people who find it objectionable to protest that political speech. However, if they don't have a permit or cause disruption it's against the law and they can be arrested and prosecuted. Whether they are or not is a judgment call best left to local law enforcement. At any rate, the protestors should be prepared for the consequences. Indeed, usually they are prepared for arrest, and in fact seek it out so they can get publicity for their cause, which is why sometimes it's best to not arrest the protestors for minor infractions. You also don't want to exacerbate any existing tensions and help make the situation worse. Any violence against people or property is never permissible, however, imo, and has to result in arrest or things can rapidly get out of hand.

There's absolutely no comparison between what's going on right now and the mass protests that went on during the Civil Rights and Vietnam War Era. The Civil Rights protests weren't about stopping segregationists from speaking; they were about protesting the unequal treatment of black Americans through Jim Crow laws, among other things. Those non-violent, often prayerful protests were met with water cannons, attack dogs, the burning to death of little children in black churches, the assassination of Medgar Evers and Martin Luther King and others. These horrors and the sight of grown white men and women cursing at and spitting in the faces of little black girls in their starched dresses trying to go to an integrated school so horrified the general American public that it lead to the enactment of various civil rights laws.

The Vietnam protests were different; they did at times turn violent and ugly. It was a terrible time in American history. The left turned not just against the Vietnam War, or Lyndon Johnson, or the right in general, they even hounded returning vets and people like Hubert Humphrey, a Democrat, and by all accounts a decent man. Bill Ayres, a man whom the right claims was a friend of Obama's was part of a group that set bombs and killed people. That kind of behavior actually led to the election of Richard Nixon. That's what I'm afraid will happen with Trump.

The kinds of protests that took place after the Rodney King affair, Ferguson, and Baltimore aren't examples of non-violent civil disobedience; they're mindless, senseless riots where people are destroying their own communities out of misdirected rage. In my personal opinion Martin Luther King would be horrified to see it if he were still alive.

It's not, btw, that I think racism no longer exists in this society, because I know it does. For one thing, black men are treated differently by law enforcement. There's no denying it as far as I'm concerned. Sometimes it's racist cops, and they do exist. Sometimes it's not even intentional, but just because black people are disproportionately poorer. If your family can afford to hire a really good attorney, get you out on bail, send you to a therapist, get you a community service job while you're waiting for your trial and show up in force at trial to show support, you're going to get a better outcome than if you're some ghetto black kid who has to rely on public defenders and has to spend the whole time in prison. There are also people who although they don't say it will deny a job or an apartment to someone because that person is black. It's just that the dysfunction in poor black communities also stems from drug abuse, broken families, the incredibly high illegitimacy rate in poor black communities, the learned dependence on public assistance, the lack of role models etc. Until those issues are addressed there's never going to be any improvement.

Well, now I'll get off my soapbox, but you did ask. :)

@Dupidh,
My belief that all human beings should be treated fairly and equally before the law has nothing at all to do with any desire on my part to hew to a particular ideological line. Those beliefs come partly from my own natural sense of justice and compassion, I think, but also from both my training at home and my religious education. You've heard of Christianity I take it?

Fire Haired14
20-03-16, 15:32
@Angela,

Thanks for the helpful response. I understand worrying about bad authority and rights of citizens a very most important value of America. I whole-heartily support that. I guess it's impossible to bring an end to abusive cops and cry-baby protesters, so there'll always be unnecessary conflict at protests. It can be reduced though. The protesters, in violent protests in the 1960s, were definitely more justified than the ones going on now. The 1960s I think was good for America, because it ended some ridiculousness and brought in extreme liberalism. We need to see extreme conservationism and extreme liberalism, to know what the balance is. IMO, in the near future, a balance that takes out bads of both extreme will become popular.

Anyways off subject: What do you think is the solution to the cycle of poverty and no fathers and crime in African Americans. I know that sounds bad, I'm not saying African Americans are a train-reck, just this is an issue and what to know your opinion.

Angela
20-03-16, 17:44
@Maleth,

I think one of the main reasons that Clinton didn't beat Obama for the Democratic Party nomination is simply that she's not black and he is. African-Americans are a big chunk of the Democratic Party vote, and there's no way that they were going to vote for her, no matter how much of an increase in spending for social programs she promised or how many times Bill tried to remind them of all they, the Clintons, had done for them in the past. She's also a terrible candidate. Bill Clinton has the "common touch" and can seem sincere even when he's lying through his teeth or has just said two contradictory things in one sentence. She's totally different. She seems as phony as a two dollar bill.

In terms of the general election, it was more of the same. All the blacks, all the minorities, in fact, voted for President Obama, along with all liberal whites and even centrist whites who sincerely hoped, I think, that his election would heal the remaining racial divides.

Just generally, there aren't enough "non-liberal" white votes to win the presidency. The Republicans have to get all the disparate wings of their party together, plus get more than their share of the independents, and hopefully poach some of the Latino vote. George Bush was able to do that; he got more than 30% of the Latino vote, based largely on his record as Governor of Texas and the fact that he didn't threaten to deport people who had been here for decades. McCain and Romney couldn't do it. They couldn't get virtually any of the Latino vote, but perhaps more importantly the "right" wing of the Republican Party thought they were too "centrist", and some of them stayed home. Some Evangelicals also stayed home because Romney is a Mormon. They called it ideological purity; I called it shooting yourself in the foot. :) Added to that I just don't think either Romney or McCain really "took it" to the Democrats in those campaigns. Romney could have shredded President Obama in some of those debates, but he didn't do it. I don't know if it's just not his nature or he was afraid to do it for fear of being called a racist. This is what has happened; if you criticize the politics of a black man then you're a racist. Then there's the fact that supposedly a lot of Americans resented Romney for being so rich. Of course, they don't resent Trump for being rich, in fact richer, and having also led a charmed life and gotten a lot of help from his father. I guess the difference is that if you talk like an out of work truck driver who's had too much to drink it's all ok.

@Fire-Haired,

I think it's pretty clear that throwing money at the problem in the form of give away programs doesn't work. I don't know if you know about Jack Kemp. He was a Republican politician who advocated setting up "enterprise zones" in minority communities.

The self-respect that comes from a decently paid job would definitely help, as would the fact that you can support a family on those kinds of jobs instead of having to deal drugs or steal.

Welfare laws should stop penalizing poor families of any race if a man and woman live together with their children. Some changes have been made, I think, but I believe it's still the case that a woman can get more money for herself and her two children if the man's income, small as it is, isn't included because he isn't living in the home.

Minority parents should be given the option of getting vouchers and using them to put their children in charter schools or the better performing Catholic schools instead of forcing them to stay in poorly performing public schools because the public school teachers' unions give the Democrats a lot of donations.

The rest is up to the African-American community leaders, in my opinion, including the pastors. It's beyond me how Christian pastors can ignore the high rates of illegitimacy among the members of their flock, and its detrimental effects on the community, even if they don't believe in the sexual immorality of pre-marital sex. The biggest predictor of poverty in this country is being born to a young, uneducated, single mother. There's nothing cool or hip about it. What a rich movie star might be able to do without major harm to her children, some seventeen year old girl living in public housing on welfare can't. I don't really care if the reason there's more tolerance for this is because the slave system destroyed the black family and made women headed families the norm. It isn't functional. Someone has to be working because you need money to raise a family, and someone has to be able to supervise the children. I'm not saying that the father has to be the one to work, but it's all easier if there are two parents to share both responsibilities. It's also my opinion that children, especially sons perhaps, need fathers. The nuclear family works better than these ad hoc arrangements, like it or not, and whether that sounds too conservative and traditional or not.

Likewise, using drugs may be a great escape, but they cost money, money these people don't have without some sort of illegality, and when you're straight again, your problems are even worse.

When traditional black Republicans try to spread this message they're excoriated by other African Americans. Middle class blacks just stay quiet it seems to me. It also seems to me that these kinds of behavior patterns are becoming more and more prevalent in white communities as well. They're certainly pretty prevalent in a lot of Latino communities. So, all in all I'm not very optimistic about where things are headed.

Maleth
20-03-16, 20:45
I think one of the main reasons that Clinton didn't beat Obama for the Democratic Party nomination is simply that she's not black and he is. African-Americans are a big chunk of the Democratic Party vote, and there's no way that they were going to vote for her, no matter how much of an increase in spending for social programs she promised or how many times Bill tried to remind them of all they, the Clintons, had done for them in the past.

Very probable. It seems more of a realistic reason rather then simply for Obama being easily beatable, so she must be terribly week as per Dupidh comment.


Just generally, there aren't enough "non-liberal" white votes to win the presidency. The Republicans have to get all the disparate wings of their party together, plus get more than their share of the independents, and hopefully poach some of the Latino vote. George Bush was able to do that; he got more than 30% of the Latino vote, based largely on his record as Governor of Texas and the fact that he didn't threaten to deport people who had been here for decades. McCain and Romney couldn't do it. They couldn't get virtually any of the Latino vote, but perhaps more importantly the "right" wing of the Republican Party thought they were too "centrist", and some of them stayed home. Some Evangelicals also stayed home because Romney is a Mormon. They called it ideological purity; I called it shooting yourself in the foot. :) Added to that I just don't think either Romney or McCain really "took it" to the Democrats in those campaigns. Romney could have shredded President Obama in some of those debates, but he didn't do it. I don't know if it's just not his nature or he was afraid to do it for fear of being called a racist. This is what has happened; if you criticize the politics of a black man then you're a racist. Then there's the fact that supposedly a lot of Americans resented Romney for being so rich. Of course, they don't resent Trump for being rich, in fact richer, and having also led a charmed life and gotten a lot of help from his father. I guess the difference is that if you talk like an out of work truck driver who's had too much to drink it's all ok.

Oh it was Romney. My bad. What you explained seems to be the case. I guess it gets quite complex with all the different racial groups and they all have different histories and starting points, but yet they are all US citizens. So lots of strategic calculations need to be made, which can be very tricky indeed. Funnily enough even in Democracies where such (racial) situations do not exist or are not so prevalent, one will still find the same mind sets more or less of Liberal vs Conservatism very often with the education and the economic situation of the person that is driven to get aligned to one side or the other.

Going back to the present scenario, I still believe however that personally the biggest novelty in this election is not Trump as (With all respect) he could be seen typical American in many ways reminiscent to the old cowboys and Indians days, but the rise of socialism which I think its going to grow in the coming years. In my opinion I believe that life in America is extraordinary tough for the people in the lower strata, and the general psyche dictates that if you are in that position its all your fault so not very sympathetic to receive any kind of assistance. (Just talking about my impression as i really do not know how the system works with these peoples). Maybe that is why socialism. Some people do abuse of social assistance of course, but the general system will probably bring about inclusion and dignity and in return it pays well to the country in general in many spheres. Not everyone has started off on a level playing field and some must have been more disadvantaged then others and NOT straight forward to recuperate, which not many would agree too. This will create a viscous circle not easy to eliminate.

The other reality (to me at least) that Obama has been there nearly 8 years now, and I dont believe that these groups I mentioned have improved their positions, and there is still a situation where the Rich did get richer and the poor poorer. (correct me if I am wrong). I feel that irrelevant to who will win the presidential elections, the US is moving to a three party system as the Centralist, Democrats and Republicans will have much more in common then the loyalists. They would want to do thing on their own steam.

Piro Ilir
27-03-16, 13:12
I have to admit, I don't really like any of them. I voted Rubio, as the one closer to the center, still having some chance of winning if super delegates choose so, and as a lesser evil. I don't think any of them is a good material for a leader. I would rather pick Obama or Romney from last election. On brighter side we have one billion dollar worth of reality show for a whole year paid by candidates and their faithful.
In my opinion Trump is not a real candidate. He is infiltrated by Clinton. [emoji6] . Clinton it's trying everything to win these elections. Trump is a puppet of Clinton. Trump declared that if he will be not the official candidate of republican party, he will be an independent candidate . This means that he is playing the game in Clinton's interests

LeBrok
27-03-16, 18:20
In my opinion Trump is not a real candidate. He is infiltrated by Clinton. [emoji6] . Clinton it's trying everything to win these elections. Trump is a puppet of Clinton. Trump declared that if he will be not the official candidate of republican party, he will be an independent candidate . This means that he is playing the game in Clinton's interestsIt seems that way, isn't it. Though honestly this one is destined to Conspiracy Theory dangen. Trump is ambitious enough to want presidency by himself alone, and he could make the biggest reality show ever, and be the main character. That's all Trump!
Maybe it is a payback for being a laughing stock like this (Warning, it is really funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8TwRmX6zs4

Piro Ilir
28-03-16, 12:56
It seems that way, isn't it. Though honestly this one is destined to Conspiracy Theory dangen. Trump is ambitious enough to want presidency by himself alone, and he could make the biggest reality show ever, and be the main character. That's all Trump!
Maybe it is a payback for being a laughing stock like this (Warning, it is really funny):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8TwRmX6zs4
Seems we have four candidates running for the white house:
Clinton, Sanders, Cruz and Trump. I hope only Sanders don't win these elections. He looks too leftist. For me personally I hope that the new elected president would stop this new Russian- Chinese expansion. If USA don't stop it now, tomorrow will be too late. The new president should do something to deal with this new threat.

Angela
01-05-16, 16:38
I've thought that Trump couldn't win the White House, but if these kinds of Trump protesters keep this stuff up, maybe he will. Talk about counter-productive...

http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Trump-protesters-burn-American-flag-Twitter-AJPlus-575x431.jpg

http://www.gopusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/mexican_flag_protest.jpg

Maleth
02-05-16, 15:57
I've thought that Trump couldn't win the White House, but if these kinds of Trump protesters keep this stuff up, maybe he will. Talk about counter-productive...

http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Trump-protesters-burn-American-flag-Twitter-AJPlus-575x431.jpg

http://www.gopusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/mexican_flag_protest.jpg

Angela in my opinion if Trump will make it to the white house it will not be because of this behavior although its always condemnable, but because the majority of the American people approves to the general Trump psyche which is very defined by now to be provocative on many fronts. That would mean that the majority of the American people would think that, that will be good for them and that is what they need.

If Trump makes it to the White house we are going to see a different world order which I am defiantly not looking forward to. There is nothing I wish more then to be proven wrong and have to swallow all I think about the man

bicicleur
02-05-16, 17:45
I've thought that Trump couldn't win the White House, but if these kinds of Trump protesters keep this stuff up, maybe he will. Talk about counter-productive...

http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Trump-protesters-burn-American-flag-Twitter-AJPlus-575x431.jpg

http://www.gopusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/mexican_flag_protest.jpg

it proves that there are also stupid people not voting for Trump
there are so many stupid people around, if you can get their support, you rule
it is like that in America, and even more so in most other countries all over the world

Angela
02-05-16, 18:49
Angela in my opinion if Trump will make it to the white house it will not be because of this behavior although its always condemnable, but because the majority of the American people approves to the general Trump psyche which is very defined by now to be provocative on many fronts. That would mean that the majority of the American people would think that, that will be good for them and that is what they need.

If Trump makes it to the White house we are going to see a different world order which I am defiantly not looking forward to. There is nothing I wish more then to be proven wrong and have to swallow all I think about the man

I don't think that's the case, Maleth. Trump has a 76% disapproval rating among the American public. The problem is that in the early days of the Republican primaries there were 14 candidates at one point. They divided up the anti-Trump vote into so many small pieces of the pie that he got the highest number of votes and therefore in most cases all the delegates. A month ago, when registered Republicans were asked if they wanted Trump to be the nominee, only about 1/3 said yes. It's going up to about 50% now because Ted Cruz is the only other person left standing, and he's too conservative socially and religiously for Americans, and he also has a reputation as being a back stabber and double dealer. When asked about him, the former Speaker of the House said he's Lucifer, and in a town full of SOBs, he was the worst.

The thing is, if it winds up to be Clinton v Cruz, what will people do? As I said, Trump's disapproval is at 76%, but Hillary's is at about 67%. I suppose if Trump can drive her negatives higher so that they surpass his, he could win. However, he won't get the black vote, or the Hispanic vote, or probably any of the Asian vote, which could add up to 30-35% of the total electorate. Then throw in a lot of women, including me, who just can't vote for him. (Women make up about 53% of the voting public and while some women would vote for him, a lot wouldn't.) So, are there enough remaining white votes for him to win? I don't know.


Bicicleur:it proves that there are also stupid people not voting for Trump
there are so many stupid people around, if you can get their support, you rule
it is like that in America, and even more so in most other countries all over the world

I couldn't have said it better.

Maleth
02-05-16, 20:26
I don't think that's the case, Maleth. Trump has a 76% disapproval rating among the American public.

I just hope it stays that way, although if he will get the nomination, which looks like he will, probably those figures will be set to change. Once he will get the nomination he will lick the wounds he inflicted on his contenders (like he did with Rubio who became the bright boy he can work with when he dropped out) and probably would do the same with Cruz. He focus his guns (insults) towards Hillary which many might find appealing. The momentum of 'if you cant beat him join him' will grow. He might get a few Muslim, Black, Hispanic Americans to rally behind him to ease and maybe win some votes from these groups. So we just need to wait and see the outcome. If he managed to get away with so much contradictions and insults by now, clearly there is a formula that is working. I mean he said he is willing to use a Nuclear bomb on ISIS. Can please someone explain were this bomb will fall?.....and he wins state after state........very sad if you ask me.

LABERIA
02-05-16, 20:40
I just hope it stays that way, although if he will get the nomination, which looks like he will, probably those figures will be set to change. Once he will get the nomination he will lick the wounds he inflicted on his contenders (like he did with Rubio who became the bright boy he can work with when he dropped out) and probably would do the same with Cruz. He focus his guns (insults) towards Hillary which many might find appealing. The momentum of 'if you cant beat him join him' will grow. He might get a few Muslim, Black, Hispanic Americans to rally behind him to ease and maybe win some votes from these groups. So we just need to wait and see the outcome. If he managed to get away with so much contradictions and insults by now, clearly there is a formula that is working. I mean he said he is willing to use a Nuclear bomb on ISIS. Can please someone explain were this bomb will fall?.....and he wins state after state........very sad if you ask me.





In the Mediterranean Sea.

Maleth
04-05-16, 13:32
In the Mediterranean Sea.

Thank you so much for info Laberia, at least someone knows. I will get my bunker and space food ready :smile:

bicicleur
04-05-16, 14:22
now Ted Cruz is out of the race, I expect Trump to change his tune

LeBrok
04-05-16, 16:36
now Ted Cruz is out of the race, I expect Trump to change his tune why would he?

sparkey
06-05-16, 20:23
why would he?

Because he is ambitious and has no principles.

LeBrok
06-05-16, 20:39
Because he is ambitious and has no principles.I have no doubt that he will behave like a normal politician, or even in worse hypocritical form than average would, and say and do anything to win. I just asked the question to see what the poster had in mind exactly.

Angela
06-05-16, 21:13
Well, he kept on saying that as soon as it looked like he had the nomination he would start acting so "presidential" that we wouldn't believe it. Well, I'm still waiting. :) Last thing I heard, he was citing the National Enquirer rag that poor Ted Cruz's father was in a picture standing next to Lee Harvey Oswald. Really, the man has no shame.

As to the outreach to Hispanics he needs, so far it's limited to tweets saying "I Love Hispanics"! Would he dare dump "The Wall" promise? I don't think so.

On the other hand, the economy numbers were bad, China is stumbling, and thanks to the environmental lobby, Clinton is against the pipeline and for more controls on coal production, while Trump keeps promising more jobs, and wants to dig, baby, dig, which is why the Coal Association is now backing him.

Of course, he's still a loose cannon in terms of foreign policy.

So, will people vote what they think is in their economic interest, or will they be more afraid of a lunatic like this having his finger on the nuclear button.

Bottom line, how can people vote for someone when it's clear we have no idea what he would really do as president?

It's too depressing. That's why I'm barely watching the news.

LeBrok
07-05-16, 04:57
As to the outreach to Hispanics he needs, so far it's limited to tweets saying "I Love Hispanics"! Would he dare dump "The Wall" promise? I don't think so. He was very quiet on this one when presenting his foreign policy, I mean his foreign dribble, recently. And quiet on many more of his loud and outlandish early promises.


On the other hand, the economy numbers were bad, China is stumbling, and thanks to the environmental lobby, Clinton is against the pipeline and for more controls on coal production, while Trump keeps promising more jobs, and wants to dig, baby, dig, which is why the Coal Association is now backing him. Of course, he's still a loose cannon in terms of foreign policy.On one hand he might be good for my province Alberta rich in oil. However, he might mess up the world's economy so much, spinning it into another recession, that oil will not be worth much anyway.



So, will people vote what they think is in their economic interest, or will they be more afraid of a lunatic like this having his finger on the nuclear button.

Bottom line, how can people vote for someone when it's clear we have no idea what he would really do as president?

It's too depressing. That's why I'm barely watching the news.Amen, sister.

sparkey
07-05-16, 06:11
I'll be voting for one of these guys:


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

bicicleur
07-05-16, 09:10
I have no doubt that he will behave like a normal politician, or even in worse hypocritical form than average would, and say and do anything to win. I just asked the question to see what the poster had in mind exactly.

exactly, they are all hypocrits

Angela
07-05-16, 18:49
exactly, they are all hypocrits

Hillary Clinton is already making her pivot toward the center, and trying to remind people that Bill will be back in the White House too. (I wonder if she's still throwing lamps at his head. :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/hillary-clinton-republican-party.html?_r=0

Maleth
08-05-16, 20:53
Oh! Jerry springer was blamed for the present verbal violence during the party nomination race.....:laughing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDS1NUsqXNM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDS1NUsqXNM)

LeBrok
09-05-16, 01:07
Oh! Jerry springer was blamed for the present verbal violence during the party nomination race.....:laughing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDS1NUsqXNM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDS1NUsqXNM)LoL, voice of reason from Jerry Springer. He is smarter that I gave him credit for.

bancroft
09-05-16, 09:19
I think all of them are same that making promises and most of their promises will remain in their lips.

Piro Ilir
02-06-16, 15:47
In my opinion Trump is not a real candidate. He is infiltrated by Clinton. [emoji6] . Clinton it's trying everything to win these elections. Trump is a puppet of Clinton. Trump declared that if he will be not the official candidate of republican party, he will be an independent candidate . This means that he is playing the game in Clinton's interests
Above my post of 23 March.

I still stand on this. Clinton is the new president. The republicans should reorganize or reforms their party. Really, really a strong woman.

After she get the presidency, for his job well done, Trump will be rewarded with millions of dollars by the signing of new contracts with the new administration.


This is my conspiracy imagination [emoji3].

Yetos
02-06-16, 21:34
Hillary Clinton is already making her pivot toward the center, and trying to remind people that Bill will be back in the White House too. (I wonder if she's still throwing lamps at his head. :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/hillary-clinton-republican-party.html?_r=0



:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Bill will be alone? or with Monica? :grin:

bicicleur
13-06-16, 08:20
the Orlando shooting proves a point Trump made :

blind hatred against western values exists in Islam communities but Obama and Clinton always go into denial on that subject
Trump will not go into a rational discussion, he'll play on sentiments
but as long as Obama and Clinton have such taboos, Trump will gain from that

Maleth
13-06-16, 09:02
the Orlando shooting proves a point Trump made :

blind hatred against western values exists in Islam communities but Obama and Clinton always go into denial on that subject
Trump will not go into a rational discussion, he'll play on sentiments
but as long as Obama and Clinton have such taboos, Trump will gain from that

That is exactly what makes Trump an extremely dangerous person. When you are president and a leader you need to be rational otherwise simply not fit for the job. There are two sides of the argument not a prompt reaction on sentiments.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scZpd5Zp0KY

bicicleur
13-06-16, 10:02
That is exactly what makes Trump an extremely dangerous person. When you are president and a leader you need to be rational otherwise simply not fit for the job. There are two sides of the argument not a prompt reaction on sentiments.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scZpd5Zp0KY

the majority of the Muslims is not extremist, but the Muslims that sympathise with extremism are not a tiny minority either
it is time to face it, and these American Muslim leaders should acknowledge that too, now it looks more that they are doing dammage control with their excuses
the dangerous people are those political correct people that go into denial all the time
they came up with statistics that the majority of victims of violent attacks in the US are non-Islam related
if you watch closely all these statistics started in 2002, the year after 9/11, why?
now with San Bernardino and Orlando they will have to find another excuse
they try to twist the truth but in the long run they can't get away with it
that is when people like Trump show up

because these political correct people are as irrational in their arguing as Trump

Maleth
13-06-16, 13:53
the majority of the Muslims is not extremist, but the Muslims that sympathise with extremism are not a tiny minority either
it is time to face it, and these American Muslim leaders should acknowledge that too, now it looks more that they are doing dammage control with their excuses
the dangerous people are those political correct people that go into denial all the time
they came up with statistics that the majority of victims of violent attacks in the US are non-Islam related
if you watch closely all these statistics started in 2002, the year after 9/11, why?
now with San Bernardino and Orlando they will have to find another excuse
they try to twist the truth but in the long run they can't get away with it
that is when people like Trump show up

because these political correct people are as irrational in their arguing as Trump

I think the Islamic mentality on a number of affairs is quite well known with everyone and I dont get the feeling that someone is in denial. The challenge is how to solve it without collective punishment and without measures that will make things much worse then what they are. In regards to this particular case my mind does not register Islamist terrorist (although its so easy to say so).

Firstly I would say a psychopath, as only psychopaths are able to do such a thing and they can be from any creed or race like so many others we have around the world.

Secondly I would say his disorder is fueled (and all the others who commit crimes of this nature) by the background of the individual and the obsessions that such people will be affiliated with. In this case would be Islamic fundamentalism. I also doubt if we would ever be able to know the full story of what has driven this terrorist to become one and what demons he had to wrestle with. I would not exclude that he would have had homosexual tendencies himself and the circumstances would have made his life impossible full of guilt and resentment. But those are deeper things we will never find out. He had a very short marriage and beated up his wife for not doing the laundry example. In return suppression and depression would make you cling to something. Some commit suicide quitley to get away from an unbearable situation. Others want to bring down the world with them. In a shooting in the army quarters some years back was just a question of jelousy for not getting a promotion or something....I have to go back and look for the case.

Regarding western values just have a look at the tone of this post from someone who is not from Iran or Saudi Arabia but born in the USA

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31793-Bestiality-the-new-Homosexuality?highlight=Homosexuality

and dont forget that a poster on Eupidia (not from an Islamic country) who I have not seen for some time now had said I would shoot homosexuals. If I will find the post (unless it was removed) and post in here.

Yes I agree with you with Islamic teachings in general and their stubborn rhetoric will push psychopaths to carry out these despicable evil crimes and that what needs to be tackled.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vev-OzHQy94

and the probability is that this Imam is Gay, this is the physiological state these people get into through perverted 'religious' teachings. I have seen this behavior in different grades not only with Muslim people but even other conservative religious groups. Is this Imam still in the USA?. Is he arrested for inciting not only hate but death?

On the other hand collective punishment does not work and firebacks with more horrendous results. We also know that many muslims do not agree with this kind of perversion. We know that from not so distant history what generalization does.

Yetos
13-06-16, 14:28
I have said it before

All MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS,
BUT
ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIMS

why? cause they do not isolate the extremist preachers.

LeBrok
13-06-16, 16:38
On the other hand collective punishment does not work and firebacks with more horrendous results. We also know that many muslims do not agree with this kind of perversion. We know that from not so distant history what generalization does. Exactly the point. Trump and other short sighted people to fall prey to these terrorists acts creating phobia against all Muslims. This is exactly what IS wants, what this terrorist act was for, to start global war of all Muslims against all unbelievers, Armageddon and global Califat.

Angela
13-06-16, 17:48
I think this will help Trump, unfortunately. I also agree that this man was probably psychotic, or at least suffering from depression and bi-polar disorder.

On the other hand, in a broader sense, anyone who joins ISIS and does these kinds of horrendous acts is borderline psychotic in my opinion. Also, he made two trips to Saudi Arabia, and was questioned twice by the FBI, so this is not just some crazy who snapped and latched on to the ideology to commit suicide by cop.

So, definitely, the ideology itself has to be fought. We also have to stop with the political correctness. If the most current reports are correct, he was talking about killing people in the name of Islam to co-workers, who reported it, but the company allegedly refused to call the police or FBI for fear of profiling Muslims. This has got to stop.

How must the FBI agent who closed this case, or the company officers feel when they look at the footage of that poor mother outside the club screaming, "Where's my son? Nobody can tell me where my son is."

@Yetos,
No, all terrorists are not Muslims, or they didn't use to be. We've had IRA Irish terrorists for a long time, although they've recently been quiet.

In the U.S. we've had skin head white racist terrorists, extreme Christian terrorists, black terrorists and white Communist/Socialist terrorists in the sixties, American Indian extremists or terrorists.

In Europe there was the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof group. Communism came to power through the admitted use of terror.

It goes on and on.

bicicleur
13-06-16, 18:07
Exactly the point. Trump and other short sighted people to fall prey to these terrorists acts creating phobia against all Muslims. This is exactly what IS wants, what this terrorist act was for, to start global war of all Muslims against all unbelievers, Armageddon and global Califat.

For starters these American Muslim leaders could and should have acknowledged that Muslim fundamentalism is a worldwide problem and that even some American Muslims are also prone to the fundamentalist rhetoric. They should have warned for this allready before there was an attack. This is to little to late. They are washing their hands in innocence after harm has been done.
Even Obama never dared to criticise Islam.
It is this silence that makes Trump stronger.
Not all short sighted people are in the Trump camp.

bicicleur
13-06-16, 18:21
@Yetos,
No, all terrorists are not Muslims, or they didn't use to be. We've had IRA Irish terrorists for a long time, although they've recently been quiet.

In the U.S. we've had skin head white racist terrorists, extreme Christian terrorists, black terrorists and white Communist/Socialist terrorists in the sixties, American Indian extremists or terrorists.

In Europe there was the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof group. Communism came to power through the admitted use of terror.

It goes on and on.

Yes, these were dispicable.
But none of them (I mean terrorist groups) have ever had so much support worldwide.
None of them have had the opportunity to commit the atrocities Muslim extremism has done so far.
None of them wanted to conquer the world and persecute everyone that don't want to subject to their ideologie.
Boko Haram is killer n° 1 worldwide, ISIS is killer n°2.
If they'd find even more support and means, they'd start WW III.

It is not an American problem, it is a worldwide problem which will ultimately also affect America.

bicicleur
13-06-16, 18:38
On the other hand, in a broader sense, anyone who joins ISIS and does these kinds of horrendous acts is borderline psychotic in my opinion. Also, he made two trips to Saudi Arabia, and was questioned twice by the FBI, so this is not just some crazy who snapped and latched on to the ideology to commit suicide by cop.

So, definitely, the ideology itself has to be fought. We also have to stop with the political correctness. If the most current reports are correct, he was talking about killing people in the name of Islam to co-workers, who reported it, but the company allegedly refused to call the police or FBI for fear of profiling Muslims. This has got to stop.

How must the FBI agent who closed this case, or the company officers feel when they look at the footage of that poor mother outside the club screaming, "Where's my son? Nobody can tell me where my son is."



In Europe the problem is even worse. There are thousands or ISIS fighters coming back to Europe.
Politicians claim they are all followed and monitored. That is bullshit, that would require a manpower nobody can afford.
Putting all of them in jail, that is 'against there rights', there is to little proof, lawyers are ready and happy to defend these guys.
Furthermore the jails would be overcrowded.
Someone in jail costs the Belgian taxpayer 50.000 € every year.
Monitoring and following some one 24/24 costs some 450.000 €/year in Belgium.
So, why not admit that the system as it is organised today is unable to controll the situation?
These guys who go to another country to murder and torture other people, or these guys that preach that hatred ideology simply have to many rights.

Angela
13-06-16, 18:51
I've been a long time supporter of James Comey, the FBI director, but I was very disappointed with his public statement. He doesn't see any cognitive dissonance between on the one hand telling tell people to report anything suspicious, and on the other hand revealing that the FBI interviewed him as the result of a complaint about his behavior from an employer, but closed that investigation.

I don't see how anyone could think, albeit in hindsight, that this was the correct decision.

There's also the access to guns question. When someone has this many red flags, he should not have been able to buy firearms. His name should have been flagged.

bicicleur
13-06-16, 19:48
I've been a long time supporter of James Comey, the FBI director, but I was very disappointed with his public statement. He doesn't see any cognitive dissonance between on the one hand telling tell people to report anything suspicious, and on the other hand revealing that the FBI interviewed him as the result of a complaint about his behavior from an employer, but closed that investigation.

I don't see how anyone could think, albeit in hindsight, that this was the correct decision.



maybe there are far more such lunatics walking around in America than you can imagine ..

bicicleur
13-06-16, 19:53
There's also the access to guns question. When someone has this many red flags, he should not have been able to buy firearms. His name should have been flagged.

the free arms law in America is uncomprehensible for Europeans

on the other hand possesion of arms is forbidden or very strict regulated in Europe, yet all big criminal organisations and terrorist groups posses arms

Angela
13-06-16, 20:23
the free arms law in America is uncomprehensible for Europeans

on the other hand possesion of arms is forbidden or very strict regulated in Europe, yet all big criminal organisations and terrorist groups posses arms

There's really no point in debating the general right to bear arms in the U.S. There's enough in the constitution (although it doesn't actually say what people claim it says,in my opinion), and enough precedent from the Supreme Court on down, that owning a gun will never be banned here.

Only the fringe thinks there shouldn't be controls, however. This guy should never have been able to get guns, much less a concealed carry permit.

Criminals and terrorists will always be able to get guns. That's not to say that it isn't more difficult when there are more regulations.

I'm personally torn, honestly, partly because I tend to be a bit of a libertarian, and partly because of what I know from history.

To take a hunting rifle from rural Americans who regularly go hunting in accordance with long established custom is crazy in my opinion. The problem is really with semi-automatic weapons. How do we handle access to them? Our gun rights organizations demonize any attempt to control them because they say it's the thin edge of the wedge; once the government bans those it will ban all guns. A significant number of Americans are pushed by that fear into not supporting a total ban. Even Bernie Sanders, Socialist/Communist extraordinaire, was pro gun rights. He couldn't be anything else and get elected from Vermont, which is still a very rural state with a strong tradition of hunting.

The United States has traditionally had a mistrust of government, and particularly strong, centralized governments, and that distrust is enshrined in American institutions and laws. Some Americans believe that if private citizens don't have the means to defend themselves against armed government officials, the day could come when they would lose their liberty to a government overthrown or subverted from within. I don't think that's totally crazy. One of the first things the fascists did in Italy after coming to power was to confiscate every single gun in private hands. That's one of the reasons there was no resistance to them, and that it only started once the British and Americans started dropping weapons and ammunition in for the partisans.

On the other hand, you can have loony mothers who allow depressed, mal-adjusted teens to have access to semi-automatic weapons, as in a recent school shooting case.

Then, the carnage of the Boston Marathon terror attack was perpetrated largely by making bombs out of pressure cookers.

I don't know what the answer is...it's just a mess.

Athiudisc
14-06-16, 01:07
This event bolstered both Trump and Clinton, in the eyes of their supporters.

Trumpers: "See? Muslims are clearly dangerous and should be subject to extra scrutiny! Enough with the political correctness!"

Clintonites: "See? Guns are too dangerous to be so readily-available! We need more gun control! Enough from the gun lobbies!"

elghund
14-06-16, 01:55
Don't be bringing in Wahhabi and then try to limit my rights because they go jihad.

Yetos
14-06-16, 02:30
@Yetos,
No, all terrorists are not Muslims, or they didn't use to be. We've had IRA Irish terrorists for a long time, although they've recently been quiet.

In the U.S. we've had skin head white racist terrorists, extreme Christian terrorists, black terrorists and white Communist/Socialist terrorists in the sixties, American Indian extremists or terrorists.

In Europe there was the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof group. Communism came to power through the admitted use of terror.

It goes on and on.

Angela before 30 yes,

we had 17 November, Mafias, Red Brigade, IRA, ETA etc etc

but where are they the last 30 years?
and ok the 20 years?
after Heathrow 1970s islamic terror is rising, (Shuna)
while political terror declines,

The domino effect? the anti-muslim feeling is getting stronger, soon we will have attack on innocent muslims,
if Muslims do not isolate and protest against ISIS ideas, then we will face more terror as retaliation of societies,

At the funeral of Mohamed Ali even politician and presidents went to honor a great Muslim,
But would the same people go to the funeral of the victims of the terrorist attack? NO
why? cause they were LGBT? or because Shuna is sacred?

the last 40 years Islam is testing the West societies,
the last 20-30 years all terrorists are MUslims
The last 20 years I have not seen a Muslim gathering to protest against Foundamental Islam
Only against USA and WEST general.

LeBrok
14-06-16, 03:15
For starters these American Muslim leaders could and should have acknowledged that Muslim fundamentalism is a worldwide problem and that even some American Muslims are also prone to the fundamentalist rhetoric. They should have warned for this allready before there was an attack. This is to little to late. They are washing their hands in innocence after harm has been done.Give them some creadit. After 9/11 there were nowhere to be found. Now they are on TV right away denouncing extremists, terrorists, and intolerance to others. That's a huge progress!

Even Obama never dared to criticise Islam. or Christianity or Hinduism.

Yetos
14-06-16, 07:07
For starters these American Muslim leaders could and should have acknowledged that Muslim fundamentalism is a worldwide problem and that even some American Muslims are also prone to the fundamentalist rhetoric. They should have warned for this allready before there was an attack. This is to little to late. They are washing their hands in innocence after harm has been done.
Even Obama never dared to criticise Islam.
It is this silence that makes Trump stronger.
Not all short sighted people are in the Trump camp.

No they are not washing their hands,
infact they attack again giving a second slap to freedom

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/12/23/3531E33200000578-3638055-image-m-2_1465770182786.jpg

like a common crime of a homosexual and a homophobic,
just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

that is not wash my hands,
when say wash hands, you mean i only execute, other is responcible,
that is a second slap on face,

the first is the massacre,
the second is that the fault is in the west that has perverts, and he a 'angel of God' clear the perverts from gods garden,
so foundamental Islam is again clean and on top.

I still wonder
ALL THESE GUYS THAT WENT TO MOHAMED ALI FUNERAL,
WILL THEY GO TO PUT A FLOWER FOR THE DEAD? OR TEACH THAT THIS IS PARANOIA?

Maleth
14-06-16, 14:25
I would not exclude that he would have had homosexual tendencies himself and the circumstances would have made his life impossible full of guilt and resentment. But those are deeper things we will never find out. He had a very short marriage and beated up his wife for not doing the laundry example. In return suppression and depression would make you cling to something. Some commit suicide quitley to get away from an unbearable situation. Others want to bring down the world with them.

hmm getting drunk in a gaybar been visiting for the past 3 years? would we get to know more about this?


http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/14/us/orlando-shooter-omar-mateen/index.html

bicicleur
14-06-16, 15:56
No they are not washing their hands,
infact they attack again giving a second slap to freedom

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/12/23/3531E33200000578-3638055-image-m-2_1465770182786.jpg

like a common crime of a homosexual and a homophobic,
just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

that is not wash my hands,
when say wash hands, you mean i only execute, other is responcible,
that is a second slap on face,

the first is the massacre,
the second is that the fault is in the west that has perverts, and he a 'angel of God' clear the perverts from gods garden,
so foundamental Islam is again clean and on top.

I still wonder
ALL THESE GUYS THAT WENT TO MOHAMED ALI FUNERAL,
WILL THEY GO TO PUT A FLOWER FOR THE DEAD? OR TEACH THAT THIS IS PARANOIA?

'this is not Islam'
but it is the way to paradise
how stupid and blind can you be?

Angela
14-06-16, 16:15
hmm getting drunk in a gaybar been visiting for the past 3 years? would we get to know more about this?


http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/14/us/orlando-shooter-omar-mateen/index.html

I'm not sure what to make of it. It's certainly possible that he was actually homosexual and was conflicted about it. At the same time, he might have been "casing" these types of places, so that may have been a part of it. I just saw the CNN interview with his ex-wife, and I think they were pushing her to say she suspected he was secretly gay. It didn't seem to me that she had suspected it before this information came out, not that this is dispositive, of course.

What's clear is that he also was radicalized on the internet by extremist Muslim clerics. There are leaks coming out that he consumed an incredible amount of this garbage.

It's important to realize, as well, that since childhood he was in an alternative school specifically designed for kids with emotional and/or psychiatric problems.

I wonder if he was on anti-psychotic meds, and if he had been prescribed them, whether he was taking them. From what the wife was saying, there was an abrupt change in him a few months after she married him, with him displaying a lot of anger and physically abusing her.

Angela
14-06-16, 16:52
No they are not washing their hands,
infact they attack again giving a second slap to freedom

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/12/23/3531E33200000578-3638055-image-m-2_1465770182786.jpg

like a common crime of a homosexual and a homophobic,
just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

that is not wash my hands,
when say wash hands, you mean i only execute, other is responcible,
that is a second slap on face,

the first is the massacre,
the second is that the fault is in the west that has perverts, and he a 'angel of God' clear the perverts from gods garden,
so foundamental Islam is again clean and on top.

I still wonder
ALL THESE GUYS THAT WENT TO MOHAMED ALI FUNERAL,
WILL THEY GO TO PUT A FLOWER FOR THE DEAD? OR TEACH THAT THIS IS PARANOIA?

You are making statements directly contradicted by the facts. Hundreds stood in line for six hours and more to give blood for the victims. An online site has already collected over 2 million dollars for them. Millions have participated in ceremonies honoring them, the House of Representatives observed a minute of silence for them, and the President will indeed be going to Orlando.

bicicleur
14-06-16, 17:30
You are making statements directly contradicted by the facts. Hundreds stood in line for six hours and more to give blood for the victims. An online site has already collected over 2 million dollars for them. Millions have participated in ceremonies honoring them, the House of Representatives observed a minute of silence for them, and the President will indeed be going to Orlando.

that is one side, and it is Americans that feel sympathy for the victims and their relatives
the paper shows another side, how Muslims in Turkey look at it, it's the duty of the American Muslim leaders to warn for this kind of interpretation of Islam that does exist in many countries around the world
if the American Muslim leaders don't do that, then Trumps comments on the shooting make more sense than what Clinton says

bicicleur
14-06-16, 17:32
No they are not washing their hands,
infact they attack again giving a second slap to freedom

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/12/23/3531E33200000578-3638055-image-m-2_1465770182786.jpg

like a common crime of a homosexual and a homophobic,
just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

that is not wash my hands,
when say wash hands, you mean i only execute, other is responcible,
that is a second slap on face,

the first is the massacre,
the second is that the fault is in the west that has perverts, and he a 'angel of God' clear the perverts from gods garden,
so foundamental Islam is again clean and on top.

I still wonder
ALL THESE GUYS THAT WENT TO MOHAMED ALI FUNERAL,
WILL THEY GO TO PUT A FLOWER FOR THE DEAD? OR TEACH THAT THIS IS PARANOIA?

I don't understand Turkish

just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

is that what the paper says?

Angela
14-06-16, 17:41
that is one side, and it is Americans that feel sympathy for the victims and their relatives
the paper shows another side, how Muslims in Turkey look at it, it's the duty of the American Muslim leaders to warn for this kind of interpretation of Islam that does exist in many countries around the world

I don't disagree with that. I was responding to the other part of his post.

Maleth
14-06-16, 20:43
I'm not sure what to make of it. It's certainly possible that he was actually homosexual and was conflicted about it. At the same time, he might have been "casing" these types of places, so that may have been a part of it. I just saw the CNN interview with his ex-wife, and I think they were pushing her to say she suspected he was secretly gay. It didn't seem to me that she had suspected it before this information came out, not that this is dispositive, of course.

That is what I initially thought as well, but I believe he would have needed to visit the bar less for that particular reason. He also drank alcohol which is Haram (forbiden) for Muslims, so if he was so practicing the religion he would not be doing that. I also know what his father thought of homosexuals (The god created a man and a woman fable, we are so used to hear from all Religions ...But only god can judge the choice of these people). Imagine if this to become terrorist has to be brought up in this environment since a kid, then he has to deal with his own sexuality at puberty?.....and the same people that brought him to this world and nurtured could only be known to believe this?..........



The most vociferous anti gay religious leader in Malta is a '''converted''' gay ballerina to become a Pastor, who had become brainwashed in Texas when he joined the Evangelists. Shooting innocent people is a very hideous crime no doubt, but continuous verbal violence comes a close second. Now how can psychology explain this?

It figures that Pastor Manche brought his gay conversion Evangelist ideas from the United States where, he tells us, he was a professional ballet dancer until he “saw God” (“He spoke to me, but I did not see his face”). Is professional ballet dancer here a cipher for homosexual?

http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2011/05/queer-no-more/


I wonder if he was on anti-psychotic meds, and if he had been prescribed them, whether he was taking them. From what the wife was saying, there was an abrupt change in him a few months after she married him, with him displaying a lot of anger and physically abusing her.

This reminds me of Andreas Lubitz who deliberately crashed a German wings plane in the mountains killing 150 people. Mateens ex wife in another interview did mention that he was bi polar.

Athiudisc
14-06-16, 21:17
He also drank alcohol which is Haram (forbiden) for Muslims, so if he was so practicing the religion he would not be doing that.

No true Scotsman? The 9/11 attackers weren't adverse to alcohol, either. Pederasty is hardly unknown in Muslim cultures, despite it being haram, as another example.

Maleth
14-06-16, 21:41
No true Scotsman? The 9/11 attackers weren't adverse to alcohol, either. Pederasty is hardly unknown in Muslim cultures, despite it being haram, as another example.

So true and so were the Paris Killers from Belgium. Apparently they were party animals. That would make them pathological killers and hardly Islamic saints. You cannot consume alcohol and receive young virgins at the gates of Jannah at the same time.

Angela
14-06-16, 22:08
This goes all the way back to debates I used to have at university about some of the Nazis. Were the people who built and staffed the concentration camps sane? It doesn't seem like sane behavior to me...Yet, are there that many insane people in the world? I do think, although it's not a popular idea in this recreational drug approving world, that people who have latent mental instability can be made much worse by drug use. Look at Hitler's increasing instability as he took more and more methamphetamine. Any one who is diagnosed as bipolar is told to stay away from stimulants. A lot of them also have bad reactions to anti-depressants. In my opinion, half of the people incarcerated in prison have mental health issues. They should put zyprexa in the water as some prison doctors used to do. The ACLU would be after you if you suggested it now.

I think perhaps there are variations or levels of mental health. This man sounds as if he was diagnosed with mental health issues very young and always had problems. At a certain point he snapped, though. He seems a little old for a schizophrenic "break" because that usually happens in the late teens, early twenties, but who knows? Maybe he was medicated for a while and then stopped taking the meds, as these kinds of people often do. Maybe he was taking certain sorts of recreational drugs. It takes very sophisticated and informed parents, who in addition give up their whole lives, to care for children like this, to keep them under control, and even then they're not always successful, because you can't physically coerce an adult into living under your control.

None of this changes the fact that this extremist Muslim ideology is a curse and something has to be done to stop it spreading.

Yetos
14-06-16, 22:59
You are making statements directly contradicted by the facts. Hundreds stood in line for six hours and more to give blood for the victims. An online site has already collected over 2 million dollars for them. Millions have participated in ceremonies honoring them, the House of Representatives observed a minute of silence for them, and the President will indeed be going to Orlando.

no, I do not think so,
or I have been misunderstood,

simply you know who was at Ali's funeral, especially from Muslim world,
and I am waiting to see, if the same will be and speak at the funerals of PULSE victims,

did I made my thoughts clear now?

PS
psycology of a beaten dog, remember?

Yetos
14-06-16, 23:21
I don't understand Turkish

just kill 50 perverts, deviants at a bar, well done to him, he will be in paradise cause he killed 50 pervert

is that what the paper says?

No, but what I was told, it says ''the number of pervert homosexuals that had gone at the bar has reached 50''

blah blah the attacker was killed in the bar, etc etc

you can find the page here,

http://www.yeniakit.com.tr/haber/escinsellerin-gittigi-barda-olu-sayisi-50ye-cikti-183764.html

anyway yeniakit is a strange news channel/newspapper, in past it showed many ISIS thesis,
some say that is Erdogan's tool.
by what I found most of turkish post deny and critisize yeniakit.

No it does not say that he will go to paradise,
that would put strong political problems,
simply the dogma of radical islam is saying so,

Yetos
15-06-16, 00:13
I just wonder

Is there connection that this happened after Ali's funeral?
or just luck, coincidence?

Angela
15-06-16, 05:30
It's all just so depressing. The Iman of a school that this shooter supposedly attended gets interviewed and is vehement that he totally disapproves of what was done, of any acts of terrorism, and that this guy never attended his school, and then under questioning he says he won't condemn the stoning of women taken in adultery, and when pressed refuses to admit women are stoned but not men.

How can you have a rational discussion with people like this? Where do his free speech and freedom of religion rights end? If he's caught stoning some one or even specifically inciting people to stone some woman, ok, but what if he just generally teaches half wits or half crazies that it's ok, then what? He gets a pass?

bicicleur
15-06-16, 08:07
It's all just so depressing. The Iman of a school that this shooter supposedly attended gets interviewed and is vehement that he totally disapproves of what was done, of any acts of terrorism, and that this guy never attended his school, and then under questioning he says he won't condemn the stoning of women taken in adultery, and when pressed refuses to admit women are stoned but not men.

How can you have a rational discussion with people like this? Where do his free speech and freedom of religion rights end? If he's caught stoning some one or even specifically inciting people to stone some woman, ok, but what if he just generally teaches half wits or half crazies that it's ok, then what? He gets a pass?

Hillary and Obama say we should be nice to these men, communicate, they'll help us fight terrorism.
Do you trust them?
At least from Trump we know he's talking bullshit.
But I don't know who has the biggest bullshit.

And then America is even blessed. These guys are taking over the world. In America they are still a tiny minority.
Europe is much worse. Letting these guys in is an act of selfdestruction.

Athiudisc
15-06-16, 15:42
Where do his free speech and freedom of religion rights end?

A particularly thorny (and dangerous) argument, but it needs to take place, IMO. Not here, but nationally (and internationally, I would say). We generally have something of a worshipful attitude towards free speech and freedom of religion in this country particularly, and stoning for "adultery" (I put it in quotes because sometimes, their version of "adultery" is "a woman was raped"), to continue with your example, is most definitely a part of the religious tradition of some Muslim cultures.

Obviously, we can't allow the practice. But how far do we allow the promulgation of the idea?

The "hate speech isn't free speech" movement seems to gathering steam, lately. I generally find this idea abhorrent, in practice if not principle, because some peoples' idea of "hate speech" doesn't necessarily stop at "stone women who have 'unapproved' sex" or "gas the Jews, race war now," but includes ideas that aren't actual incitements to violence, like "I don't want to live around group X" or even "our religion will not be participating in or offering homosexual marriage ceremonies."

And then we have parts of Europe where the problem seems even worse, where any criticism of someone who's Muslim or non-European is shouted down as "racism," and punishable under law.

It's a hell of a pickle. :petrified:

Maleth
15-06-16, 16:09
It's all just so depressing. The Iman of a school that this shooter supposedly attended gets interviewed and is vehement that he totally disapproves of what was done, of any acts of terrorism, and that this guy never attended his school, and then under questioning he says he won't condemn the stoning of women taken in adultery, and when pressed refuses to admit women are stoned but not men.

How can you have a rational discussion with people like this? Where do his free speech and freedom of religion rights end? If he's caught stoning some one or even specifically inciting people to stone some woman, ok, but what if he just generally teaches half wits or half crazies that it's ok, then what? He gets a pass?

The most straight forward thing I can envisage at the moment is that anyone who is willing to live in a free country and has a background of its ok to stone kill in the name of some god,....also its a right to chop off a female clitoris as its a sin for woman to feel sexual pleasure :confused2:.... they all have to sign a declaration that this against the law of these free countries and they need to respect that. If they find it offensive and do not agree in an interview they will be immediately be deported back to were they come from, so they can feel comfortable practicing what they believe in. This will give stronger grounds that for any so called 'Religious' person who incites hate more (even with literature in any particular community and more incites death will be prosecuted. If Nazism has been curtailed why should not Radical 'religiosity'? We are in 2016 for goodness sake.

Once I had Jehova witnesses knocking on my door and let them in. I asked them if they approve of god drowning the earth in what would be the biggest massacre ever happened in human history in the name of a perfect god :rolleyes2: (which is a fake story anyway). I asked if they approved of the killing of Men Women children babies by Jehova. Their answer was yes. Because every one was a sinner then (I guess they mean even innocent Kids and babies) How Pathetic one can be? Only someone with a Pathological mind can feel comfortable with such a scenario. I told them to get out and never ever step on my door step. Never seen them again.

LeBrok
15-06-16, 16:51
The most straight forward thing I can envisage at the moment is that anyone who is willing to live in a free country and has a background of its ok to stone kill in the name of some god,....also its a right to chop off a female clitoris as its a sin for woman to feel sexual pleasure :confused2:.... they all have to sign a declaration that this against the law of these free countries and they need to respect that. If they find it offensive and do not agree in an interview they will be immediately be deported back to were they come from, so they can feel comfortable practicing what they believe in. This will give stronger grounds that for any so called 'Religious' person who incites hate more (even with literature in any particular community and more incites death will be prosecuted. If Nazism has been curtailed why should not Radical 'religiosity'? We are in 2016 for goodness sake. I liked that.
Freedoms only for tolerant people. Treat intolerance with intolerance. Said but had to be done. The most important war is not on the ground or air but one against hateful ideology of radical islam. Fight them in Mosques, Madrasas and on internet.