• Donald Trump

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:29 pm**

On ITV 1 now is a interview by Piers Morgan with Donald Trump. Could be rather interesting because as crazy as it is, this guy has the potential to be US president within the next 12 months.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:36 pm**

Ted Cruz just lost his primary race too, so it's between Trump and Kasich for the bigoted, women-hating, immigrant-hating, Muslim-hating, gun-nut apologists, Republican nomination. And if the Democrat are stupid enough, or bone-idle enough to nominate Clinton as the Democratic nominee then America is ******, because she'll lose to either of those two.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:30 pm**

The Republican party doesn't have a few hundred million members, and their primary is going to be decided by voters with any or all of those traits I've described.

Edit: I also forgot "gay-hating". I'll let you guess whether that goes on the Democrats side, or the Republicans.

TomBenderson wrote:You, of course, wouldn't stand for it if it were any other group where you would urge us to look past a few with fringe views to understand the moderate hinterland which just need engagement to ensure they stay onside...

When Ted "patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods" Cruz is the establishment choice then the Republican party is already controlled by its extremists.
When Donald "take out their families" Trump is the front runner, ahead of the extremist, establishment candidate for the Republican nomination then how much more obvious does it need to be that the Republican party is now an extremist party?

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:46 pm**

[img]

: Trump.jpg (45.86 KiB) Viewed 8575 times

[/img]

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:46 pm**

Trump is just Nigel Farage on steroids and would be a side note If America had more than a two party system. He is appealing to what I can only predict is a much less well educated demographic because he is seen as not part of the establishment and gives 'straight answers' (despite not being able to back them up with any logical plans on how to implement them) and even If they are lies.

I'm a little tired of the 'OMG WTF America?!' I see daily. The circus that surrounds Trump is simply noise and there is a huge silent majority who are not whooping and hollering at conventions who do not want him as president, even those who have voted for serious republican candidates in the past are willing to vote democrat as they see how much of a disaster a Trump presidency would be. Just let the thing play out and don't add to the hyperbole that surrounds him.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:47 pm**

Clinton vs Trump. Clinton wins. Not all Republicans are as stupid as you think. But what a choice? Only America, the biggest mental asylum in the world.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:49 pm**

It is interesting to me that, assuming Sanders won't win, the next US President is going to be a right winger who is bad for our country and yet our focus is on Trump. Why?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:01 am**

The manner in which Clinton's is running her campaign against Sanders has all but ensured that liberal Democrats won't bother turning up to vote for her. So if she's going to beat Trump then she's going to need to gain a lot of Republican voters, voters who are going to be targeted by Trumps inevitable shift to the centre after the Republican convention, assuming he has the delegates by then.

And he's not going to need to worry about his extremists abandoning him while he reaches out to the centre because they will understand the game he's playing and believe, rightfully, that he's truly with them and not moderates. They don't mind that he's lying to the centre to gain their votes, as long as he does what he's promised them during the primary.

And on top of Clinton's progressive-voter problem, she's got an email scandal that can blow up if the FBI's criminal investigation into her brings up an indictment, she's going to be hammered by Republicans all over the place about Benghazi, and she's going to be against a GOP candidate in Trump who can literally mock woman for menstruating when he doesn't like their tone and actually gain voters, yet if Clinton so much as becomes mildly impolite she'll find her voters being turned off by her.

President Trump isn't a pie-in-the-sky, dystopian future, it's a real and terrifying possibility and it's not hyperbole to warn about it.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:06 am**

TomBenderson wrote:It's not membership, it's registered affiliation (as I understand it) and there are 75million registered affiliated Republicans. Add the fact that 20+ states have open primaries and the number is much bigger than the 30 million members you suggest. That's by and large irrelevant. What's important is the naked inability you show to think about digging beneath the surface of that electorate; like I say in a way you'd recoil at if they were another group. It contextualises everything you say.

Unfortunately for you i'm more careful with my words than you give credit for, because i called the party extremist, not it's members. Although i would certainly go as far as saying that a significant portion of it's base is extremist. It's a bit like saying that Islam is an extremist religion, but avoiding saying that all Muslims are extremists, which i'm fairly sure is what you're ignorantly getting at with the last couple of sentences of your rather presumptuous post.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:27 am**

I'm not sure which tar-soaked brush is worse:

A burkha wearing, suspicious backpacked crazed Muslim terrorist........or a gun toting, abortion clinic burning, bible bashing, dinosaur disbelieving, universe made in 7 days United States Republican.
Mmm.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:27 am**

TomBenderson wrote:I've re-read your post. If you say that's how you meant it, OK, although I'm not sure how "gun-nut apologists" can be an entity and not a group of people. I never mentioned Muslims - does it always have to be about them?

I think we both know who you were talking about. But if it wasn't Islam and Muslims then to what group of people were you referring?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:28 am**

TomBenderson wrote:I've re-read your post. If you say that's how you meant it, OK, although I'm not sure how "gun-nut apologists" can be an entity and not a group of people. I never mentioned Muslims - does it always have to be about them?

Be honest with yourself.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:00 am**

Americans are no more or less capable of making informed decisions than voters anywhere.
Clearly Trump has amassed a huge support. Whether it will be enough to get him into the whitehouse remains to be seen.
It might be easy to jump on the bandwagon and suggest both he and his supporters are redneck lunatics, but it would be unfair.
His predecessors have made a right hash of things, costly,unresolved foreign wars, massive unemployment, a faultering internal economy.
These are also unusually dangerous times globally. The USA might not suffer the terrorist threat to the degree we in Europe do, but they are not totally immune. They already have become involved in Syria, the complex mess isn't helped by Putin's stance. It is a colossal game of chess with inevitably thousands of innocents caught up in the shambles.
Trump has an appeal because he appears to tell it as it is. He may not have the means to articulate his party's position as some of his contemporaries do.
His bluntness shouldn't be confused for madness though. For all our supposedly intellectual politics in Europe, we are in a right state. No accord anywhere, and massive potential problems with mass migration. The terror threat is constant and will not be going away anytime soon.
Trump might not be the greatest statesman of his era, but he is deserving of some respect .

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:31 am**

...but he is deserving of some respect .

Is he ****.

"costly, unresolved foreign wars" - thanks to a Republican president.
"massive unemployment" - unemployment rates skyrocketed thanks to Bush's mismanagement and have been falling consistently under Obama. In 2012 election Mitt Romney promised to get unemployment below 6%, it's now 4.9%.
"a faultering internal economy" - Dow Jones and Nasdaq have reached record highs under Obama.

"Americans are no more or less capable of making informed decisions than voters anywhere." - I think I've just demonstrated how that is bullshit.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:36 am**

There is one reason ALONE why Trump has lots of support, people over here are sick and tired of the bull5shit that goes on in the Government, those politicians that are bitching at Trump are doing so because they know their gravy boat will come to an end if he gets in power. I've watched every single debate and not one of them as substantiated any of their policies. At present there is no point in voting because whoever gets in the other party will block all their ideas - and that is why Trump is appealing

If you think it's because everyone in America is racist then you are clearly mistaken.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:41 am**

Vegas Claret wrote:There is one reason ALONE why Trump has lots of support, people over here are sick and tired of the bull5shit that goes on in the Government

But if Trump wins - we suffer. So I'm not sure how that follows to be honest.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:41 am**

Americans are no more or less capable of making informed decisions than voters anywhere." - I think I've just demonstrated how that is bullshit.

No...far from it Imploding. If anything you've demonstrated how the anti Trump media suck people in.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:00 am**

It most certainly isn't based purely on them voting for Trump. It has everything to do with 10 years of following American politics in much the same way most of us follow football.

Are there any other assumptions you'd like to make for me to shoot down tonight?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:45 am**

Actually starting to believe that trump could be a good thing.

Should he win the nomination without uniting the republicans behind him he will probably split the party and a third party/tea party candidate will be nominated to run against him and Clinton.
Both Bush and Romney were not too popular when they began their runs for the republican nomination,but by this time in the race they had pretty much a united base behind them.
Clinton is running on Obama's coat tails. The economy is booming despite all the doom mongers saying it is not so.In essence,with Obama's cooperation she will represent Obama's third term.

If trump fails to unite the party at the convention,or the republicans nominate somebody else despite Trump gaining the most delegates(without reaching 50 percent plus 1) ,Trump will probably run as a third party candidate/ independent himself again, splitting the republican vote.
The hispanics will not vote for Trump, African Americans will not vote for Trump and unless they are forced to sell out again, the tea party republicans will not vote for Trump.

If Trump does win the nomination out right, then many conservatives will simply stay home on election day ,which could cause real problems in the senate and congressional elections which happen the same day as the presidential elections.

This is why the republican party are really opposed to Trump. They would nominate the devil himself if he would help them keep majorities in the house and senate and stand a descent chance of winning the white house.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:41 am**

The whole political system is an absolute joke in this country and theirs. I for one want to see Trump get elected, to hit the bottom of the barrel and fingers crossed it will shock us all into change. It's a pantomime currently, where you have to select from a group of people that have been invested in by big business, it is a complete rigged game.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:05 am**

"I for one want to see Trump get elected, to hit the bottom of the barrel and fingers crossed it will shock us all into change"
That theory turned out well in 1930s Europe didn't it?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:28 am**

Trump wins ,Brexit wins,federal EU collapses this could be an historic year ...the commies get pushed back as usual..

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:36 am**

Who are "the commies"?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:45 am**

Vegas Claret wrote:There is one reason ALONE why Trump has lots of support, people over here are sick and tired of the bull5shit that goes on in the Government, those politicians that are bitching at Trump are doing so because they know their gravy boat will come to an end if he gets in power. I've watched every single debate and not one of them as substantiated any of their policies. At present there is no point in voting because whoever gets in the other party will block all their ideas - and that is why Trump is appealing

If you think it's because everyone in America is racist then you are clearly mistaken.

VC - Living over there, what chance do you give Bernie of winning the Democratic nomination? I'm normally right of centre, but looking at all the candidates; Bernie seems to me to be the only honest one out of the lot of them, maybe with the exception of Gov. Kaisich. Unfortunately, he's affiliated with a party that has allowed itself to be hijacked by those who peddle religious and gender intolerance.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:48 am**

"Who are "the commies"?"
An annual American Awards ceremony for comedy I believe.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 11:04 am**

nil_desperandum wrote:"I for one want to see Trump get elected, to hit the bottom of the barrel and fingers crossed it will shock us all into change"
That theory turned out well in 1930s Europe didn't it?

Bit unfair that comment. Baldwin turned out to be a descent Prime minister

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 11:06 am**

DownUnderClaret wrote:VC - Living over there, what chance do you give Bernie of winning the Democratic nomination? I'm normally right of centre, but looking at all the candidates; Bernie seems to me to be the only honest one out of the lot of them, maybe with the exception of Gov. Kaisich. Unfortunately, he's affiliated with a party that has allowed itself to be hijacked by those who peddle religious and gender intolerance.

Bernie has little or no chance of winning.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 11:32 am**

"Bit unfair that comment. Baldwin turned out to be a descent Prime minister"
Baldwin was first elected in 1924. It was in the 1930s that Europe descended into turmoil with the 'accidental' the election of extremists.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:25 pm**

When people criticise Trump, there seems to be a view that he is outlandish and extreme.The times we are all living in now are chaotic, just take a look around the globe. It isn't a time for run of the mill politics. I don't think there are similarities between Trump and 1930's Germany. No one should jump to that conclusion. He has made a number of remarks about American citizens being less forthcoming with information from within their communities that could have severe security implications, that isn't a far right stance, it is just common sense. The west has been facing a genuine terror threat for years. 9/11 is recent relatively, not to mention the atrocities in Europe. We don't live in Camberwick Green Chigley unfortunatley, the world is a very dangerous place, made ten times more dangerous by religious fanaticism.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:33 pm**

I commented on the CEO of America thread http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... 653#p37653 that it's more and more looking like a spoiler will be deployed by the GOP establishment - Mit Romney.

Vegas Claret is more or less right in #18 - I would say two reasons, one for the reason he cites, the second because his brash statements resonate with the fears of Americans outside of the East and West coast conurbations, who simply are less experienced at internationalism than pretty much anyone that lives in Europe - i.e. never been out of their own back yards.

As for Bernie, he'd never win. For the rest of the world he's the stand out candidate. For the operation of America Inc he would never ever get anything done as his social democrat (let's say middle-ground tory in UK terms) would be blocked time and again in Congress. This is where Clinton has the edge as she's very experienced as to how the Hill works.

For those that think "sane Americans" will ultimately deal with Trump, I'm not sure... this country is sooooo entrenched in its politics, that I doubt Republicans would vote democrat to keep Trump out.

There are three outcomes
1. A Clinton win
2. A Trump win, and he gets moderated by how the system works (i.e. all his pre-election chest-thumping would never see the light of day)
3. A Mitt Romney win because democrats, tired of Congress blocking Democrat policy would suffer just as Obama's has

I think it's between scenario 1 and 3. I cannot for the life of me not see GOP put up Romney as a spoiler should Trump capture the delegates he needs

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 4:32 pm**

nil_desperandum wrote:"Bit unfair that comment. Baldwin turned out to be a descent Prime minister"
Baldwin was first elected in 1924. It was in the 1930s that Europe descended into turmoil with the 'accidental' the election of extremists.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 4:32 pm**

Whoosh

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 4:49 pm**

"Whoosh"
You obviously missed the significance of my phrase "descending into turmoil".

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 4:57 pm**

Was referring,tongue in cheek to the abdication crisis. Knowing full well you were referring to the rise of fascism and the descent into world war 2.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:05 pm**

And Trump would have worked well in 1930s America. He would have seen the money that could be made by joining the war too.
As for the current state in Europe, you don't need Trump's help in any new descent into chaos.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:07 pm**

"That theory turned out well in 1930s Europe didn't it?"

Why the obsession with references to Nazi Germany? Not just yours nil, but it's all over the place....and it's bloody silly.

Do people REALLY think a Trump led administration will repeat the darkest time of the 20th century???

Thought not...now stop being silly and just accept that an awful lot of people hear what DT is saying, and agree with him that something needs to be done in America, to protect America and Americans before they end up with the absolute "cluster" that we in Europe have to live with.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:11 pm**

bobinho wrote:Thought not...now stop being silly and just accept that an awful lot of people hear what DT is saying, and agree with him that something needs to be done in America, to protect America and Americans before they end up with the absolute "cluster" that we in Europe have to live with.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:13 pm**

"Was referring,tongue in cheek to the abdication crisis. Knowing full well you were referring to the rise of fascism and the descent into world war 2."
Well I guessed that, but it was the "descent Prime Minister" that amused me. He didn't go down all that well with some sections of society.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 5:18 pm**

"...now stop being silly and just accept that an awful lot of people hear what DT is saying, and agree with him that something needs to be done in America, to protect America and Americans before they end up with the absolute "cluster" that we in Europe have to live with."

And then you wonder why comparisons are made with the racists and tyrants of the 1930s. What begins as rabble rousing rhetoric can end up with a very sinister outcome.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:04 pm**

[quote="bobinho"]"That theory turned out well in 1930s Europe didn't it?"

Why the obsession with references to Nazi Germany? Not just yours nil, but it's all over the place....and it's bloody silly.

Do people REALLY think a Trump led administration will repeat the darkest time of the 20th century???

It's what we all do bobinho. We refer to the extreme to prove our point.

Like the constant reference to the Orient game.

It wouldn't have the same poignancy if we referred to finishing mid table in the championship, or in this case the Thatcher years.

Or would it???

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:06 pm**

Trump rallies do have some resemblance to the Hitler rallies.
Not as many torches .

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:09 pm**

I think Underwood will just edge it.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:16 pm**

I dunno, Rileybobs. America Works is failing. It's a failure. America would win at jobs with Trump. Trump has the best jobs. The best you've ever seen. I guarantee you.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:22 pm**

I lurve that woman, I lurve her like a shark lurves blurd.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:52 pm**

NRC wrote:
As for Bernie, he'd never win. For the rest of the world he's the stand out candidate. For the operation of America Inc he would never ever get anything done as his social democrat (let's say middle-ground tory in UK terms) would be blocked time and again in Congress. This is where Clinton has the edge as she's very experienced as to how the Hill works.

This is such a big misconception that you could fit Tom Benderson's mum through it.

Bernie Sanders, in a head to head polls against Trump, is trouncing him by a much bigger difference chan Clinton. In fact he beats all the republican candidates by a larger margin than her. Whereas Clinton only beats two of them, she loses to Kasich.

Clinton leads Trump by 11.5% (RCP averages), Cruz by 2.9% and loses to Kasich by 6.5%
Bernie leads Trump by 18.5%, Cruz by 8.4% and Kasich by 1.0%
Bernie Sanders has passed more roll call amendments in congress in Republican senates than anyone else. So the argument that he'll get nothing done isn't based in observed reality.
If Sanders is the nominee and is against Trump in the general election, there's almost no way for the Republicans to hold onto either the Senate or the House, gerrymandered districts and all.

Sanders wins by such a huge margin that Democrats would overcome the estimated 5 million House votes barrier that gerrymandering has put in their way, and they'd reclaim the senate with a super-majority. Neither of which will happen if it's Clinton vs. Trump.

But the Democratic Party is stupid and will never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, so Sanders won't be the nominee.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:43 pm**

Jimmy Carters presidency is why Sanders would not win the presidency. Carter ,is a great man, and a fantastic human being. In better times probably would have had his face on mount Rushmore.
However circumstances created a nightmare presidency that the American public will not forget.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:53 pm**

What Trump is, really, is an undercover agent for the Democrats (much like Keane was with the B******s). He has given the redneck element a real voice (the ones who always voted against their self-interests). The Republican base was wealthy, corporate types and poor, white, under-educated people who take the Great American Myth to heart. (The myth that they are God's chosen people who have saved the world numerous times and are so much better than any other humans that they can sing "God Save America" always in full voice. As Neil Young once said, what's He going to do with the rest of the world?) The U. S. Army always recruits from this base because they are either under-employed or unemployed. And they come back disillusioned from whatever foreign hell-hole they've been assigned to because they find out there's more to the world than Podunk, Iowa. There's going to be a 3-way race this time. Trump's not backing down and neither is the Republican etablishment. It's going to be Trump, Cruz, and Clinton on the ballot, and a split Republican party has no hope against a unified Democratic one. Trump has bas demographics with women, Clinton with men, and nobody really knows what Cruz stands for, other than himself. This thing is far from over.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:58 pm**

Bernie is too intellectual for the average American. He tries not to, but always talks over their heads. Sad but true.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:05 pm**

The first thing Hitler did was appease the unions (read the working class). How could a fascist party be called socialist? Hitler was the master of "The Big Lie" and of symbolism (the Nuremburg Rallies). Do you see any similarities?

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2016 9:24 pm**

For decades The Americans have just turned up in force and decided set up shop in order to impose their policies . Not once was Trump involved.
Their have been numerous rallies and protests but to no avail. They have bombed and killed thousands of people to death, civilians too (albeit accidentally) Suddenly Trump is akin to Adolf Hitler ?
He's fighting an internal election campaign . He hasn't killed anybody either. His missus has had to fight for US citizenship so he's hardly that anti foreigner is he ?
Think back to Nixon, then latterly Bush, quite how Trump can be castigated as he has been is a total mystery to me.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump

Re: Donald Trump