Donald! Trump!

konabunny - Member

Hillary has a really toxic brand, at least fifty percent of which is deserved.

Yup- a really important stat is "would never vote for" and Hilary is just barely behind Trump in that. And Clinton and Trump have similiar disapproval ratings- Trump 59% negative, 38% positive, but Clinton 53/44. These are both completely shit numbers to be taking into a presidential campaign. (as opposed to Sanders 60% positive, 33% negative) Cruz also has a negative rating. I don't think the message of how disliked she is gets across (Bill otoh still gets a positive rating, it's not a "boo Clinton" thing). I suppose the bottom line is, she's the experienced candidate, her entire selling point should be "I'm already doing the job" but every time she says it, a decent chunk of voters say "Aye, and you're shite at it"

Another, among Sanders supporters, 33% say they'll never vote for Clinton compared to 32% who say they'll never vote for Trump! There's a strength and weakness here, Sanders is far more likely to pick up opposition votes than Clinton- but his supporters are also far more likely to go to the other side.

OTOH I saw in Utah, 16% of previous voters said they'll refuse to vote if the choice is Trump or Clinton, which is downright tragic especially given groundswells of nontraditional voters, but a natural side effect of turning the election into an unpopularity contest.

Again, all just polls- but a hell of a lot of polls, coming up with similiar and parallel results. I'm not overly trusting of polls but it's better than just declaring everything to be how you think it is, or swallowing whole perceived wisdoms.

(I must admit, I'm completely astonished about the Bernie thing, I think like a lot of people I'd fallen for the idea that just saying "socialist!" rules people out. I think a lot of us have underestimated normal Americans tbh. But it's the clown car you see the most. I don't think he has a play that can beat his party but the take-away lessons for both parties are simply this- the rules aren't what they thought they are.)

good for headlines but with no chancs of being elected.

It is an obvious comparison, but it's the line above I take issue with. It's a line repeated so often as if it's a fact when I think both would have a very real chance of being elected, if their parties let them get on with it.

What I find amazing is ([url= http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-abortion-women-punishment_us_56fc2a99e4b083f5c606880d ]according to the HuffPo[/url] who admittedly are rabidly anti-Trump) the abortion question just doesn't matter to some. They quote one woman at the meeting as saying:

"I don’t vote based on abortions. I think there's more important things," said Deboard, who described herself as pro-choice. "Look, if ISIS comes over and kills us, I'm not real concerned with abortions. There's more important things to deal with here. We're way beyond abortions here. If you want abortion, you can go get one. I guess I'm pro-choice, but I'm not strong. Like I said, I have more important issues I'm concerned about."

So there's someone who is so caught up in the fear that the terrorists are coming and only Trump can stop them that she is willing to ignore things that actually have much more of an impact on her community.

You want to stop whatever it is your smoking because there is no way the Dems & HC are "far to right of the Cameron & the Conservatives"......

Your point about the Republicans is well made, they are right out there.

So there's someone who is so caught up in the fear that the terrorists are coming and only Trump can stop them that she is willing to ignore things that actually have much more of an impact on her community.

As for BBC bias and not taking Trump seriously nobody was, even in deepest darkest Conservative American back in October he was nothing but a joke. People are still waiting for the punchline.

Clintons biggest weakness, and Trumps greatest strength:

[img] ?t=1458057999124&width=452[/img]

Trump is clearly telling a positive line about the economy - it may be pie in the sky, but at least he's got a bloody plan!
Thats doubly telling when you tackle 'change vs more of the same' as Clinton is very much 'established order'

and as for healthcare... well, regardless of the absolute need for something, Obamacare remains toxic to all too many - Trumps line of "“I would end Obamacare and replace it with something terrific, for far less money for the country and for the people,” is obviously bollocks, but at least its 'change vs more of the same'.

“I would end Obamacare and replace it with something terrific, for far less money for the country and for the people,” is obviously bollocks, but at least its 'change vs more of the same'.

I suspect the only option there would be a full blown NHS style system. The money saved on bureaucracy alone would be huge

just can't help himself can he 🙂

[img] ?oh=fe0aa3d95980dee02034d4167bd04a30&oe=582B6714[/img]

🙂

Is he for real or a carefully scripted construct?

Saw this the other day (careful of swearing):

There were a couple of nice comments on Youtube (amongst all the masses of butthurt Trumpets and frothing racists) than nicely summarise the situation:

"Man, why do we depend on comedians today making the best political analysis. Where have serious journalism gone??"

"When a guy like Jim Jefferies,makes more sense then the guy who runs for president of the USA,then you realise how much humanity is screwed."

"We used to laugh at our comedians. Now we laugh at our politicians and listen seriously to comedians."

Look, here's Serena not being his friend while opening his new sports centre:

And not being his friend at a party:

[img] ?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=X7WJLa88Cweo9HktRLaNXnzrhljNM2zi5%2BLOmzFZe2Q3XbI3Ya7MwZSLrYM06QK1eqTVLsUD2lxo74TeAk3Kjw%3D%3D[/img]

I think maybe Serena is prepared to be his friend, just not his 'Black American Woman Friend'.

Edit: OK. Fake.

well maybe they became less friendly when it became apparent to her that he was using her as to signal that he isn't a sexist bigot, like he is.

Yep, ninfan is right. Don't believe everything you read on t'internet even if you want it to be true:

http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-serena-williams-wimbledon/

DOne up like a kipper there. I can even hear his voice saying it.

keep up to date with his latest gaffes here

http://www.slate.com/topics/t/trump_apocalypsewatch.html

to be honest If i was American id be looking at the Brexit vote with some worry, and not underestimate my fellow countryman's ability to commit gross acts of political and economic self-harm

As if the Trump campaign couldn't get any further into farce: Melania Trump made a surprisingly good speech addressing the Republican National Convention.

But it sounds strangely familiar...

"From a young age, my parents impressed on me the values that you work hard for what you want in life, that your word is your bond and you do what you say and keep your promise, that you treat people with respect. They taught and showed me values and morals in their daily lives. That is a lesson that I continue to pass along to our son. And we need to pass those lessons on to the many generations to follow. Because we want our children in this nation to know that the only limit to your achievements is the strength of your dreams and your willingness to work for them."

To this one from somebody called Michelle Obama made in 2008:

"Barack and I were raised with so many of the same values: that you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond and you do what you say you’re going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect, even if you don’t know them, and even if you don’t agree with them. And Barack and I set out to build lives guided by these values, and pass them on to the next generation. Because we want our children — and all children in this nation — to know that the only limit to the height of your achievements is the reach of your dreams and your willingness to work for them."

And it goes on like that 😯

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/us/politics/melania-trump-speech.html

Polls have him tied with Clinton. We need to understand he may well win.

To be fair it's pretty hard to find a political speech that isn't just a list of platitudes and truisms, maybe they've got the same banalbolloxgenerator app?

Plagiarism of Michelle Obama's speech will not matter one jot to the Trump supporters, they are all ****ing loons to begin with and any attempt to argue or reason with them is pointless, as an aside...... Did you watch Panorama last night?.

Polls have him tied with Clinton. We need to understand he may well win.

see a clinic full of cynics
Who want to twist the peoples' wrist
They're watching every move we make
We're all included on the list
The lunatics have taken over the asylum

Which polls Jamby?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/
These mostly come out Clinton up

they are all **** loons to begin with

So, Republicans then? 🙂 Have you seen their platform?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/us/politics/republican-party-issues.html

[img] [/img]
Crossing the margin of error streams now but not the actual lines

Polls have him tied with Clinton. We need to understand he may well win.

Hillary Clinton: 46% (unchanged since June)
Donald Trump: 41% (unchanged since June)

ABC News/Washington Post:

Hillary Clinton: 47% (down from 51% in June)
Donald Trump: 43% (up from 39% in June)

CNN:

Hillary Clinton: 49% (up from 47% in June)
Donald Trump: 42% (unchanged since June)

[url= http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/latest-polls-raise-eyebrows-republican-convention-begins ]clicky thing[/url]

As reported on news coverage of the convention yesterday, "tied in the polls" is what they said

Personally I think he's going to win as Clinton is equally divisive and very unpopular and has far too many skeletons in her cupboard, especially financial dodgy deals. That plus Obama's Presidency has too many major errors and that will impact the Democrats. Its hard for us to see it here but Trump is the anti-establishment candidate.

I was wrong about him not winning the nomination and I'd vote for Hillary but the US want's a change.

"“I would end Obamacare and replace it with something terrific, for far less money for the country and for the people,”

This does seem to sum up the Trump. I'm going to change it and it's going to be "terrific". But I'm not going to give you any details as to what it's going to look like or how I plan to implement and pay for it!

Its hard for us to see it here but Trump is the anti-establishment candidate.

Yep I fear he might get in on the same anti-establishment disgruntlement that has clouded voting decisions here

Despite the fact that, just like here, all he [i]really[/i] offers is a slightly different establishment (one with less Gays, more Guns, less Climate Worry, more Coal, less Mexicans, more Walls, less Muslims, more Fear).

I'm not going to give you any details as to what it's going to look like or how I plan to implement and pay for it!

Even that sounds kind of familiar... 😉

As reported on news coverage of the convention yesterday, "tied in the polls" is what they said

Personally I'm going for a vote on common sense, Trump is popular among his supporters, he is more unpopular than Hillary and he now needs to start backflipping on huge amounts of policy to gain some of the centre ground. She will tear him a new one in the debates if there is a moderator who keeps him on track. If he launches into soundbite shouty mcshoutface she can step back and be Presidential. Something Trump will never achieve even if they elect the prick.

Even that sounds kind of familiar...

🙂 I guess the UK fell for that one too!

Just been to the states actually. A lot of people asked me about this brexit mess and how it's messed up the uk economy and asked how it happened. I explained that the leave campaigned appealed to the xenophobic masses in the same way that Trump does. I think seeing the UK going down the pan has put off a few potential trump voters. Every cloud and all that.

I'm finding the Republican Convention videos intriguing. I'm not quite sure whether to laugh or run into the wilderness and live off grid for the rest of my days.
Quote of the day has to come from a US friend's fb feed...

Not sure why everyone is so worried about the candidate's wife plagiarizing Michelle Obama when the candidate himself is going to plagiarize Mein Kampf.

@mike indeed 🙂 the issue what we see as "common sense" is quite different to the US, no real universal health care, no unemployment payments beyond 2 years, no broader welfare support - not even the Democrats want to change that.

I really think people here (myself included) too often look at the US and try and interpret it through European eyes.

@fourbanger if you had explained how the eu works with a foreign court and parliament setting laws and freedom of movement between member countries I think you wouod have got a different outcome. Both Clinton and Trump want to heavily modify the one significant trace agreement the US has in NAFTA.

@ocrider I think Trump will be much more protectionist and much more isolationist, so not quite Mein Kampf !

jambalaya - Member

As reported on news coverage of the convention yesterday, "tied in the polls" is what they said

Personally I think he's going to win as Clinton is equally divisive and very unpopular

I've yet to meet an American who likes her and can stand up and say why. And it's not for want of meeting Americans (well, Californians).

@fourbanger if you had explained how the eu works with a foreign court and parliament setting laws and freedom of movement between member countries I think you wouod have got a different outcome.

On your point about "different eyes" I suspect that many Americans, looking at the EU through their eyes, would probably interpret that set up as being not much different from their Federal and State system, which is where the "United States of Europe" analogy applies.

(And of course it's not a "foreign court and parliament", but you knew that anyway)

Exactly that GrahamS. That's how most people saw it and couldn't understand what kind of narrow minded simpleton could possible object to it.
Especially with the GDP of the USA and the EU being basically the same. "Why would you opt out?" they said.
A lot of people saw an analogy with the Southern States, all that "the south will rise again" confederate flag, white supremacy bullshit. It helped I was in a more liberal and enlightened north east.. But it was pretty embarrassing none the less.

What is it with these politicians & their tough on immigration stance who like to marry immigrants?!

@ocrider I think Trump will be much more protectionist and much more isolationist, so not quite Mein Kampf !

This does seem to sum up the Trump. I'm going to change it and it's going to be "terrific". But I'm not going to give you any details as to what it's going to look like or how I plan to implement and pay for it

This is exactly the reason I'm very scared of POTUS Trump

Just throw in some casual xenophobia (Trumps done this + lots)and you've got Brexit

If a load of populist lies and scapegoating can work on the left behind of Britain , it can work in the USA too

What is it with these politicians & their tough on immigration stance who like to marry immigrants?!

Because they probably like to dress their wives up like plantation slaves...

He asked for a wall,he got his wall >>> [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36854572 ]Trump's wall[/url]

Well it made me laugh 🙂

Blimey...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/21/donald-trump-republican-national-convention-speech

Politics of fear, guess it's a tried and true Republican path, but this seems to have sunk to new depths 🙁

@mrblobbt Donald Trump gave himself away as a full-fat fascist.

He asked for a wall,he got his wall >>> Drumpf's wall

Well it made me laugh

Why has Trump got a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame? Is it for his role in Home Alone 2?

For the Apprentice (and for submitting the application and paying the fee, which I read is $30000)

Just noticed that Donald Trump has armed militia men protecting him during rallies. Please tell me they wear armbands, also they should salute their leader more - perhaps by using a Roman salute, everyone knows the Romans were cool. Also they would look even snazzier if their uniforms were brown.

The politics of the demagogue seem to be en vogue. Trump hasn't been alone in selling fear to drum up support.

Maybe it's because right wing politics has run out of things to offer?

I thought this was an interesting take - "The case for making Donald Trump America's first king":

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/20/12235572/donald-trump-king-america

Evidently, Trump is interested in the prestige and public attention that comes with the presidency. But he doesn’t want to spend a lot of time worrying about niggling policy issues like Brexit or corporate tax reform.

While the idea of a president with no power sounds crazy to American ears, it’s actually how a lot of advanced democracies work around the world. Many countries have a ceremonial figurehead — either an elected president or a hereditary monarch — who represents the nation at state dinners and ribbon-cutting ceremonies. And they also have a head of government, usually the prime minister, who makes all the important policy decisions.

In the United States, we’ve combined these roles into a single person, and it hasn’t been working very well. It’s made the presidency an impossibly demanding job, while giving our head of government a degree of prestige that makes it harder to hold him accountable for his policy mistakes.

simon_g - Member
I thought this was an interesting take - "The case for making Donald Trump America's first king":

It's already had an [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton ]emperor[/url] though.

Vomit-inducing little fascist.

We are so screwed.

*sigh*
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/21/donald-told-21-fact-checked-proven-lies-acceptance-speech.html

Outrageous lies used to hoodwink a reactionary public into making a shitty electorial decision? Hmmm, there's something about that that sounds familiar...

I don't think the American public is particularly reactionary, if they were then John McCain would have won in 2008 and Mitt Romney would have won in 2012.

What the US electorate is is highly politically polarised, far more so than any other time in recent history and far more so than other comparable countries.

The Tea Party Republicans are particularly vocal (and they have plenty of money to be heard) which creates a false impression, imo, that they reflect overwhelming public opinion. But it shouldn't be forgotten that at the opposite end are American liberals and that Bernie Sanders has proved to be hugely popular with the American public. Although admittedly not quite enough to win the Democrat nomination. He did however have a significant effect on the political narrative, something which even Trump can't ignore.

The US is very reactionary, actually the planet seems reactionary at the mo. Someone's political persuasion doesn't really matter that much, I see friends that consider themselves leftwing/progressive/liberal also being reactionary; posting fake (and unchecked) quotes as memes and links to dubious blogs that support what they think is their viewpoint, usually without reading them first. I see this happen with pro-Corbyn, anti-Tory, anti-Trump posts as much as I see anti-Trump, anti-foreign, anti-Europe etc.

Also; the Silent Majority which was the backbone of small-c conservative politics for decades seems to have evaporated; everyone has an opinion and they seem to be sharing it on social media. The 'Angry Brigade' is no long the preserve of the militant left. We seem to be living in an increasingly binary world.

The US is very reactionary, actually the planet seems reactionary at the mo. Someone's political persuasion doesn't really matter that much, I see friends that consider themselves leftwing/progressive/liberal also being reactionary; posting fake (and unchecked) quotes as memes and links to dubious blogs that support what they think is their viewpoint, usually without reading them first. I see this happen with pro-Corbyn, anti-Tory, anti-Trump posts as much as I see anti-Trump, anti-foreign, anti-Europe etc.

Also; the Silent Majority which was the backbone of small-c conservative politics for decades seems to have evaporated; everyone has an opinion and they seem to be sharing it on social media. The 'Angry Brigade' is no long the preserve of the militant left. We seem to be living in an increasingly binary world.

Yep, I agree. Feels like everyone's made a dash for the extremes!

simon_g: I've trotted that same argument out in defence of our Queen. It's actually quite handy to have a separate ceremonial Head of State to handle opening hospitals and the like, leaving the PM free to get on with their job.

Not sure I'd want it to be Trump though 😯

CNN poll has Trump ahead - a post comvention bounce perhaos but I am not sure we"'ll see the same from Hillary

[url= http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html ]linky[/url]

Is it too late to vote in Bernie Sanders? I thought the superdelegates could vote for whoever they like?

Doesnt really matter who wins, those in power, large companies/banks etc, those who control the media and all those non elected civil servants or whatever theyre called over there have THE REAL POWER.

Michael Moore discussion on why Trump will win - genuinely interesting on the mathematics of the rust belt states etc.

http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/

^ That popped up in my twitter feed yesterday courtesy of Stephen Kinsella (economics lecturer @ Limerick Uni)

A few months ago i would have laughed at the absurd possibility of trump being president but these days i'm quite resigned to the fact that he's going to win the election.

And this after the democrats put such titanic effort into selecting their candidate with the worse chance of beating Trump. All the while shouting unelectable! unelectable! Genius.

Ninfan - that was an interesting read.

Soma yes me too, 9 minths ago I thought Trump was a side show who'd soon be brushed aside.

Northwind, the democratic voters didn't think Bernie had anchance. Hillary won easily.

"Trump Lie: Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more deeply than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our border.
Fact: Washington Post Fact Checker: “Data on immigrants and crime are incomplete, but a range of studies show there is no evidence immigrants commit more crimes than native-born Americans.” [Washington Post, 7/8/15]"

Some of those 20 odd lies are pretty tenuous...

Someone like Paul Mcenna (but not him) wrote an article on Trump that made me realise he had a cunning strategy to win that could work.

He tells lies and immediately gets debunked. But the very debunking spreads the message behind the lie. You're effectively getting the opposition to campaign for you.

It's a bit like the 350 million. Debunked in May. Remainers just kept spreading it. People knew it was exaggerated, but they repeated it over and over spreading the Leave campaign's message that EU membership has a cost for them.

True that oob. I think another factor is that for a certain group of voters, forcing the establishment to challenge these lies just emphasises the idea that he is some kind of anti-establishment hero that "tells it like it is" (i.e. without all those inconvenient facts and figures that no one can be bothered reading).

Again I think there are parallels with Brexit here where somehow Boris Johnson managed to cultivate an anti-establishment image, despite the fact that he couldn't be more establishment if he tried.

Someone like Paul Mcenna (but not him) wrote an article on Trump that made me realise he had a cunning strategy to win that could work.

I am more and more convinced,that during their campaigns,both Trumpet and Boris had some crafty subliminal messages running on all the big screens behind them.

Worth a read on the insight into the campaigns, the funds and the structures
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-24/is-donald-trum p's-celebrity-enough-to-win-the-us-election/7655816

Excitement, drama, showbiz, plagiarism — the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

But now, there is an even bigger intrigue: just how could Republican nominee Donald Trump win the election in November?

Australian journalist Jonathan Swan, who works for the authoritative US political media outfit called The Hill, is part of a small, specialist group of US reporters that follow the massive amounts of money that flow into political campaigns and said a lot of it — in fact, a big chunk of it — has to do with money.

'We've never seen an experiment like this'

Swan said Mr Trump may be a billionaire, but his campaign is not all that wealthy.

Worth a read on the insight into the campaigns, the funds and the structures
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-24/is-donald-trum p's-celebrity-enough-to-win-the-us-election/7655816

Really interesting, thank's for sharing that.

People voted Leave as the EU is dysfunctional. There was no positive case you could make for it. Arguing about £350m was stupid as the line "but its [b]only[/b] £150m a week or £10bn pa" just played into Leave's hands. Boris never tried to appear anti-establishment, people certainly voted "against" Cameron / IMF / OECD establishment but not for Boris or any other individual.

"Lie" is not a place Hilary is gong to go, in fact its Trump who is going to go after her on this ground. She has a long track record of saying one thing then doing another plus she's been found to have lied repeatedly about Benghazi / personal email server. She is very very unpopular.

To bring the EU / US elections together the trade deal with Mexico (NAFTA) is very unpopular. Under Trump I would expect major changes in it, perhaps it's just torn up. The view in much of the US is trade deals just export jobs. No deal is seen to be a better option.

Mike you need a short url for that.

IMO Trump will raise enough money. Whether its more or less than Clinton I don't know.

This is the article I was talking about:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126589300371/clown-genius

jambalaya - Member
People voted Leave as the EU is dysfunctional. There was no positive case you could make for it.

You haven't been paying attention.

People voted Leave as the EU is dysfunctional. There was no positive case you could make for it. Arguing about £350m was stupid

My point was the technique employed, not the issue itself.

When Remainers were still screaming from the rooftop that £350 mill overstated the payments (two months after the number was debunked) what they were actually doing was publicizing the Leave message that there's a significant cost. Making part of the Leave case for them.

Exactly as Scott Adams says, I had no idea exactly what EU membership costs before, and I still don't. I've *never* heard a 'Leaver' say what it is. But thanks to Remainers I know it's a little bit South of £350 mill due to whatever discount we get. The Leavers told a lie, which tricked the Remainers into giving a vast amount of free publicity to the idea behind the lie.

Whether it was a good/meaningful argument or not is irrelevant to the point. If the Leave campaign had stated the exact correct number it wouldn't have made the news at all. Exaggerating the number made it front page news for weeks and motivated the Remain campaign to spread a Leave message far and wide.

If you don't like that example I'm sure you can think of another you prefer.

outofbreath - I think we agree. I just read the Dilbert article. One place I think Adams (and many others) are making a grave mistake is the same Remain argument that "smart people" automatically vote Remain / Clinton. Firstly its not true and secondly it galvanises support for the other side who say FU. Also the net figure for EU is £10bn pa as I posted above, thats current figure and it moves about as contributions are calculated based on relative strengths of the economies (we are predicted to outperform EU substantially post Brexit). So its £10bn and rising

Trump won the nomination as he was the best candidate in what was a weak field. Sadly he's the best candidate Trump vs Clinton. In fact he's the perfect candidate to put up against the ultra-establishment Clinton "brand"

One place I think Adams (and many others) are making a grave mistake is the same Remain argument that "smart people" automatically vote Remain / Clinton.

I didn't really get that message from the Adam's article, but yeah, I'd agree that would be a big mistake. Sounds like Clinton won't be making the same mistakes the Remain campaign made, they're got serious campaigning machinery.

On the brexit parallel a few things contributed.
Shouting very loudly and blaming the eu
Dissatisfaction with the government
The government could not admit that if they wanted to the could have fixed most of the things people are complaining about but chose not to.

On the link just cut and paste it.
On Trump the link does go some way to suggest the difference in the campaigns, how the voters will react to Democrats door knocking and advertising etc will be telling Trump has none of the infrastructure and a fraction of the cash. The infrastructure he will be borrowing don't trust or like him. The senators are distancing themselves. Clinton already has a massive presence in the swing states so that will benefit her greatly.

I would expect to see a lot of trumps most shocking outbursts being played to the key demographics over the next few months. Just a reminder of what he really stands for.

OOB - I'm glad that other people realised that

me pre-referendum:

[IMG] [/IMG]

and for those who doubt the effect:

[img] [/img]

@ninfan Once again I fail to have an original insight. 🙁

I prefer to think that great minds think alike. 😀