Is there a thread about this yet? Couldn't find one. Anyway..
So it would seem the US is following the rest of the western world in rejecting mainstream establishment candidates/parties in preference for 'extremist' firebrands. It'll be interesting to see if it lasts. My initial relief at the defeat of Trump in Iowa has been tempered by Cruz's apparent crazyness. Clinton must be wondering why she's bothering with all this again. Sanders is an interesting bloke. Perhaps a vision of what Corbyn isn't?
Every time i turn on the news to see some squirrel eating shitkicker whooping how he's going to be voting for 'The Donald' I fear for the future of humanity.
Throw Palin into the mix and you've a whole new level of keraaaaazy....
Its not funny any more. Make it stop! 😥
Well having looked into Cruz, I'm not so sure he's a better option than Trump. Trump for all his bombast is a bit of a circus figure, he'll say anything to win. I doubt he'd actually do a lot of it. Cruz on the other hand is much more sinister. A religious zealot basically as far as I can see. And I'm more scared of that than a egotistical attention seeker.
Trump and Sanders both lost to "machine" politicians.
Whilst Trump is a walloper, she is on another planet.
I would though....
Well as Trump has previously pointed out, not winning is being a loser. So it must be time for him to throw in the towel.
Trump and Sanders both lost to "machine" politicians.
Pushing it a bit to say Sanders lost. It was decided on a coin toss. And I'm not sure how in any sense you can call Cruz a 'machine' candidate. [url= http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/is-senator-ted-cruz-our-new-mccarthy ]Some think he's the new McCarthy[/url] and he's despised within the Republican establishment.
Some think he's the new McCarthy
To be fair, its not a struggle to imagine any Republican candidate for the last 2 decades ending up with that tag. They all do the wrapping themselves up in the flag/if you're not with us, you're against us thing by default
I would though....
Would you?…really?…… 😯
Well as Trump has previously pointed out, not winning is being a loser. So it must be time for him to throw in the towel.
I don't think being a loser in Iowa is that much of a predictor of the eventual winner, at least as far as the Republican nomination is concerned.
Feels like a very bad dream. And I thought Scottish politics was worrying! 😉
Caught bits of the Trump programmes last week, and that was genuinely scary.
I know who'd get my vote
[img] 
[/img]
The current debate is whether Ted Cruz is actually able to _be_ president. The thinking is that, despite living in the US, he's a naturalised Canadian (by birth) and, as such, is ineligible.
That would be a hilarious outcome.
Anyway, the only sensible candidate is John McAfee.
Despite my approval of Corbyn winning the labour leadership, when I look at Sanders it does make me despair that the British left couldn't come up with a similarly passionate candidate. For all his measured intellectualism, Corbyn could do with a bit more anger rather than just sneering disapproval. Question is could Sanders actually win (the presidency, not the candidacy)? Or would he condemn the world to Cruz or Trump should he win the nomination? It's a scary dilemma for the lefties.
I think you can tell a lot about a candidate by their memes. Bernie's is the wordiest and most hardcore
[img] 
?t=zb5w5lqknFYxaP1XjJNgkg&f=1454907600[/img]
but it's also indistinguishable from reality
[img] 
[/img]
Well having looked into Cruz, I'm not so sure he's a better option than Trump. Trump for all his bombast is a bit of a circus figure, he'll say anything to win. I doubt he'd actually do a lot of it. Cruz on the other hand is much more sinister. A religious zealot basically as far as I can see. And I'm more scared of that than a egotistical attention seeker.
Nail on head...
Couldn't agree more, the last thing the world needs right now is another religious nut job in charge of the most powerful nation on earth.
nyt story was headlined "Trump receives humbling defeat in Iowa". I doubt it will humble him...
Trump and Saunders are not-electable by the majority of the population. The process to select the candidates are done by a tiny proportion of the population and tend to attract the extremists.
Even the Americans could not elect Trump.
Cruz requires the hard core right wing Christian votes - and (hopefully) there are not enough of those.
Rubio is therefore likely to be selected on one side.
Clinton will be on the other. Saunders may do well in the NE states, but has no chance in the South, West and mid-West. This removes the big states of Florida, Texas and California.
I think Clinton may struggle in some of those states as well. For a start, she's a woman (not good with south, south-west states) and is in favour of tighter gun control (not good with anything but California).
I'm not a political commentator though, so will probably be wrong.
Clinton will be on the other. [s]Saunders[/s] Sanders may do well in the NE states, but has no chance in the South, West and mid-West. This removes the big states of Florida, Texas and California.
I think Sanders will do better in California if he gets the nomination.
Clinton will be on the other.
And I bet you thought Andy Burnham would be labour leader? How can you say that with such certainty given that Sanders poll ratings were in single figures not long ago and he was written off, and now he's tied with Clinton in Iowa? What evidence is there that what happened here is not also happening in the US?
willard - Memberis in favour of tighter gun control (not good with anything but California).
Well here's an interesting point... Because when you ask most americans "are you in favour of tighter gun control" most say no. But if you ask them if the want mandatory background checking, 70% (or higher, depending on the poll) say yes.
There's an obvious contradiction there and the most likely explanation is that most americans think gun control is much stricter than it actually is- so new laws are simultaneously seen as draconian, while still not being as strict as they assume the law to be.
It's such an emotive issue that it's probably hard to educate people but you can still position it, and they've got smarter at this- talking about responsible gun owners, "gun safety" not gun control. But it's easy to counter with DEY TURK UR GUNZ
sadmadalan's post reflects the consensus of the political commentators - Sanders needed to win and Rubio is sufficiently close that he should do well in other states. Hey, but consensus can be wrong.
consensus of the political commentators
After the past 6-12 months I don't think anyone can say that sentence with a straight face any more. Of course whether that applies to the US rather than the UK is the question. I may be wrong but it seem like a lot of the dynamics in play here with regard to the SNP, Corbyn, the election etc, are also playing out in the US, but with much higher stakes an potential consequences.
At this stage, where the parties vote for their favoured candidate, what is stopping democrats voting for a complete nutter on the republican side to skew the process?
Question is could Sanders actually win (the presidency, not the candidacy)?
If he runs against Trump, then definitely. Trump is such an imbecile he'll be found out. Not all of America is as stupid as the Trump supporters, fortunately.
At this stage, where the parties vote for their favoured candidate, what is stopping democrats voting for a complete nutter on the republican side to skew the process?
I think most US primaries are closed, i.e. you are either a registered Republican or Democrat and can only vote in the relevant party's primary. There could be a rush of Democrats registering as Republicans, but it would have to be a lot of people to make a difference.
It does happen. My friend was an active Democratic Party member and he told me the local Dems and Reps regularly registered on each other's side to try and get the most loony candidate nominated. (This was for state politics - idk if he also meant it happened for presidential campaigns.)
Northwind, I think many Americans see the two seemingly contradicting gun control questions like this:
"I want to have access to any type of firearm I like with no restriction (i.e. do not tighten gun control on the firearm type or capacity), but I am fine with having you check the FBI database and criminal records for all firearm purchases (i.e. to prevent convicted felons having legal access to firearms)".
It's when you get deeper into the politics, constitutional aspects and the 'riders' that are put on most bills that lobbyist such as the NRA throw a spanner into the works. Much of the sensible legislation that the NRA opposes is opposed for broader reasons than they actually articulate. They (NRA, conservatives etc.) are very scared of ending up like the boiling frog - slowly enveloped in a cosy warm bath of federal 'help and assistance' and ending up with all their civil liberties boiled away.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/04/new-hampshire-town-hall-clinton-and-sanders-spar-over-progressive-record ]http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/04/new-hampshire-town-hall-clinton-and-sanders-spar-over-progressive-record[/url]
The parallels between the UK and US are becoming ever clearer. Now that the democrat establishment has woken up to the fact that Sanders can't be dismissed or written off, they're trying to rewrite history and portray their candidate as a woman-of-the-people progressive, who absolutely isn't a puppet of wall st. and corporate America. Next she'll be saying she wants to nationalise the railways.
When ordinary people have shite lives while the political elites just free ride all the way then it worth the risks to vote in someone different to see if there can be improvement ...
Problem is, for corbs and sanders when it comes to election time period fear change and will just go with the corporate lapdogs : Cameron/Clinton etc
I see Trump is now claiming fraud, going on the defensive and fueling the "Washington is just for the elite" conspiracy nut jobs.
Problem is, for corbs and sanders when it comes to election time period fear change and will just go with the corporate lapdogs : Cameron/Clinton etc
True, but in this case we have the extremely interesting potential scenario of non-establishment candidates on both sides. Should he win the nomination, I'd say Sanders has a much better chance of winning the election than Corbyn ever will. The stakes are huge though, is it worth the risk of ending up with Trump or Cruz?
The repbulicans are now horse-trading on who would do the most torturing. You couldn't make it up.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/06/donald-trump-waterboarding-republican-debate-torture ]http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/06/donald-trump-waterboarding-republican-debate-torture[/url]
The repbulicans are now horse-trading on who would do the most torturing. You couldn't make it up.
Yep. Can't understand why Assange doesn't want to be dragged there!!
old story, but I couldn't help hearing the voice and melodic, artful use of lanuage of Cletus' wife from the Simpsons when Palin was speaking/shouting in support of Trump the other day.
Also, even older story but I reliase there is a lot of love for the Princess Bride on here it seems: have we done this one?
[url= http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/12/ted-cruz-the-princess-bride-mandy-patinkin ]Mandy Patinkin on Cruz missing the point about Inigo Montoya[/url]
“I have been in the revenge business so long, now that it’s over, I don’t know what to do with the rest of my life.”
so basically he said those words dont mean what you think they do 😉
Nice article and interesting take he has. Have to confess I had not thought that much about that line or the deeper meaning of the film
[b]Doom! [/b] We are.
[img] 
[/img]
Junkyard - lazarus
...Have to confess I had not thought that much about that line or the deeper meaning of the film
...there's a deeper meaning to the film?
😯
surroundedbyhills - MemberI see Trump is now claiming fraud, going on the defensive and fueling the "Washington is just for the elite" conspiracy nut jobs.
It's not fraud but he's got a point, Cruz's tactics were pure shitebaggery. Though it's kind of ironic that after months of him being an obvious shitebag, a little lie on election night is what's finally convinced lots of people that he's a shitebag.
So anyone betting on a Sanders vs Trump election? Incredible to think about it. For some bizarre reason I almost feel sorry for Clinton, in the same way that I felt sorry for Burnham. What should be her cast iron chance of the presidency is disappearing on a wave of anti-establishment sentiment. She has a habit of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Long way to go yet though, and a lot of mud to be slung and dirty dishes to be washed in public.
Some commentators have been suggesting recently that if a Trump vs Sanders election is looking likely, Michael Bloomburg will stand as an independent and presumably pitch himself as a sane middle-ground candidate.
Coowee did you catch Trump yesterday ?
US election... has suddenly become interesting. 😯
if a Trump vs Sanders election is looking likely, Michael Bloomburg will stand as an independent and presumably pitch himself as a sane middle-ground candidate.
Apart from the fact he essentially bought his way into office through sheer wealth (!), he was a very good NYC mayor. However, my concern would be that he would split the Democratic vote while Republicans recoil from his gun-hating, gay-hugging, cosmopolitan, "New York" (ie Jewish) values...and that leads to President Trump.
Much better is if Trump is not nominated, stands as an Indy and splits the (Cruz?) Republican vote. Then it will be full-on Nelson Muntz time.
Also, even older story but I reliase there is a lot of love for the Princess Bride on here it seems: have we done this one?
Mandy Patinkin on Cruz missing the point about Inigo Montoya
well I've learnt something new from this thread. Saul was Inigo. I've watched all five seasons of Homeland wondering why he looked familiar.
So its not just here that gesture politics can get our of hand
The US [s]dream[/s]nightmare gets ever closer!
[img] 
[/img]
Jesus Christ, yunki 🙁
Whut? Let's make America great again
Yunki you look a lot like that Donald Trump fella from America, the dude with the moody syrup.
This thread is making me crave hot wings 🙁
Bear in mind though that Iowa and New Hampshire aren't massively representative of the US as a whole; Iowa full of farmers and NH is pretty much Saunder's back yard, It's like predicting a Labour Landslide by looking at the results from Luton.
[img] 
[/img]
Question is could Sanders actually win (the presidency, not the candidacy)?
If he runs against Trump, then definitely. Trump is such an imbecile he'll be found out. Not all of America is as stupid as the Trump supporters, fortunately.
I remember the exact same being said about Bush. And they voted him in. Twice!
It is an embarrasing sideshow for American politics and really will not reflect what will happen at the Election.
The GOP are in a mess which is playing right into Hillarys hands apart from that Bernie guy is making her and the democratic party nervous because they know that just like if Trump is the GOP candidate, the GOP won't win and Bernie will not hand victory to the democrats. Trump is a so extreme, he will be trounced at the Election (don't let a few squirrel kickers fool you differently). Bernie is so far left (for US politicis) people will be frightened for their rights.
So if it is Bernie vs Trump, Bloomberg will win, which is what he secretly has his fingers crossed for in the wings. Bloomberg is just about the right mix of weird right and weird left politics to appeal to the middle ground who are sprinting away from disassociated themselves with Bernie or Donald.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/23/donald-trump-wins-nevada-caucuses-results ]http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/23/donald-trump-wins-nevada-caucuses-results[/url]
Trump looks unstoppable now 😯
I think I'm beginning to understand what it must have been like to be a liberal in Europe in the 1920s. The parallels are stark. I'm not saying Trump is a genocidal maniac, but he clearly has a cast-iron, and unjustified belief in his rhetoric. The only question is whether he's just saying this stuff to win, or whether he'll actually implement any of this should he become president? And meanwhile all rational and level headed people around the world have their head in the sand thinking it will never happen.
I can see a lot of Americans abstaining in this election which means it could go either way, based on who people hate least.
Whoever gets in, you can guarantee that the first mid-terms will see both houses go against the incumbent.
And meanwhile all rational and level headed people around the world have their head in the sand thinking it will never happen
I have said several times, the short term pain of a Trump presidency, could be a good thing for world politics. It could end the American political philosophy imperialism that we are currently suffering and create a stronger and more humane political movement with the US on the outside.
It could end the American political philosophy imperialism that we are currently suffering
You think the US will become less imperialistic with Trump as president? His entire philosophy is based on projecting American power into all corners of the world so that they become 'winners' again.
You think the US will become less imperialistic with Trump as president?
I think the rest of the world is more likely to turn its back on US political ideology with Trump as president.
unjustified belief in his rhetoric
@dazh what on earth makes you think is belief is unjustified. Trump has far more credibility with his supporters than do his opponents, this is for a variety of reasons not least is they believe he speaks his mind - he doesn't do political correctness.
Yes he looks unstoppable and remember Clinton is as disliked amongst Republicans and Trump is amongst democrats. He really could win the race for President
@MSP the world quite simply cannot turn its back on the single most powerful, wealthy and geo-politically important country. As for "Imperialism" Imagree with @dazh. Trump is all about American power and influence, what he's said is he will not be the worlds policeman. So if we want to deal with Putin in Ukraine it will on our own backs. What he has very clearly said is he will "bomb the shit" out of IS which sounds more like the Russian approach - all oit to win
You have to wonder at a country where Trump can apparently win 44% of the Hispanic vote???
You have to love the funnies that democracy throws up - good job we are not talking about an important role here 😯
they believe he speaks his mind
That's the problem. What's in his mind doesn't make him fit to hold a serious political position (or the coat of someone who does). Luckily, all presidents have to wade through the quagmire of Senate and Congress, so, should the worse happen, he will probably find himself moderated or ignored.
Contacts in DC are surprisingly unfazed by the rise of Trump - the machine that is DC will, according to them, simply swallow him up.
I hope, if the nightmare scenario comes to pass, that they are correct
Try and catch Sky News piece on Trump in Nevada. There is a short comment from a black gentleman, I paraphrase
[i]Politicians have caused the problems, we need a businessman in Washington to take care of business[/i]
@tmh, prior generation immigrants in the US legally have every reason to be worried about illegal immigrants undermining their wages amd discrediting them ? Why wouldn't Hispanic voters support Trump's comments on immigration controls on Muslims ? Just becuse we think Trump's comments are outrageous doesn't mean others do.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
Beyond the waterboarding and wall building, Trump doesn't actually have any policies for make 'merica great again, it's all rhetoric and rabble rousing. It seems odd that no one has actually asked him how he plans to fulfill his wish.
Yep I hear he plays well with the idiots
"We won with the highly educated. We won with the poorly educated ... I love the poorly educated."
Along with the racists, homophobes, xenophobia, sexist's and many more of the rank and file republican party.
He's playing a good game though, but like some conspiracy posters in here, contradict criticise or cast doubt and your part of the problem.
Like many elections the left or the right have no influence, they will vote their side regardless it's the middle who win it. How many won't vote for the other one is more critical.
I don't think there is anyone who can imagine a Trump presidency is good for the world. The nut cases behind him in the polls seem to want to return the US to the dark ages on things like equality and discrimination.
Because he wants to deport 11 million of them?
@egb as a businessman and well know figure after 10+ years on the US version of the Apprentice the public identify him as a figure with the experience to focus on business issues and not politics. Innthe way the SNP and Corbyn try and place themselves as the anti-establishment candidate Trump does just the same thing.
@kimbers yup the Americans know he said that, thats partky why they are voting for him. Obamas universal healthcare policies have been very unpopular in the US, its a country where yiu can only claim unemployment benefits for 2 years. Its a different place politically, its a country made up of legal migrants who couod have been sent back from Ellis Island to where they came if they where sick, its a country with very different polotics than we have here.
Be in no doubt I thoughtbhe was unelectable but I can understand why he's now the front runner and looks unstoppable
Be in no doubt I thoughtbhe was unelectable but I can understand why he's now the front runner and looks unstoppable
in the same way you thought it was a good idea to vote for corbyn?
@dazh what on earth makes you think is belief is unjustified. Trump has far more credibility with his supporters than do his opponents
It stands to reason that his supporters would think him more credible than his opponents.
its a country with very different polotics than we have here.
Yeah thanks for that. Like we hadn't realised. Doesn't make it any less worrying or scary though. The constitution's checks and balances will hopefully restrict him but only domestically. He will still have control of the military and foreign policy.
jambalaya - Member@egb as a businessman and well know figure after 10+ years on the US version of the Apprentice the public identify him as a figure with the experience to focus on business issues and not politics. Innthe way the SNP and Corbyn try and place themselves as the anti-establishment candidate Trump does just the same thing.
I get that but not all Republicans are stupid. You'd think at some point someone would get bored with the bluster and destroy him with some detail.
They've tried the "detail" and failed. The detail he's come up with has proven popular, an anti migrant wall paid for by Mexico and a ban on Muslims
in the same way you thought it was a good idea to vote for Corbyn
Different case, Corbyn was to be leader of the opposition and I wanted his far left agenda to be presented to tje electorate for their consideration. Trump I would not have supported no matter what. I am for Clinton
You'd think at some point someone would get bored with the bluster and destroy him with some detail.
Sadly Trump benefits from the same immunity from public and media interrogation as Boris Johnson. They could both be in power come christmas!
Trump has far more credibility with his supporters
I'd have thought even Trump's ego might be dented if his supporters didn't think he was credible...
Thing is, this is for the Republican ticket, so it looks like Trump has loads of support, latest one puts him at 35% of "the vote" but that registered Republican voters...In reality that's about 8% of the population at large, and mostly means that Republicans haven't made up their minds yet between him, Cruz and Rubio.
Sensationalist reporting is sensationalist shocker...
Corbyn was to be leader of the opposition and I wanted his far left agenda to be presented to tje electorate for their consideration.
That not the real reason you wanted him now is it you want to rejoice in his failure at doing this.
As for Trump he may well win the republican ticket but he has no chance of mustering a credible vote from folk likely to vote republican never mind getting the middle ground. He is the Farage of the US incredibly popular with those who think like him and a joke/scary/laughable to almost everyone else.
HIs brand of make america great, smite all our foes, whilst making them pay for it, is popular with some. Its also unrealistic,simplistic and borderline madness and everyone else can see why. Mexico wont be paying for a wall- why would they its madness to think this.
Mexico wont be paying for a wall- why would they its madness to think this.
God help the buffoon if he did get in. Would be amusing if he did just for the leaked recording of him trying this line with the Mexican president, and the ensuing howls of laughter.
Mexico wont be paying for a wall- why would they its madness to think this.
To keep all the US emigrants trying to escape the Trump regime out. Canada will do the same but demand the US build and pay for it.