thegreatape – Member

Can he be that dim and have done so well both in business and, so far, politically?

Mostly what he’s done is take the massive bag of money he was loaned to set up in business, and another massive bag of money he inherited, and slowly turn it into a larger bag of money. But his actual rate of return has been pretty poor- a recurring theme of the campaign has been articles comparing him unfavourably with other businessmen like his rivals the LeFraks, and pointing out that his rate of return is pretty comparable to index linked funds (depending of course on who you believe regarding his net worth). So it’s arguable how succesful he’s really been- his personal successes seem exaggerated, his personal failures pretty substantial (and much of the cost borne by others), and now much of his value is based on leasing his brand name to other people.

And ironically his dad made most of his money exploiting federal subsidies. (not abusing btw, just exploiting- he built a shitload of affordable housing and made a pretty big impact on NYC)

It’s all just part of the mythmaking. But “My dad made a fortune from taxpayers then I turned that into a slightly larger fortune” isn’t such an impressive tale.

And he’s not dumb or stupid. He know’s exactly what he’s doing and how to get elected. It’s just not clear what he’ll do if he is.

Oh look I am high …

Really? I’d never have guessed!

Bush may have been dim, but he came from a well connected political dynasty. He will have surrounded himself with at least a few political advisors with half a brain.

Wasn’t Karl Rove often referred to as Bush’s brain?

Bazz – Member

Oh look I am high …

Really? I’d never have guessed! [/quote]
You like weed? Yes?
Legalise weed? Yes?

Northwind – Member

thegreatape – Member
Can he be that dim and have done so well both in business and, so far, politically?

Mostly what he’s done is take the massive bag of money he was loaned to set up in business, and another massive bag of money he inherited, and slowly turn it into a larger bag of money …[/quote]
He is definitely not dimmer than you lot that I am sure.
Even if he has inherited all the money he surely has not wasted them all.

There are plenty of folks that consider themselves “clever” but what I don’t understand is why they are still in the dead end job day in day out …

Me mates who are highly intelligent (PhDs etc) knowing how to criticise people etc yet still struggle throughout their lives to earn a living … I mean are they stooopid or what? 😯

Ted Cruz’s main tactic against Trump is to point out that he is far more conservative/right wing than Trump. Who he is trying to portray as a New York liberal, not a real Republican as he’s previoisly donated to the Democrats and has supported abostion. So is he what people really want, a more genuine right winger than Trump ?

As for foreign policy Trump has already said he does not believe the US should be the world’s policeman. That could well mean greater instability with Europe forced to take a far more pro-active role not least against an emboldened Putin. STWers may think Bush created a huge problem in the region but is it worse if Trump walks away after having “bombed the sh1t oitnof IS” ?

Interesting perspective.

I hate to say it, but I’m forced to agree with Jamba on this one. Trump now has a very good shot at the Presidency. What that means in reality Christ knows. Cruz is equally mental, if not more. It’s bloody scary I’ve always been one to support shaking up the status quo but on this the stakes are too high and Clinton inspires very little confidence against the reactionary tsunami which seems to be advancing.

@mefty I read that today, was thinking of taking a photo and post too !

Tonights results are going to be very telling

jambalaya – Member

Ted Cruz’s main tactic against Trump is to point out that he is far more conservative/right wing than Trump. Who he is trying to portray as a New York liberal, not a real Republican as he’s previoisly donated to the Democrats and has supported abostion. So is he what people really want, a more genuine right winger than Trump ?

TBH this is definitely a thing. Cruz’s undoubted awfulness has been totally downplayed because of Trump’s. To be fair, this is just the GOP election, once we get to the actual election there’s a lot of time to refocus on that, but it’s definitely a concern that he becomes the acceptable republican when really we should be firing both of them into the sun.

Interesting perspective.

Although in Indiana ‘mildly conservative’ is still pretty right of center.

From that letter; the alternatives to Trump are “worse than Hitler”…

If that’s what passes for considered comment in the US, they deserve an idiot like Trump

Watching the BBC, which it seems is the new NBC, this morning reveals Trump ahead and Hil’s strongly fighting her corner.

It’ll be these two, it’s pretty much over for the rest of the candidates now..

If trumps support for that KKK douchebag, is a red flag (with a swaztika in the middle) id be very mindful of them voting on the next Hitler.
Trump is obviously racist, whipping up hated to win an election is not going to end well.

As for Trump going big on tax reform, really? a man who’s$$$ are stashed in offshore havens and repeatedly refuses to publish his tax returns, no chance

Amazingly, I too agree almost entirely with Jamba. I never thought Trump could win the nomination because I thought a “sensible” establishment candidate would have smashed him by now but he probably will become the candidate. I also think there is a lack of recognition on here for how tainted a brand Clinton is, how unsavoury she herself is, and how patriarchal voters are.

However, gawker has an interesting (invective-tinged) piece pointing out that Trump’s nomination and possible victory is a bit of a crisis for the republican establishment. On one hand, he has taken the bigoted dog whistle politics of previous campaigns and take It to an extreme – turns out a klaxon is better than a dog whistle. On the other hand, he has overturned key policies of the republican platform and rejected them eg some kind of public healthcare system. That’s not surprising in itself (shock – populist policies are popular!) but it’s a challenge to the funders that have spent a long time getting the republicans to convince people that elitist policies are good for them.

http://gawker.com/the-time-has-come-for-donald-trump-to-destroy-the-hater-1762231346

But a trump presidency is a nightmare, Clinton is a 90s zombie, Sanders is all over the place, and those people in the newspaper are just dickheads. We are living in the end times

The point is how much power does the US president actually have . Isn’t he really 99% just a kind of figurehead with little real influence . That’s partly why the likes of Reagan did OK because he was an actor and was good at delivering the lines he was given , even George W Bush was actually quite a good speaker , as is Obama . You just have to wonder whether Trump has the polish or class needed to do the job . One suspects that he doesn’t and will be effectively neutralised by the US political system . Neutralised as in made to be ineffective , not killed obviously .

The point is how much power does the US president actually have

Domestically, if – and it’s a big if – the republican establishment close ranks he’ll be as limited in what he can do as Obama has been. Internationally, he will have sole control of the US military and foreign policy, The world, quite literally, will be his oyster.

trump presidency is a nightmare, Clinton is a 90s zombie, Sanders is all over the place, and those people in the newspaper are just dickheads. We are living in the end times

I think there remains a strong possibility that Trump went ugly early to win the republican nomination (as has been pointed out, in many ways he is far to the left of the other candidates) in order to go more reasonable in the election. The noises are already being made that many of his pronouncements are a negotiating position to bring to the table in order to get the best deal.

What’s truly interesting is how much of his speeches actually discuss issues like trade imbalance and manufacturing. Amusing to hear him say last night that he would make Apple bring their production back to US shores, I’m sure that went down well with the board 😀

Trumps already got the rednecks eating out of the palm of his hand, if he can moderate his approach in the real campaign, then I suspect a choice between him and another Clinton (especially Hilary) will see a fair few swing voters go to him

have to agree with ninfan, if trump is much more cunning than he appears to be, then he could play the post nomination game very differently

his non commital flip-flopping and blaming his earpiece for refusing to condemn the KKK guy is a good example

he’s still refusing to disclose his tax returns and things like that may be a problem once he has the nomination and is under further scrutiny

I mean, if it’s all a cunning plan, he’s incredibly convincing. And I don’t believe he actually believes any of his positions. But his speeches and statements are just a collection of words. “We’re going to do amazing things, we have it all worked out, the things we are doing are things no one has ever done better, and if it doesn’t work, I’ll buy in the best to do an incredible job”.

I don’t know, I suspect that, with the diatribe that’s already been unleashed against him, most of those skeletons are already out in the open.

Blair commented in his autobiography that:

So I defined Major as weak; Hague as better at jokes than judgment; Howard as an opportunist; Cameron as a flip-flop, not knowing where he wanted to go. . . . Expressed like that, these attacks seem flat, rather mundane almost, and not exactly inspiring—but that’s their appeal. Any one of those charges, if it comes to be believed, is actually fatal. Yes, it’s not like calling your opponent a liar, or a fraud, or a villain or a hypocrite, but the middle-ground floating voter kind of shrugs their shoulders at those claims. They don’t chime. They’re too over the top, too heavy, and they represent an insult, not an argument. Whereas the lesser charge, because it’s more accurate and precisely because it’s more low-key, can stick. And if it does, that’s that. Because in each case, it means they’re not a good leader. So game over.

I feel strongly that the widespread attacks against Trump have failed to learn those Blairite lessons (as did Labour with Cameron, Gove, the NHS etc) castigating trump as mad, dangerous or stupid doesn’t work, if nothing else because millions of people have seen him on telly for years being the opposite, so it gets shrugged off as hyperbole… Equally I suspect Trump has been very much following that Blair lead, listen to what he says about his opponents, ‘weak’ ‘low energy’ it’s all very mild criticism but carefully aimed.

@konabunny – did you see Steve Forbes’ comments this week?

“Trump, even as he criticizes and throws out charges and all that kind of thing, he always ends up on an upbeat note about the USA. People want that, people want to hear that. They’re tired of all this gloom and doom, and ‘the U.S. is going in a trash heap.’”

“Make America great again” is a bloody fantastic message for a country as bruised and battered as they have been by a decade of war and a faltering economy. Trump has identified himself by standing For something, and that puts him out on his own when all his opponents are identifying themselves by what they are against

Remember how devastatingly effective “Things can only get better” was?

Remember how devastatingly effective “Things can only get better” was?

Yeah but it was a slogan, not the whole platform!

I’m not denying that Trump is popular or an effective campaigner. It’s not that his policies are objectionable – it’s that he rarely articulates any. When you read transcripts or listen to him speak, it’s so hopelessly vague that identifying the action points is like nailing jelly to a wall. He doesn’t have the slightest clue what he is talking about, and he is not bothered by this, and his supporters don’t care. They’re “common sense” people that are sick of “eggheads” making things “more complicated than they are”.

it’s that he rarely articulates any. When you read transcripts or listen to him speak, it’s so hopelessly vague that identifying the action points is like nailing jelly to a wall.

Is that not a sign of political genius? Pure Blair!

[video]http://youtu.be/Rm3d43HLyTI[/video]

FT’s political analyst was on TV saying he thought Trump would pick a fairly centre right VP running mate, probably a woman who was a child of immigrants – he did mention a lady of Indian heritage from Carolina. He doesn’t need to flip-flop on “no Muslims” as he has the caveat “until we know whats going on” – he will restrict access to many but it won’t be a ban. On the Wall he’ll start negotiations with Mexico on payment which may run fir a while, add in 11 trillion in personal and business tax cuts (his policy) and he’s an instant hero/success

This amused me:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/tanyachen/americans-are-coming

Apparently the search term “How to move to Canada” spiked by 350% as Trump won his 7th state 😆

Society gets the politicians it deserves. I thought it was bad with our dreadful opposition, but the US trumps (sorry) the mess we are in.

Some bad US karma being sorted out by the looks of things.

Not sure which is worse the Brexit debate or listening to Trump. Possibly now below yS levels, but may be that’s an exaggeration. Not far off though

Society gets the politicians it deserves. I thought it was bad with our dreadful opposition, but the US trumps (sorry) the mess we are in.

Some bad US karma being sorted out by the looks of things.

What an incredibly odd and naïve statement to make.

Try my best

So on your logic the UK public, based on their bad Karma, deserve to have Nigel Farage, George Galloway and Nick Griffin.

They deserve those politicians.

Well, we’ve Gove, Osborne & Hunt. For once I’m finding myself in agreement with thm!

Must sing the Internationale 10 times before I go to bed as penance…

Indeed, they cater for certain segments of the voting public. Why else would they be involved so visibly in politics?

Trumps VP?

Chris Christie thought it might be him, but shacking up with Satan has probably doomed his career

No matter how hungry for power they might be aligning with trump will drag them down along with trump upon his inevitable fall from grace

Very amusing analysis here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/03/02/chris-christies-wordless-screaming/

Option 1: Trump is the next President & UK remains in EU-SSR.

or

Option 2: UK out of EU-SSR & Clinton is the next President.

One of the above scenario is always the case …

My ideal is Trump Presidency and UK out of EU-SSR.

However I think that is unlikely so I don’t mind Option 2 but I will take either Option 1 or 2.

But the worst case scenario where we are all screwed will be …

UK remains in EU-SSR and Clinton is the next President. Screwed we are! Screwed!
🙄

My ideal is Trump Presidency and UK out of EU-SSR

Result being that U.K. joins NAFTA

Imagine Salmonds face 😀

Trump presidency, 1 year on……

On the plus side just imagine the material South Park’s writers will have to work with !

[video]https://youtu.be/TGc2nN9OguQ[/video]

Trump courting neonazis to get the nomination will come back to haunt him in the real election

shudder to think what itd be like if he actually won the presidency

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz9DbEpeWfM[/video]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/king-not-long-killed-trump-rally-article-1.2549868

An interesting piece in the grauniad this morning about the Republican clusterf***. Even more interesting that he thinks Sanders would be in with a better chance of beating Trump than Clinton. This election will not only go down as one where the lunatic fringe took over the mainstream rightwing, but one where the left missed an enormous, perhaps once in a lifetime opportunity to grasp power. It’s depressing on so many levels I don’t know where to start.

But the worst case scenario where we are all screwed will be …
UK remains in EU-SSR and Clinton is the next President. Screwed we are! Screwed!

I’m greatly heartened by the fact that chewkw’s worst case scenario is pretty much my best case scenario 🙂

dazh – Member

This election will not only go down as one where the lunatic fringe took over the mainstream rightwing, but one where the left missed an enormous, perhaps once in a lifetime opportunity to grasp power. It’s depressing on so many levels I don’t know where to start.

Not necessarily true. The take away message shouldn’t be “we got beat”,because they’ve already achieved the impossible, this is a proof of concept. The message is “The choice isn’t what you were told it was”. Even if Bernie does get beaten, he’s been in the fight and that wasn’t supposed to happen. The establishment will depict it as a perfect storm but it doesn’t have to be.

In other words, what makes it a once in a lifetime? It’s not just Clinton’s poor performance; people aren’t just voting against Clinton and the Democrat establishment didn’t have a better candidate. And it’s not just the Trump effect because Cruz is worse, there’s no candidate on the other side that Sanders couldn’t run against. This is the election where the GOP voters will actually get what they want, and even if they lose at the election I don’t think they’ll be keen to give up on that.

And the real earthshakers now aren’t about the nomination; it’s the polling that says to the democrats “This is your best candidate to be President”. That really wasn’t supposed to happen. He’s supposed to be at most, popular with his own party, like Trump, but he’s the most popular of all candidates (and more popular with the general public than with the party). Usual disclaimers about polls, obviously… But his campaign’s achieved the supposedly impossible over and over and all of it pales into insignificant compared to that.

So now the democrat establishment is frantically fighting to make sure their worst candidate wins 😆 And the GOP is realising too late that they can’t just ride their voters and put in place the man they want. These are potential gamechangers. You don’t need the democrat party apparatus and establishment and pacs to be in the fight. And you don’t need to vote for the lesser republican evil.

This is an optimistic view, of course, let someone else make the counter argument.