US Presidential election 2016
- Thread starter Warbler
- Start date
It was noted at the time that when he announced his candidacy, Donald Trump had handed America's stand up community 18 months worth of free amunition. Yesterday he went in search of the hsipanic vote with the following
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," Trump said at his announcement. "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," Trump said at his announcement. "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
He's trash and always has been, regardless of his Billions.
His anti-Mexican rant is just another example of his serial racism. Do you remember that beating and " gang rape" of a female jogger in Central Park that made headlines back in the 90's? Trump led what can only be called a lynch mob in demanding the death penalty for the 5 hispanic and black males accused of the crime, and took out full-page adverts full of vitriol and hate in the New York newspapers.
After serving a total of 40 years, the five accused were found to be totally innocent corroborated by DNA evidence and the confession of another individual completely unknown and unrelated to the five.
It's satisfying that his latest rant is resulting in his companies being boycotted and he himself having lucrative contracts with national firms terminated.
His anti-Mexican rant is just another example of his serial racism. Do you remember that beating and " gang rape" of a female jogger in Central Park that made headlines back in the 90's? Trump led what can only be called a lynch mob in demanding the death penalty for the 5 hispanic and black males accused of the crime, and took out full-page adverts full of vitriol and hate in the New York newspapers.
After serving a total of 40 years, the five accused were found to be totally innocent corroborated by DNA evidence and the confession of another individual completely unknown and unrelated to the five.
It's satisfying that his latest rant is resulting in his companies being boycotted and he himself having lucrative contracts with national firms terminated.
He's joint second in the early polls amongst those who've said they'll vote in the Iowa caucus (and closing in)
You said earlier that the world needed a Thatcher or Reagan character (disagree incidentally) but I would say be careful what you wish for. The prospect of Donald Trump being handed the big box of soldiers is a worrying one. God knows who he'd be prepared to play with them on?
You said earlier that the world needed a Thatcher or Reagan character (disagree incidentally) but I would say be careful what you wish for. The prospect of Donald Trump being handed the big box of soldiers is a worrying one. God knows who he'd be prepared to play with them on?
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
That may be, but he's a 20/1 price to win the Republican nomination against the 2/1 Jeb Bush.
Even in the unlikely circumstance of him overturning the odds, he will have no chance against Hilary in the main event.
No need for concern about hm being handed the nuclear codes just yet...................
Is there?
No need for concern about hm being handed the nuclear codes just yet...................
Is there?
He'll just buy them instead
It says much about the sorry state of American politics when the world is willing a Bush into the nomination as the voice of moderation! albeit Jeb was always regarded as the most capable (not that the competition need have been that strong)
I felt 1992 was something of a landmark election. For decades American Presidents could win the Whitehouse on the back of foreign policy. Typically this would involve bellicose anti Soviet rhetoric and all sorts of other patriotic posturing. Clinton was much faster in recognising the changing landscape and presented an agenda that was better atuned to the zeitgeist. The Republicans simply trotted out their old formula and looked out of date, hopelessly marrooned as they were in the cold war, and incapable of adjusting to the new world era. I think we have a few whose formative influences took shape in the mid 80's, and who have been unable to escape it's spell too, they've also been making hoorendous mistakes in judgement with a compass that's continually pointing them in the wrong direction.
I mention this because Trump seems to be taking his campaign onto this old ground which we know has resonated before. Everything he sees in the world is a threat to America and needs confronting. He said that he beats China everyday in business, he's said that Mexico is beating America in trade, and he's also rounding on internal targets (usually non white) but rolling that out into an immigration policy.
I think once the Republicans realised that their tune had run its course and that foreign policy could no longer win elections for them, they became very disorientated and didn't really no where to turn. It was about this time that things like abortion and gay marriage came to dominate their priorities, and the teat party started to spin off them. As someone said, when the big top falls down, the crowd goes to the freak shows on the fringe
I note Fox have Trump leading the polls (might be wishful thinking on their part) but when NASCAR are boycotting him, you know he's well over the extreme already
I suspect he could do quite well, as he's going to plug into that aggressive conservative streak that a significant minority of American's have. Equally though, there are huge sectors of American society who will adopt a 'anybody but Trump' strategy. Will he continue his campaign beyond the nomination though and do a Ross Perot?
That may be, but he's a 20/1 price to win the Republican nomination against the 2/1 Jeb Bush.
Even in the unlikely circumstance of him overturning the odds, he will have no chance against Hilary in the main event.
No need for concern about hm being handed the nuclear codes just yet...................
Is there?
exactly. Hes seen as a clown over there and the bookies have it right rather than the wilful assumptions of American haters
jeb bush is seen as a very moderate republican. The idea that all members of a family hold identical views is absurd. Christopher and Peter Hitchens anyone?
Tell me Clive, when you posted some denunciation yesterday about Shane Warne only being able to frame things through the prism of personal like or dislike, did it ever occur to you that you're about the worst offender on this forum for continually framing your own 'analysis' (I use the word lightly) exactly the same way?
That people were encouraging you weren't agreeing with your view incidentally that it was correct to sledge an Australian batsman over the death of his colleague. They were encouraging you to do it because they knew what would happen to you if you did!!! Typically though, you were oblivious to this.
That people were encouraging you weren't agreeing with your view incidentally that it was correct to sledge an Australian batsman over the death of his colleague. They were encouraging you to do it because they knew what would happen to you if you did!!! Typically though, you were oblivious to this.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
The whole thing is a waste of time. Whoever gets in is owned by the big corporations.
This is so poor.
The one thing so called corporations would benefit most from would be the abandoment of the anti trust laws
the usa has the strongest anti trust laws in the world and has had them fir decades
Well a few days ago he told us the golf word supported his views (as if that was either true anyway, or vindication). It appears now that the PGA have pulled the plug on his LA 'Grand Slam' finale. Mind you, the way this season is going it could be Jordan Spieth playing an exhibiton round
I do hope Turnberry doesn't get sucked into this. It's my favourite Open venue, and it would be a shame to see it caught in the cross fire and the R&A forced to drop it. They've already got to resolve the issue of Muirfield and Troon yet
I do hope Turnberry doesn't get sucked into this. It's my favourite Open venue, and it would be a shame to see it caught in the cross fire and the R&A forced to drop it. They've already got to resolve the issue of Muirfield and Troon yet
Last edited:
New York Times take an interesting view of Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/08/o...trump.html?partner=socialflow&smid=tw-nytimes
As they point out, the only Republican 'figure' who has been prepared to call him out is Jeb Bush's wife, and that's largely because she's latino. Any candidate who seeks to hide behind his wife is toast. The bottom line is they're either too scared of the man personally, too scared of losing the bloc of voters that Trump will appeal to, or privately agree with some of his sentiments and don't feel able to make a stand
Jeb's almost certainly correct otherwise though, to win the Presidential election, you need to risk losing the nomination in an attempt to steer yourself onto an electable ticket. I remember Andrew Neil interviewing Gulliani who was waxing lyrically about Reagan. Neil let him go on and then said "you do realise he wouldn't even get the nomination today though". Gulliani laughed, said that was the first time he'd ever heard such an observation, thought about it, laughed again, and conceeded that Neil was probably correct (very complementary about the line of questioning) albeit Gulliani probably saw Reagan in himself, and of course he failed spectacularly
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/08/o...trump.html?partner=socialflow&smid=tw-nytimes
As they point out, the only Republican 'figure' who has been prepared to call him out is Jeb Bush's wife, and that's largely because she's latino. Any candidate who seeks to hide behind his wife is toast. The bottom line is they're either too scared of the man personally, too scared of losing the bloc of voters that Trump will appeal to, or privately agree with some of his sentiments and don't feel able to make a stand
Jeb's almost certainly correct otherwise though, to win the Presidential election, you need to risk losing the nomination in an attempt to steer yourself onto an electable ticket. I remember Andrew Neil interviewing Gulliani who was waxing lyrically about Reagan. Neil let him go on and then said "you do realise he wouldn't even get the nomination today though". Gulliani laughed, said that was the first time he'd ever heard such an observation, thought about it, laughed again, and conceeded that Neil was probably correct (very complementary about the line of questioning) albeit Gulliani probably saw Reagan in himself, and of course he failed spectacularly
Last edited:
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
He needed the Mafia when he was building his empire in the 80s. There was no way around it in the construction game in those days.
I see he's caused a few stirs again. He's basically a tea party candidate, but the more and more he starts to fall out with the Republican party managers the more likely he'll be to run independently when he fails to get the nomination. Ross Perot all over again.
The bottom line is Trump's support has probably got a ceiling of 20-25% on it, and that's it. It means he can show up well for such time as there's a dozen or so candidates in the field, but as they drop out, their support will go elsewhere, not to the Donald
The bottom line is Trump's support has probably got a ceiling of 20-25% on it, and that's it. It means he can show up well for such time as there's a dozen or so candidates in the field, but as they drop out, their support will go elsewhere, not to the Donald
From a purely gambling perspective Hilary Clinton would be worth laying at even money on betfair.Outside chance that she will fail to get the Democratic nomination and even if she does the amount of negativity directed at her will be unreal.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Against that, Luke, if Trump doesn't succeed in getting the GOP nomination which is very possible, then he may well run as an independent ( He has said he in will do just that in the course of the televised debate a couple of nights ago).
This will split the Republican vote ( a la Ross Perot in the early 90's) and make Hilary a shoo-in for the POTUS.
I would be hesitant to bet against her at the moment.
This will split the Republican vote ( a la Ross Perot in the early 90's) and make Hilary a shoo-in for the POTUS.
I would be hesitant to bet against her at the moment.
Trump won't win. No chance. He's entertainment for now but basically a clown. He ,as lead but he doesn't exactly have a large share of vote. His vote is a reflection of current profile. That will change . Also I suspect he won't run as an independent either. It's a waste of money and time and he likes his bank balance
If he he declared as an independent -went hard at it for a couple of months then decided to withdraw how much leverage would that give him with the Republicans.
He likes his profile equally. Can you imagine Trump giving a concession speech? I don't see he could withdraw!!!
He's probably after his head on Mt Rushmore
Latest NBC Poll
NBC's post-debate poll has Trump at 23%, Cruz at 13%, Carson at 11%, Rubio and Fiorina (!) tied at 8%, and Bush/Walker at 7%
That's a big move for Fiorina (but then she's potentially one of the more capable). Jeb continues to flounder after he misjudged the mood again and complained about the amount of money being spent on women's health. Better off taking crude swipes at them instead Jeb (even if they called one of their children 'Thatcher'). Trump seems to have got the Dukes of Hazard vote anyway, and quite probably the patriotic militarists, but surely to god he can't expand his base beyond this? I've just got a feeling that banning him from the Red State debate might help him yet in the 'land of the free and the home of the brave'. With complete irony, it's going to allow him to portray himself as being bullied by a Republican elite (crazy I know given his history)
Last edited:
cant see that happening somehow.
i dont really know what his intentions are but frankly hes a sideshow and will remain so
He's an incredibly vindictive grudge bearer. I wouldn't like to second guess what he's capable of.
The GOP are clearly going to realise however (their thinkers knew it already) that he demeans women and openly insluts non white races. How can he possibly etc? The numbers aren't there, but the vision of him doing a graceful withdrawal speech acknowledging he was beaten fair and square etc I can't see. OK he could go out laying 101 accusations, but the GOP strategists are already calculating he's damaging their brand through its association with him. The frightening thing at the moment is that every time he opens his mouth and goes controversial, and they try and sanction him, his poll rating improves. Eventually he's going to over step and combust, I juts hope we don't have a major international incident during the camapign that allows him to plug into a popularist sentiment and ride temporary wave
The GOP are clearly going to realise however (their thinkers knew it already) that he demeans women and openly insluts non white races. How can he possibly etc? The numbers aren't there, but the vision of him doing a graceful withdrawal speech acknowledging he was beaten fair and square etc I can't see. OK he could go out laying 101 accusations, but the GOP strategists are already calculating he's damaging their brand through its association with him. The frightening thing at the moment is that every time he opens his mouth and goes controversial, and they try and sanction him, his poll rating improves. Eventually he's going to over step and combust, I juts hope we don't have a major international incident during the camapign that allows him to plug into a popularist sentiment and ride temporary wave