Donald Trump

tangled_metal

Anyone rate.Barbara castle from a purely local point of view? Wasn't she the first female to really show in Westminster? Touted as top ministerial positions, possibly even leader of her party. That was before Thatcher. I've heard it said that without Castle there would have been no Thatcher. (If true then socialists and unions within Labour must have been conflicted over her! No Orgreave without Castle!)

ballysmate

Nye Bevan's missus used to be our local MP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennie_Le ... _Asheridge

mrfpb

Benazir Bhutto at no.1 - first female leader of a Muslim country . Put's America's record on female leadership into perspective.

finchy

I'm becoming a lot more sanguine about Donald Trump as president. Not because I think he's anything other than a massive bell-end, but because if he does get the top job, his fantasy politics will evaporate so quickly he'd be a lame duck president within a few months of taking office. He'll have virtually no support in Congress. He won't be able to persuade states to divert all their policing resources to kicking out illegal immigrants. He'll be a powerless laughing stock who stamps his feet, shouts a lot but never gets anything done.

As for Clinton, maybe people should be asking why it is that up against someone like Trump, victory isn't a foregone conclusion. There must be a hell of a lot of Americans who are totally and utterly sick of the status quo if being seen as the establishment candidate is now so damaging that the man's still in with a good chance of being president.

joelsim

finchy wrote:

I'm becoming a lot more sanguine about Donald Trump as president. Not because I think he's anything other than a massive bell-end, but because if he does get the top job, his fantasy politics will evaporate so quickly he'd be a lame duck president within a few months of taking office. He'll have virtually no support in Congress. He won't be able to persuade states to divert all their policing resources to kicking out illegal immigrants. He'll be a powerless laughing stock who stamps his feet, shouts a lot but never gets anything done.

As for Clinton, maybe people should be asking why it is that up against someone like Trump, victory isn't a foregone conclusion. There must be a hell of a lot of Americans who are totally and utterly sick of the status quo if being seen as the establishment candidate is now so damaging that the man's still in with a good chance of being president.

Well, sort of. Disgruntlement and ignorance. Remember Brexit. There is obviously a lot of disenchantment worldwide due to previous actions.

Stevo_666

finchy wrote:

I'm becoming a lot more sanguine about Donald Trump as president. Not because I think he's anything other than a massive bell-end, but because if he does get the top job, his fantasy politics will evaporate so quickly he'd be a lame duck president within a few months of taking office. He'll have virtually no support in Congress. He won't be able to persuade states to divert all their policing resources to kicking out illegal immigrants. He'll be a powerless laughing stock who stamps his feet, shouts a lot but never gets anything done.

As for Clinton, maybe people should be asking why it is that up against someone like Trump, victory isn't a foregone conclusion. There must be a hell of a lot of Americans who are totally and utterly sick of the status quo if being seen as the establishment candidate is now so damaging that the man's still in with a good chance of being president.

I'm kinda with you on this one finchy. I said a while back that a Trump presidency might be quite amusing in a slow motion car crash sort of way but people thought I wasn't taking it seriously enough.

bianchimoon

There is an excellent Alec baldwin- saturday night live sketch on the first debate here
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ale ... aad9bbadce?
Also, i didn't realise should Trump win, he is still allowed to be in charge of his companies at the same time, unlike most other countries 'conflict of interests' rule.
More likely he'll bow out before election date as more revelations about his finances come to light.

kingstongraham

Stevo 666 wrote:

finchy wrote:

I'm becoming a lot more sanguine about Donald Trump as president. Not because I think he's anything other than a massive bell-end, but because if he does get the top job, his fantasy politics will evaporate so quickly he'd be a lame duck president within a few months of taking office. He'll have virtually no support in Congress. He won't be able to persuade states to divert all their policing resources to kicking out illegal immigrants. He'll be a powerless laughing stock who stamps his feet, shouts a lot but never gets anything done.

As for Clinton, maybe people should be asking why it is that up against someone like Trump, victory isn't a foregone conclusion. There must be a hell of a lot of Americans who are totally and utterly sick of the status quo if being seen as the establishment candidate is now so damaging that the man's still in with a good chance of being president.

I'm kinda with you on this one finchy. I said a while back that a Trump presidency might be quite amusing in a slow motion car crash sort of way but people thought I wasn't taking it seriously enough.

Depends on your view on the countries that might benefit from a weak USA. It would definitely be interesting.

pinno

bianchimoon wrote:

More likely he'll bow out before election date as more revelations about his finances come to light.

You can only hope.

ballysmate

When the Democrats selected Hillary, it was an open goal for the Republicans. Then they go and select Trump...
As they say across the pond,"Go figure"

bianchimoon

Ballysmate wrote:

When the Democrats selected Hillary, it was an open goal for the Republicans. Then they go and select Trump...
As they say across the pond,"Go figure"

Not sure the Republicans selected Trump rather that Trump selected the Republicans as the vehicle to fulfil his narcissistic ambitions. They were always on the back foot once he gained the support of the rednecks and too weak or unorganised to get a coherent campaign to help a more mainstream candidate, but hey perhaps the Chinese were right about democracy not being perfect

joelsim

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

When the Democrats selected Hillary, it was an open goal for the Republicans. Then they go and select Trump...
As they say across the pond,"Go figure"

Not sure the Republicans selected Trump rather that Trump selected the Republicans as the vehicle to fulfil his narcissistic ambitions. They were always on the back foot once he gained the support of the rednecks and too weak or unorganised to get a coherent campaign to help a more mainstream candidate, but hey perhaps the Chinese were right about democracy not being perfect

The other options were Cruz and Rubio, who are both revolting too. Whoever they pick they have to appeal to bible-bashing, ignorant, stupid rednecks.

pinno

Joelsim wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

When...figure"

Not...perfect

The other options were Cruz and Rubio, who are both revolting too. Whoever they pick they have to appeal to bible-bashing, ignorant, stupid rednecks.

Yes and if you think about that, bar Obama, almost all presidents are elected on the back of the bible bashing constituent and have therefore shaped US foreign policy since time immemorial. Frightening.

drlodge

It is frightening that in the US you need to be religious to hold any high office role. Can you imagine a President saying that all religion is delusional bollox? This is hardly likely to happen though given that Obama won't even state this middle eastern terrorism has radical Islam at its core for fear of offending or promoting the 'narrative narrative'.

bianchimoon

Pinno wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

When...figure"

Not...perfect

The other options were Cruz and Rubio, who are both revolting too. Whoever they pick they have to appeal to bible-bashing, ignorant, stupid rednecks.

Yes and if you think about that, bar Obama, almost all presidents are elected on the back of the bible bashing constituent and have therefore shaped US foreign policy since time immemorial. Frightening.

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

joelsim

With regard to Pence's views on LGBT, read this. It's horrifying.

https://twitter.com/14teammocker/status ... 2060392448

kingstongraham

bianchimoon wrote:

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

Doesn't he see a bit of a contradiction there? As I understood it, JC was quite socially liberal for his day.

bianchimoon

KingstonGraham wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

Doesn't he see a bit of a contradiction there? As I understood it, JC was quite socially liberal for his day.

to see a contradiction would mean seeing another persons point of view, Pence is has a very focussed 'narrow' view

joelsim

KingstonGraham wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

Doesn't he see a bit of a contradiction there? As I understood it, JC was quite socially liberal for his day.

He was crucified by some parts of the media for it.

bianchimoon

Joelsim wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

Doesn't he see a bit of a contradiction there? As I understood it, JC was quite socially liberal for his day.

He was crucified by some parts of the media for it.

and he got hammered with tax Unlike Trump

joelsim

bianchimoon wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

And worryingly Pence's words last night on the VP debate. He's anti-LGBT rights, anti-women's right to choose abortion, anti-imigration, plus his litmus test for everything is whether Jesus Christ would approve, FFS :roll:

Doesn't he see a bit of a contradiction there? As I understood it, JC was quite socially liberal for his day.

He was crucified by some parts of the media for it.

and he got hammered with tax Unlike Trump

But he came back quicker than Nigel Farage.

bianchimoon

He's consistent I'll give him that...

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, showing he’ll say anything to win a vote, had this message for America’s terminally ill people on Wednesday: Stay alive long enough to cast a vote for him next month.

“I don’t care how sick you are,” Trump said at a rally in Henderson, Nevada. “I don’t care if you just came back from the doctor and he gave you the worst possible prognosis, meaning it’s over, you won’t be around in two weeks. Doesn’t matter. Hang out till Nov. 8. Get out and vote.”

joelsim

bianchimoon wrote:

He's consistent I'll give him that...

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, showing he’ll say anything to win a vote, had this message for America’s terminally ill people on Wednesday: Stay alive long enough to cast a vote for him next month.

“I don’t care how sick you are,” Trump said at a rally in Henderson, Nevada. “I don’t care if you just came back from the doctor and he gave you the worst possible prognosis, meaning it’s over, you won’t be around in two weeks. Doesn’t matter. Hang out till Nov. 8. Get out and vote.”

What a quality individual.

kingstongraham

bianchimoon wrote:

He's consistent I'll give him that...

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, showing he’ll say anything to win a vote, had this message for America’s terminally ill people on Wednesday: Stay alive long enough to cast a vote for him next month.

“I don’t care how sick you are,” Trump said at a rally in Henderson, Nevada. “I don’t care if you just came back from the doctor and he gave you the worst possible prognosis, meaning it’s over, you won’t be around in two weeks. Doesn’t matter. Hang out till Nov. 8. Get out and vote.”

It's OK, those experts don't know what they're talking about anyway.

And WWJD? Come back and vote anyway.

bianchimoon

KingstonGraham wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

He's consistent I'll give him that...

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, showing he’ll say anything to win a vote, had this message for America’s terminally ill people on Wednesday: Stay alive long enough to cast a vote for him next month.

“I don’t care how sick you are,” Trump said at a rally in Henderson, Nevada. “I don’t care if you just came back from the doctor and he gave you the worst possible prognosis, meaning it’s over, you won’t be around in two weeks. Doesn’t matter. Hang out till Nov. 8. Get out and vote.”

It's OK, those experts don't know what they're talking about anyway.

And WWJD? Come back and vote anyway.

shhh, we all know the Donald reads this forum at 3am (between tweets) now he'll be quoting you at his next rally
" I was on the influential British Political forum BykeRaydar-dot-com and the respected british poster Kingston Gray-Ham said and I quote, Jeeezus is planning to come back and vote for Donald J Trump on November the eighth, that's amazing isn't it folks!

mrfpb

Pinno wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

When...figure"

Not...perfect

The other options were Cruz and Rubio, who are both revolting too. Whoever they pick they have to appeal to bible-bashing, ignorant, stupid rednecks.

Yes and if you think about that, bar Obama, almost all presidents are elected on the back of the bible bashing constituent and have therefore shaped US foreign policy since time immemorial. Frightening.

Obama and Bill Clinton both mobiised the black churches to get elected. John McCain was too liberal for the right wing evangelicals, so Obama's black church support was a big enough constituency to swing it.

In the UK most church goers don't follow the political will of their leaders like sheep, and the Archbishop of Canterbury can't come out for one party at election time due to his constitutional position, so we don't have the same effect.

joelsim

mrfpb wrote:

Pinno wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

When...figure"

Not...perfect

The other options were Cruz and Rubio, who are both revolting too. Whoever they pick they have to appeal to bible-bashing, ignorant, stupid rednecks.

Yes and if you think about that, bar Obama, almost all presidents are elected on the back of the bible bashing constituent and have therefore shaped US foreign policy since time immemorial. Frightening.

Obama and Bill Clinton both mobiised the black churches to get elected. John McCain was too liberal for the right wing evangelicals, so Obama's black church support was a big enough constituency to swing it.

In the UK most church goers don't follow the political will of their leaders like sheep, and the Archbishop of Canterbury can't come out for one party at election time due to his constitutional position, so we don't have the same effect.

In the UK a huge number of people view a leader who mentions anything religious with the utmost suspicion. Don't forget the US is the land where evangelists can take on superhero status and fill stadia.

pinno

^ Billy Graham anyone?

joelsim

Pinno wrote:

^ Billy Graham anyone?

And the rest. It's commonplace.

pinno

Joelsim wrote:

Pinno wrote:

^ Billy Graham anyone?

And the rest. It's commonplace.

Brotherleeee Rock