Donald Trump

1…371372374376377…537

Comments

  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,799
    kingstongraham said:

    Just think on balance they'd probably be better of with this guy.

    I'd be happier if he could freely verbalise actual policies instead of reading/writing soundbites/cliches.
    On balance there'd probably be better with someone younger, on both sides.
    Imagine what the Trumpster & Joe will be like in 4 years.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    pblakeney said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Just think on balance they'd probably be better of with this guy.

    I'd be happier if he could freely verbalise actual policies instead of reading/writing soundbites/cliches.
    On balance there'd probably be better with someone younger, on both sides.
    Imagine what the Trumpster & Joe will be like in 4 years.
    If you want more than soundbites, you'll have to look at his policy proposals on his website. There's lots of them.

    They may be better with someone younger, but he's what the alternative to four more years of a burning dung heap.
  • Jeremy.89
    Jeremy.89 Posts: 457
    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,799
    kingstongraham said:

    pblakeney said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Just think on balance they'd probably be better of with this guy.

    I'd be happier if he could freely verbalise actual policies instead of reading/writing soundbites/cliches.
    On balance there'd probably be better with someone younger, on both sides.
    Imagine what the Trumpster & Joe will be like in 4 years.
    If you want more than soundbites, you'll have to look at his policy proposals on his website. There's lots of them.

    They may be better with someone younger, but he's what the alternative to four more years of a burning dung heap.
    That is one of the clear differences. You know Trump is doing his own thing.
    I get the impression Joe is being guided (not necessarily a bad thing) so I am wary of written policies.
    Not that I can affect the outcome in any way or have a favourite I just want the leader of "the free world" to be cognitive.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    As I have said before, this should be a slam-dunk for the Democrats but they are doing their best again to lose this election.

    Biden will have no chance if he goes with woke policies but this is where I see the Dems pointing him.
  • capt_slog
    capt_slog Posts: 3,946
    mfin said:

    I wonder how many people have ever said something to his face like "seriously, you're a f**king idiot" and walked off. It must be what every interviewer is thinking.

    I get the impression that it's never happened, at least not for the time that he's been "powerful". I think it's one of the reasons that he is a f**king idiot.

    I would pay to see it.


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    pblakeney said:

    kingstongraham said:

    pblakeney said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Just think on balance they'd probably be better of with this guy.

    I'd be happier if he could freely verbalise actual policies instead of reading/writing soundbites/cliches.
    On balance there'd probably be better with someone younger, on both sides.
    Imagine what the Trumpster & Joe will be like in 4 years.
    If you want more than soundbites, you'll have to look at his policy proposals on his website. There's lots of them.

    They may be better with someone younger, but he's what the alternative to four more years of a burning dung heap.
    That is one of the clear differences. You know Trump is doing his own thing.
    I get the impression Joe is being guided (not necessarily a bad thing) so I am wary of written policies.
    Not that I can affect the outcome in any way or have a favourite I just want the leader of "the free world" to be cognitive.

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,734
    Jeremy.89 said:

    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.

    why is he a bizarre choice?

    _
  • Jeremy.89
    Jeremy.89 Posts: 457
    rick_chasey said:


    Jeremy.89 said:

    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.

    why is he a bizarre choice?

    His age. Given a successful president is looking at an 8 year duration, someone who is the best part of his way through his 70s before the election surely raises a few eyebrows.

    I also feel like they are going down a similar path to Hillary, in selecting a very established politician, who is slightly boring.

    Of course, the events of the past few months might show that boring politicians aren't such a bad thing.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 17,923
    Jeremy.89 said:

    rick_chasey said:


    Jeremy.89 said:

    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.

    why is he a bizarre choice?

    His age. Given a successful president is looking at an 8 year duration, someone who is the best part of his way through his 70s before the election surely raises a few eyebrows.

    I also feel like they are going down a similar path to Hillary, in selecting a very established politician, who is slightly boring.

    Of course, the events of the past few months might show that boring politicians aren't such a bad thing.

    I don't think Biden will do 8 years - I think he's the least divisive candidate on the Dem side to get rid of Trump at this election - remember, they've got to win over enough of the people who voted for Trump. Otherwise they would go the Corbyn route of alienating enough of the waverers to make sure they lose again.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    He's said he's a one term president.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,583
    Who was the last president to not stand for a second term by choice?
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    Rutherford B Hayes?
  • schlepcycling
    schlepcycling Posts: 1,614
    Pross said:

    Who was the last president to not stand for a second term by choice?

    Lyndon Johnson chose not to run for a full second term in 1968
    'Hello to Jason Isaacs'
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    schlepcycling said:

    Pross said:

    Who was the last president to not stand for a second term by choice?

    Lyndon Johnson chose not to run for a full second term in 1968
    He entered the primary campaign, dropped out pretty early when he was losing.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    Calvin Coolidge and Theodore Roosevelt though... Both had already served one and a bit terms and decided not to stand for a third term they were entitled to.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    And Truman the same.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,734
    Jeremy.89 said:

    rick_chasey said:


    Jeremy.89 said:

    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.

    why is he a bizarre choice?

    His age. Given a successful president is looking at an 8 year duration, someone who is the best part of his way through his 70s before the election surely raises a few eyebrows.

    I also feel like they are going down a similar path to Hillary, in selecting a very established politician, who is slightly boring.

    Of course, the events of the past few months might show that boring politicians aren't such a bad thing.
    Gotcha.

    Biden does well with the type of voters they can and should tease away from Trump.

    He’s also better at turning out black voters than your average pale stale male candidate.

    Which was why I asked the question.
    _
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,360
    The black vote will definitely not go to Trump. Is it possible they vote for whoever as a sort of protest vote against Trump?
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,583
    edited August 2020
    Attacking Biden today because he's following a radical left policy. No, he's not pushing for nationalisation of businesses but that most communist of issues, being anti-gun ownership. Apparently this also makes him anti-God. I must have missed the bit in my RE lessons covering blessed are the gun owners.

    Meanwhile the NY attorney general is seeking to dissolve the NRA, I assume she is somewhere to the left of Stalin.
  • Jeremy.89
    Jeremy.89 Posts: 457
    rick_chasey said:

    Jeremy.89 said:

    rick_chasey said:


    Jeremy.89 said:

    Biden does seem a somewhat bizzare choice on the part of the dems.

    I suspect the Democrats will be more aware of the risk of winning the popular vote but not the election this time around. Whether they can use that to their advantage remains to be seen.

    why is he a bizarre choice?

    His age. Given a successful president is looking at an 8 year duration, someone who is the best part of his way through his 70s before the election surely raises a few eyebrows.

    I also feel like they are going down a similar path to Hillary, in selecting a very established politician, who is slightly boring.

    Of course, the events of the past few months might show that boring politicians aren't such a bad thing.
    Gotcha.

    Biden does well with the type of voters they can and should tease away from Trump.

    He’s also better at turning out black voters than your average pale stale male candidate.

    Which was why I asked the question.
    I do think he has a much better chance of winning than most candidates going up against someone for their second term.

    And compared to the three other potential candidates I can remember off the top of my head (Bloomberg, Saunders, Warren) he's probably the safest pair of hands.

    He's just feels quite establishment. For all Trumps failings, and there are too many to list, he was correct about Washington being corrupt... or at least not working spectacularly well for the average American. Of course, Trump went in and made it way worse.

  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 25,799
    Trump likes figures. He won't like these though. Updated yesterday.


    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 14,646
    Long way to go. The US suffers from the same problem re: republican voters as we do with Tory voters. No matter how bad the candidate, no matter how bad the public mood, most of them just can't help themselves when it comes to actually putting the cross in the box.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    This is one he should worry about:



    Even with that, he has a 91% approval rating among Republicans.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,734
    First.Aspect said:

    Long way to go. The US suffers from the same problem re: republican voters as we do with Tory voters. No matter how bad the candidate, no matter how bad the public mood, most of them just can't help themselves when it comes to actually putting the cross in the box.

    FPTP is a commonality between the two (as is speaking English but I think we can rule that out)
    _
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 14,646
    rick_chasey said:

    First.Aspect said:

    Long way to go. The US suffers from the same problem re: republican voters as we do with Tory voters. No matter how bad the candidate, no matter how bad the public mood, most of them just can't help themselves when it comes to actually putting the cross in the box.

    FPTP is a commonality between the two (as is speaking English but I think we can rule that out)
    Although I don't agree with it necessarily, our system with 600 odd seats tends to amplify the popular vote and ensure majority government (not all the time, obvs). Their electoral college system has about 8% of the resolution and has to be one of the least democratic in the western world as a result. For 12 out of the last 20 years they've had a president who lost the popular vote (might be 8, but you see the point).
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,641
    Guam has an interest democratic position. They get to vote, but have no electoral college votes (or whatever they are called)
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,262
    TheBigBean said:

    Guam has an interest democratic position. They get to vote, but have no electoral college votes (or whatever they are called)

    Puerto Rico's 3 million US citizens only get to vote in the primaries, not the actual election.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,641
    kingstongraham said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Guam has an interest democratic position. They get to vote, but have no electoral college votes (or whatever they are called)

    Puerto Rico's 3 million US citizens only get to vote in the primaries, not the actual election.
    I guess they are both just colonies really. They opt for a better quality of life with democratic representation.

    Palau has a better deal. Citiziens still get to live in the US if they want (presumably as long as they blindly support US foreign policy), but are an independent country
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 14,646
    You would probably find similar anomalies in a number of the tiny remaining UK colonies/crown protectorates. Don't some of those have simply a governor appointed by the Queen?

Categories