The Next American President Thread (2016)

12526283031198

Comments

  • edited March 2016 Posts: 7,507
    bondjames wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    For most same people Trump is obviously the least authentic of all the candidates! Everything he says is pure populist monsunsesong to make himself look strong, succesful, play on emotions and manipulate the public mind. If people vote for him for the sake of authenticity, IT tells you all you need to know about these voters. Seriously... But I guess they still are not to blame for anything, in fact they even deserve to be respected...
    If what you say is correct then there will be plenty of opportunity between now and November for that to be laid clearly for everyone to see. As I said earlier, this process works (even though the quality of debate isn't there).

    If you're weak or calculating, you will be caught out and you will go down. The media are like hounds when they catch that. Witness Trump's problem re: Duke which was quite damaging for a while.

    There may not be quality discussion on the issues, but there are mechanisms in place to catch someone playing for the camera.

    Well, those mecanisms have worked brilliantly so far, haven't they... So well in fact that most other serious competitors (not that they were much better...) have frown in the towell, while Trump's ridiculous lies and mind tricks still work to full affect. The media is indeed doing a great job aren't they, giving Trump so much uncritical coverage... And obviously Trump is not a "pawn in any ones game" is he? He certainly has no powerfull friends in the media and the fanincial world that would benefit from his election does he? If there is one candidate you would trust to run the country with the people in mind and not for the benefit of himself or powerfull, corrupt friends, it is certainly Trump!

    Isn't it obvious, @bondjames that the electorial process is terrible, and that those who vote for Trump are mostly ignorant, brain washed people?
    @jobo, I will not go so far as to call the people who have voted for Trump ignorant and brain washed. They have their reasons. He has tapped into something, as has Sanders on the other side, and it is real. Visceral. It should not be ignored, because the fact that it is being expressed through the ballot box is better than if it is expressed in other, more dangerous ways.

    The other candidates have ignored these large and important concerns of the public. They are fiddling around and dealing in minutia. There are fundamental problems with the American dream, and that is not something one discusses by pissing about on the edges. Wholesale changes are required. First and foremost, income inequality and jobs are #1. This requires bold and ballsy leadership, which in particular must get the support of the heretofore obstructionist Republican Congress because everything goes through them.

    I mentioned much earlier on this thread that I expect much more from Trump if he wins the nomination. He is the leader of a movement now. One that he 'accidentally fell' into. Bigger than himself. He has power in his hands, and he has to show us how he plans to use it. All eyes will be on him, assuming he the nominee, for about 6 months. He has to start to show that he has concrete solutions to the problems which he has correctly identified.

    Expectations are quite high. There are many educated people who are waiting to see if he can step up to the moment. If he can, he will be elected. If he can't he will lose big because people won't want to take the risk on him. I am sure of it.

    Obviously he has tapped into something. People´s frustration with the financial situation and their complete lack of knowledge or understanding of what has caused it. And like a classic, populistic tyrant he´s playing on their emotions and frustrations. "Here is someone with an easy solution: The mexicans are the problem! Lets get tid of them!"

    The striking thing is that the electoral system lets him get away with such easy manipulation tricks, and that so many people are stupid enough to buy into it. That is the problem I have tried to adress. If you offer sensible solutions you are bound to loose, because it is not what the voters want to hear. That is a pretty toxic political environment.

    For me the general elections is far too late for Trump to be revealed as a manipulator without a campaign. Far, FAR too late! And that is both distressing, depressing, and not least embarrasing on behalf of the US.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    jobo wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    For most same people Trump is obviously the least authentic of all the candidates! Everything he says is pure populist monsunsesong to make himself look strong, succesful, play on emotions and manipulate the public mind. If people vote for him for the sake of authenticity, IT tells you all you need to know about these voters. Seriously... But I guess they still are not to blame for anything, in fact they even deserve to be respected...
    If what you say is correct then there will be plenty of opportunity between now and November for that to be laid clearly for everyone to see. As I said earlier, this process works (even though the quality of debate isn't there).

    If you're weak or calculating, you will be caught out and you will go down. The media are like hounds when they catch that. Witness Trump's problem re: Duke which was quite damaging for a while.

    There may not be quality discussion on the issues, but there are mechanisms in place to catch someone playing for the camera.

    Well, those mecanisms have worked brilliantly so far, haven't they... So well in fact that most other serious competitors (not that they were much better...) have frown in the towell, while Trump's ridiculous lies and mind tricks still work to full affect. The media is indeed doing a great job aren't they, giving Trump so much uncritical coverage... And obviously Trump is not a "pawn in any ones game" is he? He certainly has no powerfull friends in the media and the fanincial world that would benefit from his election does he? If there is one candidate you would trust to run the country with the people in mind and not for the benefit of himself or powerfull, corrupt friends, it is certainly Trump!

    Isn't it obvious, @bondjames that the electorial process is terrible, and that those who vote for Trump are mostly ignorant, brain washed people?
    @jobo, I will not go so far as to call the people who have voted for Trump ignorant and brain washed. They have their reasons. He has tapped into something, as has Sanders on the other side, and it is real. Visceral. It should not be ignored, because the fact that it is being expressed through the ballot box is better than if it is expressed in other, more dangerous ways.

    The other candidates have ignored these large and important concerns of the public. They are fiddling around and dealing in minutia. There are fundamental problems with the American dream, and that is not something one discusses by pissing about on the edges. Wholesale changes are required. First and foremost, income inequality and jobs are #1. This requires bold and ballsy leadership, which in particular must get the support of the heretofore obstructionist Republican Congress because everything goes through them.

    I mentioned much earlier on this thread that I expect much more from Trump if he wins the nomination. He is the leader of a movement now. One that he 'accidentally fell' into. Bigger than himself. He has power in his hands, and he has to show us how he plans to use it. All eyes will be on him, assuming he the nominee, for about 6 months. He has to start to show that he has concrete solutions to the problems which he has correctly identified.

    Expectations are quite high. There are many educated people who are waiting to see if he can step up to the moment. If he can, he will be elected. If he can't he will lose big because people won't want to take the risk on him. I am sure of it.

    Obviously he has tappes into samething. People´s frustration with the financial situation and their complete lack of knowledge or understanding of what has caused it. And like a classic, populistic tyrant he´s playing not their emotions and frustrations. "Here is someone with an easy solution: The mexicans are the problem! Lets get tid of them!"

    The striking thing is that the electoral system lets him get away with such easy manipulation tricks, and that so many people are stupid enough to bud into it. That is the problem I have trives to adress. Of you offer sensible solutions you are bound to loose, because it is not what the voters sant to hear. That is a pretty toxic political environment.

    For me the general elections is far too late for Trump to be revealed as a manipulator without a campaign. Far, FAR too late! And that is botn distressing, depressing, and not least embarrasing on behalf of the US.
    Keep in mind that the presidency is a 4 yr term job. One has to work with Congress and the Senate. The job is not a dictatorship and he has stated that he is against 'executive orders'. Trump realizes that he has to make good on attempting to mutually solve the issues he has identified & has also acknowledged such. I believe that is why he hasn't been specific to date - because he needs to offer solutions that are palatable to a General election audience and Congress. We should see them if he is the nominee. This is what happens every four years. Candidates are vague during the primaries and either 'go right' or 'go left'. Then they tack to the centre in the end while keeping true to the essence of their primary rhetoric. The media starts to focus then on their proposed 'solutions'.

    The 'wall' won't be all that expensive and is the least of the solutions that will have to be put in place to 'secure borders'. It is purely one of the deterrents and makes for headlines. If Congress obstructs it, then there will need to be increased surveillance drone use, ongoing checks for 'drug tunnels' near the border, as well as airport and border checks.

    A comprehensive plan for all of this is expected or else he won't grow his voting constituency for the General election and will end up like other recent Republican failures.
  • Posts: 6,601
    They could use all the billions for the wall and put some money into Mexico to make it a place, people don't wanna leave. How about that?
  • edited March 2016 Posts: 7,507
    I watched most of the debates in the general election between Obama and Romney last election, and I can´t say I was impressed by the political inpeth of their discussions. Compared to political debates here in Scandinavia, the American debates seem like trivial banter with basically no concrete politics being discussed. So I don´t expect anything else this time around, and I guess Trump will continue to be vague, as he will hardly be pushed to be more spesific. HIs voters won´t demand for it either. They are happy as long as the "communists" don´t win... You see, that is the level of American politics...

    Btw I was not referring to "the wall" specifically (poor Deep Purple), but the general strategy of blaming the immigrants for everything wrong with America.


    Edit: Sorry, that was Pink Floyd. Brain fart :P
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I agree on the quality of the debates. Useless. That is a fact. The level and quality of discourse on the issues is very poor. I hold the media accountable for that personally. If they don't ask the right questions and don't push the candidates, then who else can one blame.

    I believe the 'vague' responses on both sides are on account of the limited power within the American presidency. It is not a parliamentary system and legislative changes need to get Congressional approval. So candidates have to be relatively vague or risk 'losing face' when in office. Look what happened with Obama's very specific healthcare initiative, which he told everyone he would implement prior to winning the presidency. They obstructed it every step of the way, even though he campaigned on it.

    I really think it is at the congressional level where the 'vetting process' is very poor collectively. They are the ones collectively with the real legislative power.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as President this coming January. That's all there is to say on this. Period. Sanders is NOT getting the nom. And neither Trump nor Cruz stands a chance, especially when their sound bytes will play on a loop for three straight months. They're both complete idiots. The Trump campaign has already shown their strategy: make fun of Hillary. That sort of campaign message will NOT work. For the past three decades, Republicans have refused to run on ideas (because they simply don't have any); they run on a campaign of fear. That works on a local level; it doesn't on a national level, which is why they have lost the popular vote in seven of the past eight elections.

    It will be eight out of nine this November. Book it.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    You could be right @TripAces. I hope it's a testing and grueling campaign for both candidates so that we get someone battle tested for the White House.

    I stand by my belief that if Trump doesn't produce concrete solutions which he can articulate soon, then he will go down hard. The same approach that worked during the primaries will not grow his constituency sufficiently for the General.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    Germanlady wrote: »
    They could use all the billions for the wall and put some money into Mexico to make it a place, people don't wanna leave. How about that?

    If it wouldn't make the Military Industrial Complex a lot of dough, we generally don't do it.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    They could use all the billions for the wall and put some money into Mexico to make it a place, people don't wanna leave. How about that?

    If it wouldn't make the Military Industrial Complex a lot of dough, we generally don't do it.

    The Army Corps of Engineers is ready & waiting.....
  • Posts: 1,631
    TripAces wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as President this coming January. That's all there is to say on this. Period. Sanders is NOT getting the nom. And neither Trump nor Cruz stands a chance, especially when their sound bytes will play on a loop for three straight months. They're both complete idiots. The Trump campaign has already shown their strategy: make fun of Hillary. That sort of campaign message will NOT work. For the past three decades, Republicans have refused to run on ideas (because they simply don't have any); they run on a campaign of fear. That works on a local level; it doesn't on a national level, which is why they have lost the popular vote in seven of the past eight elections.

    It will be eight out of nine this November. Book it.

    I generally agree, although I do think that Trump does have a chance (sadly). If he can lure Clinton down into the gutter that he operates his campaign in, then he has a chance to beat her, since people already look at her unfavorably (this is a contest between the two least-liked candidates in US history, according to likability polls). If he can get her to come down into the gutter with him, then he has a chance to beat her. If she resists that trap, I think she'll win handily.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    dalton wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton will be sworn in as President this coming January. That's all there is to say on this. Period. Sanders is NOT getting the nom. And neither Trump nor Cruz stands a chance, especially when their sound bytes will play on a loop for three straight months. They're both complete idiots. The Trump campaign has already shown their strategy: make fun of Hillary. That sort of campaign message will NOT work. For the past three decades, Republicans have refused to run on ideas (because they simply don't have any); they run on a campaign of fear. That works on a local level; it doesn't on a national level, which is why they have lost the popular vote in seven of the past eight elections.

    It will be eight out of nine this November. Book it.

    I generally agree, although I do think that Trump does have a chance (sadly). If he can lure Clinton down into the gutter that he operates his campaign in, then he has a chance to beat her, since people already look at her unfavorably (this is a contest between the two least-liked candidates in US history, according to likability polls). If he can get her to come down into the gutter with him, then he has a chance to beat her. If she resists that trap, I think she'll win handily.
    Spot on. I agree. He wins if this becomes a gutter fight. If the Dems take the high road, then they clinch it. So far their debates have been much more impressive, and I hope they stay on this tack. The way to beat Trump is to take the high road but not be condescending about it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    Nope. Bernie will come from behind & take the nomination away from Hillary, from then on, Trump will be toast.
  • Posts: 1,631
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Nope. Bernie will come from behind & take the nomination away from Hillary, from then on, Trump will be toast.

    One can only hope.

    Could see it happening, though, if the FBI recommends charges against her and/or the DOJ actually files charges against her.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Nope. Bernie will come from behind & take the nomination away from Hillary, from then on, Trump will be toast.
    I agree that Bernie is probably the only one who can beat Trump with ease.

    Hillary has a tendency to go dirty. She can't help it. I can see that she's finding it so difficult to hold back even against 74 yr old nice guy Bernie. That will only help Trump.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    dalton wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Nope. Bernie will come from behind & take the nomination away from Hillary, from then on, Trump will be toast.

    One can only hope.

    Could see it happening, though, if the FBI recommends charges against her and/or the DOJ actually files charges against her.
    Nah, like any other hi-profile public figure, she's teflon from that POV. What she has to do is get tired & make her real personality better known through more slip ups... if enough peeps come to see how her 'stage personna' hides a puppet with crossed strings, the better Bernie's chances as he comes off very genuine.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    As I said some pages back, it really should have been Biden. He could have taken Trump out imho.

    Hillary will have a tougher job of it, but she's a fighter and she will do what it takes. It will be a filthy campaign unless Trump self destructs on his own.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    bondjames wrote: »
    As I said some pages back, it really should have been Biden. He could have taken Trump out imho.

    Hillary will have a tougher job of it, but she's a fighter and she will do what it takes. It will be a filthy campaign unless Trump self destructs on his own.
    A couple of hangovers could do it!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Someone posted this on another thread. Hilarious
    giphy.gif
  • Posts: 1,631
    I don't see a way Trump self-destructs on his own. Is there really anything that he could say at this point that could be exponentially more offensive than what he's already said to cause people to finally jump ship? I'm not sure that there is.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    dalton wrote: »
    I don't see a way Trump self-destructs on his own. Is there really anything that he could say at this point that could be exponentially more offensive than what he's already said to cause people to finally jump ship? I'm not sure that there is.

    He already has. The Republican base may think he's grand, but he has already said some things that have sunk his candidacy on the national level. I mean, where do we begin? The bleeding comment? The response to protesters? Calling out Paul Ryan?
  • Posts: 1,631
    TripAces wrote: »
    dalton wrote: »
    I don't see a way Trump self-destructs on his own. Is there really anything that he could say at this point that could be exponentially more offensive than what he's already said to cause people to finally jump ship? I'm not sure that there is.

    He already has. The Republican base may think he's grand, but he has already said some things that have sunk his candidacy on the national level. I mean, where do we begin? The bleeding comment? The response to protesters? Calling out Paul Ryan?

    Sadly, I'd have to disagree. Among the generally informed electorate, yes, I'd say he's already self-destructed. The problem is that a good number of the American electorate isn't informed and/or doesn't care. The Republican base, as bad as we've been in this primary, doesn't have a monopoly on being uninformed and/or worse.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    bondjames wrote: »
    Someone posted this on another thread. Hilarious
    giphy.gif

    =))
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    dalton wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    dalton wrote: »
    I don't see a way Trump self-destructs on his own. Is there really anything that he could say at this point that could be exponentially more offensive than what he's already said to cause people to finally jump ship? I'm not sure that there is.

    He already has. The Republican base may think he's grand, but he has already said some things that have sunk his candidacy on the national level. I mean, where do we begin? The bleeding comment? The response to protesters? Calling out Paul Ryan?

    Sadly, I'd have to disagree. Among the generally informed electorate, yes, I'd say he's already self-destructed. The problem is that a good number of the American electorate isn't informed and/or doesn't care. The Republican base, as bad as we've been in this primary, doesn't have a monopoly on being uninformed and/or worse.

    If they don't, they will. The DNC and The HRC campaign will just roll out the soundbytes during football season.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,830
    I find it rather darkly amusing that 'history' is so completely forgotten... wash/rinse/repeat.
  • Posts: 11,119
    chrisisall wrote: »
    I find it rather darkly amusing that 'history' is so completely forgotten... wash/rinse/repeat.

    I don't find it amusing a bit. Here's an example of what eventually happens and that could be seen entirely from an historical viewpoint:



    You know......lots of people in here will start a comment like "But you have to understand that this doesn't come out of the blue. For all the aggression, there is a reason why it happens."

    It sounds all very nuanced and from a historian's point of view even objective and relevant. But before one is saying that, a firm condemnation should be in place. There is nothing humane or 'good' about doing such things.


  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/17/democracy-is-a-joke-says-china-just-look-at-donald-trump

    They're not wrong. Western democracy has become a decadent joke in both America and Europe and only serves to keep the same self serving people with their snouts in the trough.

    Somehow the the system needs rebooting but the way we're heading with Trump that reset button is likely to be the same one that fires all the warheads.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    China commenting on democracy? That's a joke in itself.

    It's capitalism that is fundamentally the problem. Not democracy. People tend to confuse the two and use the terms interchangeably. Capitalism is what needs rebooting. People still have the right to vote, and actually do so fairly. However their needs are ignored once politicians get into office due to money'd interests taking precedence over the common man/woman. Moreover, the candidates that are proposed by the capitalist system are deeply in the pocket before they even get on the ballot.

    Remember 'Occupy Wall Street'? Do you remember how fast those peaceful but leaderless protests were shut down. Everywhere. Why? That is what the people who run things are afraid of. The voice of the people on the lower rung of the ladder. Ironic don't you think? I remember Obama himself being negative towards them. Why? Were they violent? He was afraid of the movement of people who don't have a shot, and the young who have limited prospects.

    For the immigration issue - it should have been put to a referendum. If Britain can have a referendum on the EU, every Western country should be allowed to have a referendum on 'refugee' immigration and numbers they are willing to allow in. When you have an economic block that is currently losing the financial and economic war against its peers, and then you welcome in boatloads of refugees, you're asking for trouble. Big trouble.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,589
    bondjames wrote: »
    China commenting on democracy? That's a joke in itself.

    It's capitalism that is fundamentally the problem. Not democracy. People tend to confuse the two and use the terms interchangeably. Capitalism is what needs rebooting. People still have the right to vote, and actually do so fairly. However their needs are ignored once politicians get into office due to money'd interests taking precedence over the common man/woman. Moreover, the candidates that are proposed by the capitalist system are deeply in the pocket before they even get on the ballot.

    Remember 'Occupy Wall Street'? Do you remember how fast those peaceful but leaderless protests were shut down. Everywhere. Why? That is what the people who run things are afraid of. The voice of the people on the lower rung of the ladder. Ironic don't you think? I remember Obama himself being negative towards them. Why? Were they violent? He was afraid of the movement of people who don't have a shot, and the young who have limited prospects.

    For the immigration issue - it should have been put to a referendum. If Britain can have a referendum on the EU, every Western country should be allowed to have a referendum on 'refugee' immigration and numbers they are willing to allow in. When you have an economic block that is currently losing the financial and economic war against its peers, and then you welcome in boatloads of refugees, you're asking for trouble. Big trouble.

    But we don't have democracy in the U.S., only the illusion of it. It's why Bush was elected President in 2000 against the will of the American people.

    As for the voice of the people: what's of note is that the TEA party revolution and the Trump support do NOT come from the lower rung. It's hilarious that "revolution" is being pushed by the privileged and the status quo. That's unheard of.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Not the first time yes. It was circumvented by one of the real power brokers in the US, namely the US Supreme Court, ironically the top judicial body of the land. The recount should have been allowed to continue and a final result obtained.

    As I recall, Gore won the popular vote marginally but not the electoral college, prior to the recount being stopped.

    Any election is essentially a referendum on the incumbent. That election was Gore's to lose. He should have been able to put Bush away more easily than he did. The fact that it was that close says something about people's opinion of Gore, or perhaps Clinton. Nader also f'd it up.

    As some have pointed out on this very thread, Bush won the second one (2004) very cleanly. Even after the Iraq debacle. That is the more surprising thing actually.

    EDIT: Tea Party support is spread out amongst the income distribution. It is not purely upper class. There is Tea Party and there is conservative. Many are both but not all. The Tea Party and Occupy are different sides of the same coin.

    As I said earlier, hardcore Tea Party is primarily with Cruz, although many are spinning it otherwise. Trump is actually pulling in the middle and that is what is scaring everyone. The so called 'establishment' at the grass roots level is moving to Trump. As I said, if he is the nominee, wait to see it in the general election. There is also the 'Trump Democrat' that Clinton and Co are shitting themselves about.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,589
    bondjames wrote: »
    Not the first time yes. It was circumvented by one of the real power brokers in the US, namely the US Supreme Court, ironically the top judicial body of the land. The recount should have been allowed to continue and a final result obtained.

    As I recall, Gore won the popular vote marginally but not the electoral college, prior to the recount being stopped.

    Any election is essentially a referendum on the incumbent. That election was Gore's to lose. He should have been able to put Bush away more easily than he did. The fact that it was that close says something about people's opinion of Gore, or perhaps Clinton. Nader also f'd it up.

    As some have pointed out on this very thread, Bush won the second one (2004) very cleanly. Even after the Iraq debacle. That is the more surprising thing actually.

    My point is that the electoral college is a joke. As long as that is in place, millions of Americans' votes don't actually count for anything.
This discussion has been closed.