It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
The Trump approach is to adopt a muscular foreign policy negotiating position and force a change in approach and financing in order to improve the US's financial expenditures on Defense (where he has noted, correctly, that there is presently massive wastage).
You will see the same approach adopted with the 'Kingdoms' in the Middle East as well.
It's even more interesting this time around with Trump because even the people he purports to be leading don't particularly like him. He's ascended to where he is because he's a master manipulator of the media, has exploited and stoked the fears of some of the more moderate and well-meaning members of the right, and then finally has whipped the extreme-right racist element of the party into an absolute frenzy, given that disgusting fringe of the party the necessary cover to express their views publicly without the usual consequences for doing so.
But, a large section of the right can't stand him, from your more rank-and-file Republican-types (those that would tend to vote for the Bushes, Kasichs, and Rubios of the world) to even the more hardcore Tea Party-types (those that would tend to back Cruz and Walker). Thanks to his manipulation of the media, the criticisms of him from the parts of the party that haven't completely lost their mind don't stick, not to even mention the criticisms from the left.
The media has shown no interest in vetting him. Every time they're critical (to use CNN as an example), they'll turn and give the floor to one of their three Trump supporters to will bend over backwards to the point of being in danger of breaking their backs to defend even the most racist of Trump's rhetoric. They do this under the guise of equal time, but that's already out the window since, from the start, they've made sure to give Trump more coverage than any other candidate. Trump's vile rhetoric should not be given the cover that it has been given from the media, but it's too late on that front, I'm afraid. Debates on the few actual policies of his that we know of (his NATO ideas, potential replacements for ObamaCare, etc.) are fine and should have differing views presented to facilitate the debate, even if the ideas are ludicrous. But, the media has gone further than that, to give cover for him to continue spewing the racially-charged rhetoric that serves no other purpose than to fan the flames and, at times, encourage violence, and his feet are never held to the proverbial flame on these issues for long enough to make a difference.
The problem with defeating Trump, IMO, lies within both the disaffected bloc of GOP voters as well as the Democratic party. I think you'd find Trump having a much more difficult time if the Democrats had nominated a candidate that hasn't made it a point to demonize the right. Her calling the Republicans and, by extension of that, their voters the "enemy" that she's most proud to have made over her career just makes it even more difficult for someone to woo the necessary votes from the disaffected right to ensure that Trump doesn't pull off the upset and win the presidency. Not to mention that she is very much a part of the Washington establishment that desperately needs to be disassembled, which is something that an insurgent candidate could do, but clearly Trump is not the right man to carry that banner.
With a candidate without the baggage that Clinton has and that is more willing to welcome disaffected voters from the other side for something other than getting their vote, I think you'd find more of an appetite from anti-Trump Republicans to pull the lever for the Democratic candidate. Not everyone on the right is one of the raving lunatics in attendance at the convention shouting nonsensical epithets. Otherwise, us anti-Trump Republican-leaning voters are left with the choice of voting for someone who considers us her "enemy" and doesn't align with many, if any, of our political ideals or casting our vote for Gary Johnson and Bill Weld and simply hoping for the best.
That my friend is rigging.
But I understand, because in the end they feared Bernie more than Trump....
DNC- snag Bernie now while you can! Otherwise you'll hand it to The Donald with a bow on top....
I don't live in the US, and only see what UK media tell us about Trump, but it seems to me they are doing their best to do a hatchet job to present the narrative that Trump is totally unsuitable to be President by picking up on random statements to prove he is politically incorrect.
What I never see is any serious examination of the serious issues. From the small titbits I've seen, he seems to be raising some interesting issues - such as middle class incomes stagnating, the impacts upon jobs of exporting jobs overseas, immigration from countries that US is actively bombing, need to audit the Fed, the nature of spend on the military. I may not agree with Trump's views, but I think these are serious issues that deserved to be discussed - but the media is totally unwilling to do so preferring to call Trump names. Reminds me of the old adage - in politics, if you cannot attack the message, then attack the messenger.
Take exporting jobs - example, IBM have moved jobs to regional hubs in low cost countries to reduce costs. If that were stopped, IBM costs would increase, profits reduced and Executive bonuses cut. Hence media campaign to discredit messenger.
We have had this in the UK, where if anyone threatens the establishment, the media go into overdrive to blacken the messenger. Whether it's political incorrect statements, sexual antics, or even members of their family ( example - previous Labour leader Ed Milliband being attacked for left-leaning comments made by his father in the 1940s!)
From a foreign policy perspective, he wants to reduce our defense budget while still carrying the big stick and projecting fear into enemies. It's better to be feared than loved in his view. He believes that the 'institutions' of foreign policy that we have in place are too bureaucratic, too costly, too 'entitled' and not designed to face today's asymmetric threats quickly enough. His approach to force change is to confront it straight on and aggressively, because there is not other way to get them to change. They are too fixed in their ways. Witness the changes that will come as a result of Brexit - none of what is to come would have come about if Remain had won.
For 30 yrs, folks on the right have been quoting (and misquoting) & bastardizing Ronald Reagan to make themselves look bigger than they are. The latest example of this was Cruz attempting to pull a Reagan 76 at this year's convention, but misunderstanding that Reagan ultimately did the right thing for the party and supported the eventual nominee (even though Ford lost, as Trump may do). Even Obama channeled him in his 2008 campaign, saying he was transformative (much to the disdain of some on the left). Reagan was definitely a man for his times. Clinton (Bill) was a man for his (which was a time of relative peace). Bush Sr. was a competent caretaker and the less said about Bush Jr. the better. Trump's perspective is that Obama is not a man for his time, and Clinton will be more of the same. That the US needs a transformative leader again. That's his bet. Time will tell if he's right.
So you would prefer others 'saving' you, so you don't have to do the talking yourself. Fact is: In certain scenario's Trump wants to ignore Article 5 and therefore the very essence of the NATO. I find that reckless and no sign at all of being a 'negotiator master'.
And again, you do NOT go into specifics yourself. It makes you as reckless as Donald Trump. You keep talking like Trump these days, as if you are as well the sole instrument of the people, as if you really understand the people (and I don't??).
Man, you can 'understand' until you weigh an ounce........the fact is, you keep not going into specifics and solutions. And you can 'understand' all you want, in the end you risk selling 'the people' one hell of a dead horse. And you find that idea appealing. It's the very essence of contentless populism...and it at times meanders into post-fascism (a form of radical authoritarian nationalism).
I certainly agree with that. Not least the media should demand of Trump (and the other candidates) to actually explain his ideas on these issues more in detail. Trump has only barely touched on the issues you mention, he has never really explained how he wants to adress them other than with brash and bombastic statements that in reality don't explain much. Pressure him to explain his agenda in detail, then debate his views. That's how proper journalism works. Instead they cover the issues at Trump's level, only skimming the surface and resorting to name calling.
In fact the media has never really respected Trump as a proper candidate, and that has in fact helped his candidacy. In stead of cheap attacks and focusing on his antics and public persona, discuss his actual ideas in detail.
It doesn't help @Jobo. As I see it it's very simple. The Donald can get away with all the shit he caused in Atlantic City for instance. He can get away with anything. He once said it himself! So whatever media outlet goes digging into that (even Fox News)......They. Don't. Give. A. S&%t.
Hillary Clinton however........man, people are seriously asking for Hillary's head. That she should be shot. That she should be raped. That she should go to prison. Man, and no one in here condems that?
--> Trump indicted for his criminal activities at Trump University? The people then chant: "Bring those judges to prison!!"
--> Hillary reprimanded by the FBI? The people then chant: "Hillary to prison!!" or "Comey should be ashamed of defending Crooked Hillary!"
--> Ted Cruz being honest by saying "Vote for your conscience!" The people then chant: "Ted is a sore loser!!". I mean....really? Since when do we throw away such a message?? Are we really that....fascist?
--> Melania Trump copy-pasting words from Michelle Obama? Ahh, no problem!
--> Michelle Obama copy-pasting words from Donald Trump? "Go away Michelle with your big fat arms!!"
Obviously, these examples of double standards show how populism defends those people who are populists and asks for the heads of those people who are not populists.
And make no mistake, Donald Trump got way way more media coverage than Hillary Clinton. People in here may condemn the media, but The Donald is playing with it like a Barbie doll. He needs the very same media. To such an extent that his Trump supporters are basically building a safeguard wall protecting Trump. Because if you dare to criticise Trump, you will be indicted. And it doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or a Republican.
I find that sick really. It's scary. And it reminds me of some events from the Interbellum era. I condemn this kind of campaign.
That's the huge problem in the world in the last few years - every political sides are making woeful campaigns.
You only ought to condemn faul language. That's enough. Mentioning insane ideas is actually a starting point of going into specifics. But really.......to say that Hillary should be shot? That's a step too far.
And in all honesty @DaltonCraig007......regardless of how words are used. Watching the RNC made me really sick at times. The sheer hate I heard and saw there....is at least less dominant present within the Clinton campaign. If protesters during the RNC openly say to gay people that they should burn themselves.......one has to ask him/herself which campaign racists will support more: The Trump campaign? Or the Clinton campaign. I know the answer.
You seem to be completely oblivious that this is precisely playing in Trump's favour. He gets a rise every time his insane ideas are mentioning without saying anything else. Doing what the Clinton campaign and the media are doing is simply adding petrol in the tank of Trump's campaign. When you finally see that and go about Trump in another matter, he will continue to benefit from it.
Your behaviour and reasoning makes you and the Clinton campaign the biggest Trumo supporters, since you are only adding fuel to the fire. So stop moaning about Trump and handle him in a different manner. If you don't want the situation to 'worsen', as you say, you have only yourself to blame. You are equally part of the problem.
If he is to be defeated, it will be on the issues, but that requires the media to actually start talking about them properly, rather than in negative sound bite terms as well.
The debates will be crucial this year. All expectations are that he will be shown as a buffoon and will be decimated. If he can hold his ground, then watch out.
What kind of nonsense is that really. I already admitted that there's nothing you can do about populists. They lack all the self-criticism on planet Earth. Criticising them is not in their playbooks, but calling for the heads of Clinton is appopriate.
Look, I know where I am coming from. Geert Wilders is in politics in The Netherlands since 2005. He continues using language that borders racism. Four years ago politicians thought they could shut him up by forming a minority government with Geert Wilders' Freedom Party (PVV) as an extraparliamentary supporter. I tell you this. It put our country backwards for 2 years.
It didn't help a shit. So many people were silent during these days. Nobody wanted to criticise him more openly. And look where he's now after 11 years? He's en route to actually WIN next year's parliament elections (our parliament has got 150 seats):
And I am actually....appalled by your call on 'staying silent'. By jolly, are we really surrendering to 'freedom for the very few'? In which ONLY Trump supporters can say what they want....and that people like me should be silent?? I tell you this. Never.
He can, and so could Sanders. I realized that quite some time ago which is why I was interested in both of these candidates even though they are on completely opposite political sides of the spectrum. Their common link is "unfiltered" messaging to the common man/woman.
I never said that I don't want that to happen. But it still means that the 'easy language' needs to be translated into solutions.
You can appeal to the people. I have no problem with that. But if it stays only that and never becomes a more detailed solutions, in the end you will disappoint the people even more. If you are really so obsessive about Trump's politics, then let him go into the specifics. Is it that hard to ask for that?
I've already explained how important the debates are, and that only a certain level of detail is required because of the need to get congressional approval on most matters of domestic consequence. I'm disappointed by the need to repeat myself yet again.
You are correct @DaltonCraig007. I am completely inconsequential to this. A common pleb.
You want the media to call Trump out on his lies? Seems to me that's been starting to happen in the last few days.
And one last point about The Evil of Trump: now he's gone too far, now I'm taking it personally! Forgive me, I didn't actually watch much of the R Con at all, I just catch what the media reports. I knew that Trump had made his appearance to the strains of Queen's "We are the Champions" and just thought that was kind of sick. Sure, take the work of a bisexual man who died of AIDS to buttress the position of the most anti-gay platform fielded in the modern American political arena. Bitter irony is a taste all politicians should develop a fondness for. What I didn't know was that his introduction also included a bit of classic Beatles music: "Here Comes the Sun" written by George Harrison. Not cool, Donnie. The Beatles belong to everybody but you can't have THAT. The estate of the late Mr. Harrison has noted their objection to the use with customary grace and good humor, stating that they MIGHT have been willing to approve of the Trump campaign using a different Harrisong: "Beware of Darkness" from George's initial solo album All Things Must Pass. A perntinent passage:
Watch out now
Take care, beware of greedy leaders
They'll take you where you should not go
While weeping Atlas cedars
They just want to grow, grow and grow...
Beware of darkness
You'd think the traditional parties could rub the noses of Trump and co in their stupidity, but all it does is giving free publicity to Trump/etc and don't hurt them in the slightest. Every single time the media and traditional candidates try to attack these insane claims, even the mere mentioning of them only adds fuel to the fire.
Very strange times we are in, when the extreme politicians seem to get away with practically anything, while the rest are in some kind of 'vacuum space' where saying anything negative on the far left/right politicians backfires immediately.
Which is why there needs to be a total re-thinking of politics, world-wide.
Only about 8+ months too late. Just like the 'Remain' side of the UK referendum who realized they've been doing a woeful campaign when it was over.
To you I may seem obsessed. But I am seriously afraid.
Ultimately, all these candidates are connecting on a visceral level with the electorate. Whether they are right or they are left, there is something that is hitting home and to the hearts and minds of those they appeal to. I think it's the straight talk approach. No nonsense, not beating about the bush, and getting to the point. Disruptive.
The thing is, these candidates do raise important issues. Issues that are dismissed by their opponents and the media most often, rather than openly discussed and debated honestly and in a caring way. I think that is a starting point to defeating these insurgents, as you correctly noted earlier.
Sadly, the media is a lost cause. Bought, paid for and biased. For both sides depending on which channel you watch. Frankly, they are a disgrace.
More like 20 Years in arrears. If you haven't noticed, the Republicans have been doing their level best to demonize Hillary since her husband was President. Like a frog in hot water, the American public has just gotten used to it. It stuck with some people long before this campaign ever started. How many are willing to defend Hillary from the same knee-jerk reaction you describe for Trump's supporters? How many still have their minds open and are willing to be convinced one way or the other? We'll just have to see...