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
We have to work smarter, not harder.
A lot of the reform will have to happen on the bureaucratic level. But it's not crazy to suggest that the border at least be made more secure than it is. Surely there are ways to do this, given the technology the government has, to do this without going to an extreme.
...and, let it not be forgotten, a President who was repeatedly warned by his intelligence services that Muslim extremists were planning an attack using hijacked aircraft...and his response was "Okay, you've covered your ass." I should hope it'll be easy for just about ANYBODY to work smarter than GWB.
Worked out well for everyone!
Well, except for the peeps in the towers, the first respondents, the Iraq War vets, the American economy...etc...
But Cheney's stock soared!!! WIN!!!
Yep. War is great business.
Obviously it was a diversionary tactic to prevent media scrutiny (he would have been destroyed due to his heart issues if he hadn't used that deception to draw attention away from himself).
This should have tipped us off to the misrepresentation and lies that was to come.
But all this is distracting. And a disgrace. Big money rules, and we only have power in votes. Sort of.
I'm not sure why you think this. Because he advocates nonsense like building a great wall of mexico or adopting General Pershing tactics (that will certainly cause more backlash)? Blustering doesn't equal taking things seriously.
Obama has deported record numbers of illegal immigrants (look it up). Not really "doing nothing".
This is one of the best posts ITT. Too many people are looking at meaningless things like national polls (presidents aren't elected that way) and not looking at relevant (ie swing states).
Due to demographic shifts things look worse and worse for the republicans in presidential elections. At this point "Democrat win" has to be treated as the null hypothesis. I don't see any evidence that Trump will shift those swing states that voted for Obama last time. There's not enough pissed off blue collar white people in those states. I'll try and find it later, but there was a really cool tool on a news site that had all the data from the last election including demographics, and you could shift it however you wanted to see how it would change election outcomes.
I didn't need to look it up, as I'm well aware of that. Deporting people that are here illegally and potentially pose some kind of threat is something the government should be doing. But that's not securing the border. They're still doing very little to secure the actual border.
Yes, I know this. That is based on previous elections.
Yes, you're probably right, but only because Hillary is a known quantity and is the successor to the incumbent.
This is where I disagree. If it's a Hillary vs. Trump election, it won't be only the pissed off blue collar white voter who will vote for Trump. This is where the mistake is being made imho. You're correct there is no evidence yet to show that Trump will shift voters away. The operative word here is 'yet'. That's the thing about phenomenons. They tend to surprise people.
I shouldn't have said what I said about it being a landslide. US elections tend to be relatively close on popular vote. It's the electoral college that will determine where things end up, and there are a number of options for Trump (if it's him) to win. More so than any other Republican candidate imho because he can redraw the map more than any other candidate can on that side. It will be a 'go big' or 'go home' type situation with Trump. He will either do very well, or he will implode. That's why it could be a lot of fun to watch..
Problem is, Trump has given the DNC terrific sound bytes that will play really well in September and October. His bigotry and sexism won't play well when the chips are down.
I'm voting for Clinton (via mail; I still live overseas).
That's exactly why Trump is so popular right now. Because the rest of the Republicans didn't give a care, and most who still don't. Trump is not part of the Republican establishment, and that's why much of the rest of the Republican party is hostile towards him.
Gotcha. I actually agree with you on this and your following posts. No more nation building! And I'm no Cheney fan either. It's one thing to root out terrorists through some quick raids and by stepping up security here at home. It's quite another to try to establish democracy in a country that has never embraced for over 1500 years! This has caused a huge divide in the Republican party and is the reason why Trump is so popular at the moment.
I don't think GWB was a bad person. I think he had his heart in the right place. But he was advised by some pretty stupid people in their own right (or maybe pretty shrewd if we look at Cheney's bank account!). If a country wants to make a change in direction, it has to come from within. A lot of Iraqis were appreciative of what we did, but that was probably a very small minority. I know I wouldn't want some other countries army coming in here telling us how to live!
Well, if he's not serious, then I expect him to pull a "Ross Perot" and quit before the Republican convention citing "threats to his family" or some other nonsense like Perot did!
Let's assume that at least 40/50 states are 'safe states' that won't change parties regardless of the nominees (I think that's a pretty safe assumption). Of the remaining ten states, which ones do you think have a 50%+ chance of going TRUMP?
1. Trump could still implode over the next few weeks (which will be critical). The entire GOP establishment has a couple of weeks at best to destroy him.
2. Trump could yet back out and endorse Rubio, which I mentioned a while back on this thread is a real possibility.
I agree with comments that he is as surprised as anyone by his performance to date. One can see that. This indicates to me that he wasn't all that serious at the start of it all, so as I said earlier on this thread, does he have what it takes to continue - or will he pull out?
Having said that, if he decides to stay on, and if he's not destroyed in the next couple of weeks, then I believe he will beat Hillary and take the presidency. Reasons, at a high level, are as follows:
1. America is not a dynastic nation. They tried that once recently and it was an unmitigated disaster. Memories are still raw
2. Trump represents the 'outsider' perspective. That is a stronger history making inducement than the first woman president.
3. Trump is far more formidable than McCain and Romney. He has proven that so far (in terms of getting turnout on the Repub side). Hillary is not as formidable as Obama (she has proven that so far on the Dem side, where she has had some trouble to date in trying to take out an avowed 74 yr old socialist no less)
4. Trump is seen as more authentic with the electorate (no matter what people think of him) and that quality usually wins US elections. That is Hillary's #1 problem.
5. Trump has proven to date to be like Teflon. Usually candidates with this quality end up winning (Reagan, Clinton, Obama).
This is his election to lose. He will determine if he screws up or not imho. She can throw everything and the kitchen sink at him, but he alone will either self-impode or not.
So let's revisit if he is in fact the nominee, and he has a ways to go to secure it and decide if he's in this for the long haul.
Then it gets interesting, because it could by then become essentially a two man (woman) race.
Keep in mind that Hillary could select a very interesting VP candidate from outside the political realm to counter Trump (it it's him). That could reset the whole thing again.
Lots of variables.
Agreed.
The reason that Bernie and Trump are doing as well as they are is because the population of the US is fed up with establishment politics, on both sides of the aisle. There are also a lot of Bernie supporters who will jump ship to the Republican side if Hillary gets the nod because they despise the fact that they feel the DNC has made it impossible for a true reform candidate to win the nomination and have stacked the deck overwhelmingly in Clinton's favor.
So far, Trump has broken all of the rules and defied every single piece of conventional wisdom laid forth by the pundits and analysts, all of whom have been around for a long time and are paid to know how the political game works. If they can't prognosticate this race correctly, then there's no reason to believe that the race will continue going down a traditional path until it finally does prove itself to be a conventional race.
I don't know if they (or even Trump) truly cares. It became an issue because Fox News turned it into one...and that's why the Repubs and now Trump have been running with it. It's a hot button issue. The conservatives don't want to blame the economic collapse on CEOs, so instead they'll blame a bunch of illegals working in kitchens and car washes for $2/hour.
It's going to be Clinton. I am not 100% certain (maybe because I don't want to be) that Trump will get the nom from the Repubs. I can't fathom that. I still see Rubio as the most attractive choice (now that kasich and Jeb are out).
Regardless, I'd say that Hillary is by far the odds-on choice to be sworn in next January.
John Kasich needs to come out, maybe even joining forces somewhat with Trump, and try to knock Rubio from his perch once again. They've only got the one shot at it, Thursday night in Texas, but it needs to happen. It helps them to have multiple candidates going after Rubio in much the same way it helped Sanders to have O'Malley on the stage with him hammering Clinton from both sides. I don't think Bernie has bee quite as effective since O'Malley departed, at least when it comes to debating Clinton.
The only thing Rubio has going for him is that he looks good on TV. That's pretty much it. The fact that nobody has hammered him hard on not doing the job he was elected to do astounds me, because if they had, he wouldn't be in the position he is today as the establishment's "consensus" choice.
It's because the process that it takes to actually make it to the general election and the White House weeds out all of the good candidates. It's been a long time since we've had a truly good candidate run for the presidency.
Rubio is a joke, quite literally one actually after he revealed himself to be a soundbite memorizing robot. The man can't even find his way to work yet has somehow convinced 22% of the Republican party that he's qualified to lead the United States government.