US presidential elections

First topic message reminder :

Irony?

You also have to understand that a good percentage of the people that voted for Trump didn't feel particularly neglected or desperate - and a good many of them had the intelligence to know when he was bluffing and doing his snake-oil salesman technique.  But that didn't stop them voting for him because they simply wanted him and not her.  There are a million different reasons why you nod approval of one person over another - and your own background, your own experiences all through life (not just in the months of the election)... it all informs your choices when one person stands next to another. A lot of it is involuntary, a sub-conscious choice rather than an intellectual one.

Lots of commentators got the result wrong simply because they refused to believe that the 'issues' - that were forever cropping up day after day during the run-in to the election itself - were NOT going to sway many voters either way.  They were voting with their instincts - not because they had read the latest polls or because Trump was asked a difficult question that he shirked an answer to in interview.

Political brains always try to pretend people aren't people.  People keep reminding them that 80% of a person is still instinct.

Worth remembering....That 80 percent of the Trump vote was people voting on party lines.....Trump was irrelevant..

Like Corbyn...will get around 30 percent whatever he does..

Clinton was lazy...Thought she was getting Obama's vote....Unfortunately the black voters didn't come out as much.

SecretFly wrote:You also have to understand that a good percentage of the people that voted for Trump didn't feel particularly neglected or desperate - and a good many of them had the intelligence to know when he was bluffing and doing his snake-oil salesman technique.  But that didn't stop them voting for him because they simply wanted him and not her.  There are a million different reasons why you nod approval of one person over another - and your own background, your own experiences all through life (not just in the months of the election)... it all informs your choices when one person stands next to another.  A lot of it is involuntary, a sub-conscious choice rather than an intellectual one.

Lots of commentators got the result wrong simply because they refused to believe that the 'issues' - that were forever cropping up day after day during the run-in to the election itself - were NOT going to sway many voters either way.  They were voting with their instincts - not because they had read the latest polls or because Trump was asked a difficult question that he shirked an answer to in interview.

Political brains always try to pretend people aren't people.  People keep reminding them that 80% of a person is still instinct.

Nice analysis there Fly.

You should be the BBC's next political correspondent.

Clinton had nothing to say.  People talk about Trump's crazy policies.  Clinton had none.  'Here I am - here's how qualified I am, I've been there and done that.  That guy Trump don't know what he's talking about.  I'm above his sort.  I'm not going to get dragged down to his level.'

But she did get dragged down to his level because basically that's all she had.  She felt she was going to get an easier ride against a different 'Republican'.  She felt it would just be a 'colour' campaign - not in terms of Black v White (though she doesn't mind servicing that one) - but Blue v Red.  Vote for me because I'm a liberal, I like people and I'm a woman to prove it.  Women like people more than men do. '

She expected that's all it was going to be.  Yet her side of the fight have a cheek to then say she was the Substance candidate?  No, she was the Personality candidate.  She felt sure, now that the token Black President was done with, there would be no more distractions to her being elected first Woman.  She didn't need vision or policies.  All it needed was for her to turn up as a woman and keep the wave Presidential.

But she didn't expect to meet a scrapper and a common-speak street fighter.  She tried to pretend her Presidentiality would take her beyond the low-life antics of her opponent but he knew how to press her buttons.  The 'I'm up there' act quickly disintegrated as a result.  She came out fighting as low as he got.  So he won even in creating the terms of the fight itself.  He was the puppet master.  She met a boxer every bit as ready to get down and dirty as she did - and she met a better one.

When you knock aside Trump's more outlandish comments (expertly handled to keep the crowds happy), when you put aside the bombast and home-spun pig-headness, the man had much more depth to his policies for an America under his Presidency than Clinton ever tried to match.  For her the mantra of 'America doesn't have to be made great again, it already is.'....well, not much of a list of things-to-do-when-in-office, was it?

I agree with your post.......The Clintons thought the sex stuff would hurt him but being part of the Washington elite seem to forget that struggling people have more pressing concerns...

Trump's policies were crap but at least he had some and at least he was willing to go into the downtown areas.....

Michigan is a state she lost to Sanders and it is a bellwether. She didn't visit it..

Wisconsin recount.........Trump won in Nov by 27,000.......

82% ballots recounted..

Trump has gained 105 votes.....

Clinton has lost 41 votes......

$3.5 million well spent.....

I see Obama is going for midnight regulation like all outgoing Presidents in order to annoy the incumbent....

He's seen all the Tea party members in Trump's new cabinet and has banned Drilling in federal waters........Part of the Tea party's slogan is "Drill baby drill...."

The outer lands act was brought in I think by Truman to screw Eisenhower and the apple pie right........

Trump shouldn't have too much trouble rescinding it....But it a) enhances Obama's green credentials and b) Is a nuisance for Trump to promulgate a new order..

"Clinton had no policies".
Yeah, right.
Pro-choice on abortion.
Listens to overwhelming evidence from the scientific community regarding global warming. Moving away from coal, and keeping an open mind about other sources of energy.

not really relevant to the personal or political issues facing individuals or the wider world.
"Drill baby drill". Sarah Palin said that. And Trump seems to want her on board.
But the so-called metropolitan, pro-globalisation, pro-freedom of movement types, bless them,just don't get it.
Trump is a "plain-speaker"? How about lowest common denominator communicator? Which was fake anyway. A man who inherited his wealth;no-one wants to hear about that ,as the self-made nonsense appeals to those who can't or won't see beneath the veneer.
And lo and behold, he immediately rowed back on several rhetorical claims immediately.
That was real clever. Lying to get office. Or is that being "smart", like his tax-dodging? Because power is the ultimate end ,everything else justifies the means.
No.You can't justify one person voting for that venal behaviour. It's not having "street-smarts". It's being an entitled rich guy who wants power but doesn't care about what happens when you get it.

andygf wrote:"Clinton had no policies".
Yeah, right.
Pro-choice on abortion.
Listens to overwhelming evidence from the scientific community regarding global warming. Moving away from coal, and keeping an open mind about other sources of energy.

not really relevant to the personal or political issues facing individuals or the wider world.
"Drill baby drill". Sarah Palin  said that. And Trump seems to want her on board.
But the so-called metropolitan, pro-globalisation, pro-freedom of movement types, bless them,just don't get it.
Trump is a "plain-speaker"? How about lowest common denominator communicator? Which was fake anyway. A man who inherited his wealth;no-one wants to hear about that ,as the self-made nonsense appeals to those who can't or won't see beneath the veneer.
And lo and behold, he immediately rowed back on several rhetorical claims immediately.
That was real clever. Lying to get office. Or is that being "smart", like his tax-dodging? Because power is the ultimate end ,everything else justifies the means.
No.You can't justify one person  voting  for that venal behaviour. It's not having "street-smarts". It's being  an entitled rich guy who  wants power but doesn't care about what happens when you get it.

Clinton didn't have a coherent economic policy.......Politics begins at home....."The economy stupid.."

"Drill baby Drill"....was a line used by the "PDAM" (Pro Drilling Astroturf Movement) of which the Tea Party evolved from....

Lying to get office......Fancy a politician thinking of doing that....Sure it never crossed Clinton's mind......

Hard to chuck venal behaviour at someone when you have serious issues regarding your Foundation and are selling access for money....


I wouldn't have voted for Trump in a million years but I wouldn't have voted for her either with Stein in the race......

Instead of blaming Trump voters blame the Democrats for putting up the one Democrat in the whole of the USA he could beat....Because everything she could accuse Trump of he could return the compliment about her and her Husband............


But don't worry I'm sure she will back in 2020.......Because the Presidency is her prize for living with Bill all these years....The affairs we know about are already in double figures and she doesn't look like a doormat..

Infact forget 2020... it will be like "Weekend at Bernie's".............When she's dead they will stuff her and bring her out to run every four years....

Because she is the Queen of America and has a God given right to be President...It's just convincing those nasty Men to see it..

Michele Obama will steal her Queen crown and go for it next.

I'd say America would struggle to produce bigger turds next time around but I have no idea who's slated to stand.

All very well pasting my entire post, but I'm not sure what you take issue with?
Hillary had a sense of entitlement too. I'll grant you that.
Democrats should not have voted her the candidate. I'm not sure. On balance I possibly agree with this, however would "middle" America really go for Sanders?

sure the Tea Party lunatics  came up with that phrase "drill baby drill". Doesn't detract from my point that it is an ignorant position to take on Energy.

Also ,if we are splitting hairs, James Carville  came up with the phrase "the economy,stupid", not Clinton, which as you don't attribute to Carville, I can assume that you think was Clinton's.
He said this in 1991. It may well have been true then, but it sure isn't now. If there is one thing that we can learn from the West moving to the Right it is that old rules do not apply and that ,(to quote my friend who is paraphrasing the link)Leave campaign's call to 'take back control' of our country/borders as examples of Foucault's statements which don't really mean anything and have little basis in reality but have the power to influence regardless. "The conversion of all questions of truth into questions of power..."
Sorry if there are any Trump fans who don't agree with philosophical interpretations, I know that your views, now that we are in a post-truth era, are just as valid.

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-frankfurt-school-knew-trump-was-coming

Sanders held an 18 percent lead on Trump..

Clinton had a 20 percent trust rating....and Trump's deplorable treatment of Women couldn't be forced home because of her husband..

Democrats stayed at home....Students and black voters especially...

Sanders scored big with students..

I didn't attribute "It's the economy stupid" to anybody..

Trump was full of populist crap..But I believe he didn't expect to win and it was an attempt to promote his brand.

She blew it and he lucked out..

She took winning for granted and got lazy.

Agree on every point there, Sir!

Sad thing is Obama's rating is slightly above 50%.......Which kind of points to the fact that it needn't have been a "change" election....Unlike..

Arthur to Cleveland.............GOP to Dem....(GOP like Corbyn's Labour split into two between the Stalwarts and progressives.....Made it a walk over for Grover Cleveland...Only President ever to get married in the White House!!)

Fillmore to Pierce...............Whig to Dem..(Slavery was coming to a head and the Civil war looming.....Fillmore was the 19th century Dan Quayle.....Lincoln was 8 years away....)

Taft to Wilson.....................GOP to Dem...(Taft was so bad...Gop legend Teddy Roosevelt became an independent and challenged him letting Wilson in through the back door)

Hoover to Roosevelt............GOP to Dem....(Great depression)

Bush to Obama...................GOP to Dem.....(Because Bush was Bush)

Where the above incumbents had big negatives..

Infact I'll be surprised if any incumbent in history with a positive rating hasn't passed it onto someone from the same party...

Anyhow....All the very best !!.

Hmmm, about three weeks to go on the term of the 44th President of the US.  What else is going to be pulled from the last-throw-of-the-dice selection box between then and now?

We've already witnessed a number of rapid fire attempts to coax us all into a lovely New Year World War III - I wonder what other delightful little morsels of dastardly tension will 'coincidently' pop up between now and the 20th?  For all our sakes let's hope the boys finally just accept that the game is up.

Do most of us realise just how momentous a time we're moving through as the seasonal drink is guzzled and the omnibus editions of ye olde favourites are slept through in front of the comforts of warm toe-tingling fires?

Have sympathy for the Secret service on Trump's big day.....Not only will they be on the lookout for ISIS....They'll be on the lookout for..

Crazed despondent feminists....

Antagonised Mexicans who feel aghast at being stereotyped as r**is ts and murderers..

Blacks who regard Trump as a white supremist..

The KKK and other supremist groups who supported Trump in much needed GOP Southern states during the primaries and were chewed up and spat out after their usefulness was served.

Nutty apple pie Conservatives who think Trump is a closet Democrat..

Disgruntled Trump University students..

Disgruntled Business associates.

Crazed Mormons that saw big star Mitt Romney decimated by Trump abuse....

Yes should Trump eat some metal it will take Colombo,  Poirot, Sherlock Holmes and Jessica Fletcher to find the culprit...

Also, the GOP have just voted, in secret, on a holiday, without telling the Democrats, to pretty much neuter the body that enforces ethics on US politicians. Areas affected include the ability to enforce against conflicts of interest.

"Drain the swamp" he said. You couldn't make this up.

It has to go through Congress..........

Should also be noted neither the Donald or party leaders were in favour.

Rumour has it that the GOP senators have now back-pedalled on this...

Enforcement of ethics?

Who decides the ethics brand (as we all know they come in flavours)?  Who enforces them?  Who employs the ethics enforcers?  Who keeps the ethics enforcers ethical - as enforcement power is always corruptible? And who is gonna stop the evil Ruskies from infiltrating the whole shebang anyway??

It's a Merry Go Round of Who-To-Trust... but I'd say it's decidedly unethical to fake a birth cert for a start....

The head of the now defunct birther movement......Was Orly Taitz..

That woman was so embarrassing......If you get a minute check her out on Youtube...

The Laurence O'Donnell interview is legendary..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Sad thing is Obama's rating is slightly above 50%.......Which kind of points to the fact that it needn't have been a "change" election....Unlike..

Arthur to Cleveland.............GOP to Dem....(GOP like Corbyn's Labour split into two between the Stalwarts and progressives.....Made it a walk over for Grover Cleveland...Only President ever to get married in the White House!!)

Fillmore to Pierce...............Whig to Dem..(Slavery was coming to a head and the Civil war looming.....Fillmore was the 19th century Dan Quayle.....Lincoln was 8 years away....)

Taft to Wilson.....................GOP to Dem...(Taft was so bad...Gop legend Teddy Roosevelt became an independent and challenged him letting Wilson in through the back door)

Hoover to Roosevelt............GOP to Dem....(Great depression)

Bush to Obama...................GOP to Dem.....(Because Bush was Bush)

Where the above incumbents had big negatives..

Infact I'll be surprised if any incumbent in history with a positive rating hasn't passed it onto someone from the same party...

Anyhow....All the very best !!.

Forgive the indulgence but i've just re-read the post and can't believe I missed the crash of 1893 screwing Grover Cleveland and letting the Republican Mckinley in...Crossover election.

"Honest Grover" was not only the only President to get married on Pennsylvania avenue but he was the only President to serve two terms non consecutively ..

Mckinley was wasted..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The head of the now defunct birther movement......Was Orly Taitz..

That woman was so embarrassing......If you get a minute check her out on Youtube...

The Laurence O'Donnell interview is legendary..

Well first up...that's one angry Laurence O'Donnell there.  Quite pointed that a supposed neutral journalist and unbiased presenter should act as though it was his own Nationality that was dragged into doubt.  That cat had a horse in that race, for sure
You really see that guy as being a cool, efficient hatchet assassin?  

"Will you let me speak?" -
"NO!" "This is not where you come to do your madness!" "You're not going to talk about your nonsense."  

So all the journalist from a supposedly unbiased News network wanted from the 'Birther' was a public apology to the President?  Was that his role?  

Meanwhile, back at the ranch - in the news quite recently (Dec 15th 2016; if you search for it as it was pointedly ignored by the mainstream Trump-is-a-disaster-for-the-World news networks - including the BBC! - unsurprisingly) were two people - Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Mike Zullo.  Check them out on Youtube under the same topic.
I think at the very least what they had to say (in great detail) undefuncts the movement, at the very least puts the issue back in the dock, at the very least hits the tennis ball back across the net to the O'Donnell style boys.  Now perhaps Laurence O'Donnell should be asked to apologise to the Taitz woman unless he has information that debunks yet again?
A number of questions arise about that 'Official' Birth Cert Copy on the President's Offical site:
Why the suspicions about his identity in the first place?  Someone behind the scenes whistleblowing?
Why did he excite those suspicions himself and wait for nearly three years before publishing a version of a birth cert?  Playing the game keep-em-guessing isn't exactly conducive to making them just go away.
Why then did that version have to create authenticity issues of its own in it being a complex multi-layered digital format that has many display on/off switches for many of the written parts?  A genuine copy of a official document doesn't require buttons that can turn off dates.
Why not just copy a document and place it on the site as a simple photographic copy?
Why now again are serious detailed doubts being cast on the image on the President's site?  Or to be blunt, why is the image on the Official President's site being again publically described as an outright fake/counterfeit?
Why does Joe Arpaio admit that he's more than willing to have his forensic findings debunked by the publishing/viewing of a clear, unaltered photographed copy of the original official birth cert document (microfiche) - something that is supposedly being denied over and over by the appropriate Hawaiian authorities?

Circumstantial evidence that something is being hidden?  Plenty - and over an extended period too.  What man would want such continuous hassle if he could directly debunk the birther theories on his first few weeks in office?

I think O'Donnell was one of the reasons Trump ran......Been calling him a fraud on MSNBC for years and saying he wouldn't have the balls....

Reckon Trump's ego couldn't stand the pain....So he put in a novelty campaign to shut the naysayers up and to promote a new "angry network" he was planning with Roger Ailes and then ended up winning a post he probably didn't want..

Funny thing is when O'Donnell finally met him he did a butt squirming show where he licked his ass...

As for Orly......She's a loony....She deserved no better..

SecretFly wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The head of the now defunct birther movement......Was Orly Taitz..

That woman was so embarrassing......If you get a minute check her out on Youtube...

The Laurence O'Donnell interview is legendary..

Well first up...that's one angry Laurence O'Donnell there.  Quite pointed that a supposed neutral journalist and unbiased presenter should act as though it was his own Nationality that was dragged into doubt.  That cat had a horse in that race, for sure
You really see that guy as being a cool, efficient hatchet assassin?  

"Will you let me speak?" -
"NO!" "This is not where you come to do your madness!" "You're not going to talk about your nonsense."  

So all the journalist from a supposedly unbiased News network wanted from the 'Birther' was a public apology to the President?  Was that his role?  

Meanwhile, back at the ranch - in the news quite recently (Dec 15th 2016; if you search for it as it was pointedly ignored by the mainstream Trump-is-a-disaster-for-the-World news networks - including the BBC! - unsurprisingly) were two people - Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Mike Zullo.  Check them out on Youtube under the same topic.
I think at the very least what they had to say (in great detail) undefuncts the movement, at the very least puts the issue back in the dock, at the very least hits the tennis ball back across the net to the O'Donnell style boys.  Now perhaps Laurence O'Donnell should be asked to apologise to the Taitz woman unless he has information that debunks yet again?
A number of questions arise about that 'Official' Birth Cert Copy on the President's Offical site:
Why the suspicions about his identity in the first place?  Someone behind the scenes whistleblowing?
Why did he excite those suspicions himself and wait for nearly three years before publishing a version of a birth cert?  Playing the game keep-em-guessing isn't exactly conducive to making them just go away.
Why then did that version have to create authenticity issues of its own in it being a complex multi-layered digital format that has many display on/off switches for many of the written parts?  A genuine copy of a official document doesn't require buttons that can turn off dates.
Why not just copy a document and place it on the site as a simple photographic copy?
Why now again are serious detailed doubts being cast on the image on the President's site?  Or to be blunt, why is the image on the Official President's site being again publically described as an outright fake/counterfeit?
Why does Joe Arpaio admit that he's more than willing to have his forensic findings debunked by the publishing/viewing of a clear, unaltered photographed copy of the original official birth cert document (microfiche) - something that is supposedly being denied over and over by the appropriate Hawaiian authorities?

Circumstantial evidence that something is being hidden?  Plenty - and over an extended period too.  What man would want such continuous hassle if he could directly debunk the birther theories on his first few weeks in office?

Blimey! You'll be talking about grassy knolls in a sec...

You seem so afraid of these issues, navy.  No, no, it could never happen that a President of the US of A might have his birth certificate doctored to cover up something!  It would never happen.  Watergate would never happen either... Presidents are much too noble a beast to ever engage in any of those movie-like scripts.

And then there is Trump, to prove you all wrong in your assumptions of what a President is capable of - and he ain't even in Office yet!  He's been accused of just about every down and dirty trick in the book to get elected and is already being labelled a Russian spy in some 'sensible' areas of public discourse where Presidents would never try to fool the people to get into office.

Oh and that post that you responded to is still there with all the questions still pertinent.

I couldn't care less really - he's not my President.

Conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy. It's far, far less likely than the fact that Obama was, actually, born in the U.S.
Still, there's a chance of anything being the case isn't there? Even if it's infinitesimally small.

Let's say, though, that Obama wasn't actually born a U.S. citizen. Hardly like he's shafted the country since his arrival is it? Not sure why the idea you have to be born there matters that much to be honest. I'm sure there are gazillions of naturalised Americans who're more patriotic than those that were born there.

As for Trump, he's an arse and that's bad enough without the more excessive nonsense about being a Russian spy etc - to be honest, Putin doesn't need him to formally be one of theirs does he? What was it? "Plausible idiot"? His words are public fact. I'm sure more will come out over time as he's pissed off so many journalists they're bound to be after him one way or another. Let's see where we are in four years - if he makes it that far.

Better off in four years .

Obama took the debt from 11 trillion to 17....The US economy is still coming out from the World recession....Poor growth..Standard of living down...Not really Obama's fault but that's life.

It will improve steadily over the coming years..It's the economy that he will be judged on

Like Coolidge in the 20s..Better to be a lucky fool than an unlucky genius in politics.

navyblueshorts wrote:I couldn't care less really - he's not my President.

Conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy. It's far, far less likely than the fact that Obama was, actually, born in the U.S.
Still, there's a chance of anything being the case isn't there? Even if it's infinitesimally small.

Let's say, though, that Obama wasn't actually born a U.S. citizen. Hardly like he's shafted the country since his arrival is it? Not sure why the idea you have to be born there matters that much to be honest. I'm sure there are gazillions of naturalised Americans who're more patriotic than those that were born there.

As for Trump, he's an arse and that's bad enough without the more excessive nonsense about being a Russian spy etc - to be honest, Putin doesn't need him to formally be one of theirs does he? What was it? "Plausible idiot"? His words are public fact. I'm sure more will come out over time as he's pissed off so many journalists they're bound to be after him one way or another. Let's see where we are in four years - if he makes it that far.

I'm with you on that one, navy.  I have a very political minded sister there who would make a wonderful President  - I'm like you in asking why should she not have the right to be one as an American citizen who spent most of her life there.
But.... that wasn't my point about the birth cert.  My point about the birth cert is that it seems the President is allegedly involved in trying to conceal issues about his past.  Those issues don't have to be about where he was born.  They can be about other things, like real parentage?  A people asked to vote for a President shouldn't have to be left guessing about those things.  It's just not a nice way to treat the people who you want to vote for you.  So it took him close to three years to throw up something that looked like a birth certificate and even with the lateness came even more disbelief about the supposed document that was presented.
The public have a right to know they aren't being deceived on the familial history of the President.  The rules were the rules - and what disallowed the candidacy of some foreign born American citizens, disallowed the candidacy of all foreign-borns.  His unwillingness to share details about his life - even his college life seems iffy? - appears to infer that he might Allegedly be aware rules were broken.

On Trump...yes, I'm hoping more does come out - and that he's the President outing it, and that a few people squirming uneasily now before he takes office feel even more under the headlight when he takes over.

SecretFly wrote:...On Trump...yes, I'm hoping more does come out - and that he's the President outing it, and that a few people squirming uneasily now before he takes office feel even more under the headlight when he takes over.

Oh, I seriously doubt that. No way, no how. Trump's got far too much garbage of his own to hide.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Better off in four years .

Obama took the debt from 11 trillion to 17....The US economy is still coming out from the World recession....Poor growth..Standard of living down...Not really Obama's fault but that's life.

It will improve steadily over the coming years..It's the economy that he will be judged on

Like Coolidge in the 20s..Better to be a lucky fool than an unlucky genius in politics.

Sadly, you may be right although I'm sure that eventual result will have stuff all to do with Trump and his policies and a lot more to do with the overall global scenarios that play into the U.S. economy.

navyblueshorts wrote:

SecretFly wrote:...On Trump...yes, I'm hoping more does come out - and that he's the President outing it, and that a few people squirming uneasily now before he takes office feel even more under the headlight when he takes over.

Oh, I seriously doubt that. No way, no how. Trump's got far too much garbage of his own to hide.

Serious accusations need serious scrutiny.  I think Trump has the people who voted for him all wrong if he ever thought they'd forget what they want from him.  He may quickly join the list of undesirables if he turns into a dud...but that still won't turn his opponents back into angels.  
Something rancid has been going down in American politics for years - part of the political establishment's distaste for Trump is that he is an outsider coming in to look through the files.  Republicans and Democrats are the same race - politicians scratching each others backs.  Playing the debating game in public but behind the scenes all back slaps and friendly whispers.  They know there are skeletons there - and they don't know how Trump is going to react when he uncovers the bones of many of them.

He might fall into line and keep to the etiquette of pretending all is well or he might start exposing.  Thus the quite pointed panic stations through all ranks, Republican and Democrat.

Looks like Hillary "Ursa" Clinton will be running for Mayor of New York later this year...... ("You!! What kind of a creature are you ??")...New York Post has endorsed her already and she is busy tweeting her work on education policy with Bernie.. ("They come from there a place called Houston")...

She'll have to register first and learn to use a metro card....But I imagine she'll win...The current Mayor's polling badly and it is very metropolitan...

Wow Trump goes to war with CNN.....Guy has bollox I'll give him that..

Also says he'll repeal Obamacare in his first few months..

Bad news for Obama as that is all he's got to show for 8 years..Apart from being the first President to visit Cuba for decades...Too bad the Cuban leader had better things to do than greet him..

You had the chance to change America Barack in your first term but you preferred the golf course...

Go and earn your money with Hillary on the Wall Street circuit..P**s off and don't come back..

America is ready to become fairer but it doesn't need fake preachers.....Elizabeth Warren time to step up to the plate..Time for Pocahontas..

Change the bloody record Truss, Jesus.

You had a chance.......for 12 months before the Republicans took control of America's absurd political system.

Wonder if Trump can successfully repeal Obama care in a similar amount of time.

Funny bit is the biggest users/beneficiaries of Obamacare are all States that voted Trump.......

Trump always looks unprepared in a public structured event. Fine when preaching to his supporters or tweeting but loses some of his edge when he can't steamroll the room imo

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Wow Trump goes to war with CNN.....Guy has bollox I'll give him that....

No. It's reckless, idiotic and childish. Par for the course though, I guess.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Wow Trump goes to war with CNN.....Guy has bollox I'll give him that....

No. It's reckless, idiotic and childish. Par for the course though, I guess.

He also has plans for his own news station so it's really just good business......

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Wow Trump goes to war with CNN.....Guy has bollox I'll give him that....

No. It's reckless, idiotic and childish. Par for the course though, I guess.

I hope they do go to war with him...and that it happens on Blue Screen, like some of their other wars.  It'll be exciting, the ratings will be high and a scud missile report is always a nice change from Emerdale.

T!T

What? Was it the Blue Screen that offended your eyesight, Top??

Trump has now attacked John Lewis of all people, calling him "all talk". Lewis being a guy that got his skull cracked while marching for civil right while Trump was dodging the draft.

What did John Lewis say? That the person the American people voted for is not a legitimate President?

I'd defend his right to think it - in terms of him laying down the fact that he certainly won't be a loyal citizen over the next four years or a non-critical one... if Trump lasts that long. Good for him. He's entitled to his views.

................So is Trump.

It seems Trump has allowed everyone to loosen up and start saying it as they feel it. Everyone seems to have dropped the smarmy political correctness crap that has plagued us all for too many decades now. Nothing wrong with that. Cards on the table. Fresh real-speak.

Yeah, right. So it's OK to say anything at all now because it's "as you feel it"?

navyblueshorts wrote:Yeah, right. So it's OK to say anything at all now because it's "as you feel it"?

em......................................... yeah.

It happens here, doesn't it?

Someone wilfully insults you and you're meant to just suck it up because the guy was a great 'iconic' figure of the Civil Rights movement? Does that make him a God? Criticism of the old soldier-of-conscience is blasphemy?
Too many people here are way too inclined towards censorship of opinion for my liking. Do you realise how dangerous the concept even is? Sometimes I think not.

Dennis McDonough, White House Chief of Staff:

“My hope would be that the president-elect would reach out to somebody as consequential as somebody who is such a leader as John Lewis.  That would be the kind of thing that would not only send a message to the American people that we’re prepared to work together, but would also send a message to the Russians that we are united. Their efforts to divide us, to weaken us, to advance their own interests at the expense of ours, are going to fail.”

This was spoken in the context of 23 Democrats, including the regal John Lewis, refusing to go to the inauguration...supposedly on account of Trump being a Russian stooge and only winning because the Russians told millions of Americans to vote for him.

That's a tough challenge for Trump so.  Just how is he meant to write that 'Reaching-Out' invite?

"Dear Noble Non-Partisan Democrats of the other Party that lost the election.  Please come to my Party on Friday.  Even though the Russians are paying me to dismantle this Great Nation brick by brick, and goading me to use those bricks to build my Mexican funded wall, I think you're right that we should put up a front and pretend we all hate the Russians.  

After my glitzy Inauguration (with genuine stars showing up when your presence gives them the ideological green light) we could agree to hold a joint press conference; me at one microphone and my great pal, McCain standing behind me - but not close enough to stab me in the back again.

Hillary Clinton could be at the other microphone with you, John Leiws, behind her (she doesn't want Biden there as his touchy feely ways send shivers down her spine) and I could outline how great a President I was right before renouncing my Presidency as a Russian created scam and offering my resignation.  

Hopefully, this pleading, private, top-secret letter - that you will now send straight to CNN for public scrutiny - is enough to swing you and ensure that you are there to pat me on the back and congratulate me on the shortest Presidency in the history of this Great United Sovie............., United Union of.....,  United States of Russ..............,  the USA."

SecretFly wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Yeah, right. So it's OK to say anything at all now because it's "as you feel it"?

em......................................... yeah.

It happens here, doesn't it?  

Someone wilfully insults you and you're meant to just suck it up because the guy was a great 'iconic' figure of the Civil Rights movement?  Does that make him a God?  Criticism of the old soldier-of-conscience is blasphemy?
Too many people here are way too inclined towards censorship of opinion for my liking.  Do you realise how dangerous the concept even is?  Sometimes I think not.

:yawn: Of course I realise. Trump could have made a mature comment on Lewis not attending his inauguration, but no, of course he couldn't because he's a stupid man-child who was born with a gilded spoon up his arse and doesn't have the word 'diplomacy' in his lexicon.

As to the idea that you can say what you like, what planet are you on? How about some of the lovely white supremacists start off with their Nazi anti-Semitic bollox? How about someone in the U.K. start mouthing off about 'retards' and eugenics? It's OK right? It's "how they feel". Don't be ridiculous. Trump, as Pres-Elect, is showing zero responsibility for how his utterances might encourage those kind of A-holes. Same here with Farage and his despicable nonsense during the Brexit campaign. He's NOT just any old man in the street.