US presidential elections

First topic message reminder :

Morning all,

So after the win in Iowa for Ted Cruz last night where do we see this going?

I'm thinking Clinton v Rubio. Lots of twists and turns still to come though.

Bit harsh that Fly, he's had to support Hillary to help overcome trump. I imagine it's made him feel as sick as Corbyn would having to support Blair to prevent Farage take over the UK.

Pr4wn wrote:You also didn't answer my question. What was Sanders supposed to do in his situation? Carry on with his hopeless crusade regardless, knowing that there was a chance that he could hand the keys to the White House to Trump?

Don't be ridiculous. He did the only thing he could do at that time. That doesn't make him a hypocrite at all.

You're being ridiculous.......With probably one house and a wafer slim majority in that.......How was sanders supposed to change America ??

To accuse him of hypocrisy shows a total lack of understanding about the situation and American politics in general.

The guy's voting record is absolutely immaculate. Whether you agree with his politics and his ideas or not, the guy isn't a hypocrite.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:You also didn't answer my question. What was Sanders supposed to do in his situation? Carry on with his hopeless crusade regardless, knowing that there was a chance that he could hand the keys to the White House to Trump?

Don't be ridiculous. He did the only thing he could do at that time. That doesn't make him a hypocrite at all.

You're being ridiculous.......With probably one house and a wafer slim majority in that.......How was sanders supposed to change America ??

How am I being ridiculous?

So, if the Americans wanted real change enough to elect Bernie Sanders as President (I'm aware that they haven't, this is hypothetical), you're saying that the best solution for these people would be to elect Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

Whether he has the house or not, him winning would have been a huge signal to those on the Hill that the political landscape of the country has changed.

Put simply, if I wanted real change in America, there was only one man for the job out of that entire pool and that's Sanders. Even if he'd managed to get one of his reforms through the Houses, that's one more than Hillary or The Donald would have made.

Throughout the entire nomination process, the US public were bombarded with news and media opinion saying that Sanders was "unelectable" (remind you of anywhere?). This was proven to have been orchestrated by the DNC. If that's not an illustration that the system is broken and needs changing, then I don't know what is.

I'm saying you have to be realistic like the Labour left has to be....

Bernie is a left wing Democrat there aren't many in congress....

The House of reps will stay Republican and the senate may go Democrat...it'll be close..

Clinton can cajole and bribe a few GOpers to put things through.....Bernie will have to bribe his own side..

Change has to be a slow thing..

But this is the thing Truss. Clinton won't put anything good through, so it's a total waste of time. Her track record shows that she's just an elephant in donkey's clothing.

Pr4wn wrote:To accuse him of hypocrisy shows a total lack of understanding about the situation and American politics in general.

The guy's voting record is absolutely immaculate. Whether you agree with his politics and his ideas or not, the guy isn't a hypocrite.

I accuse him of hypocrisy. You can ride off on a tantrum on that any which way you like... I'll call it as I see it - my interpretation, not yours.
He played the game - I'm not talking about his 'politics' I'm talking about him telling his followers to get behind a candidate that as pointedly uses another version of politics to him as Trump does. That's hypocrisy. "She was unfit for office until my candidacy took a nosedive - now you gotta put her in 'cause she's the right person for the job.' Hypocrisy.

Again, a complete lack of understanding.

And again, you refuse to answer my question. What should he have done, genius?

ShahenshahG wrote:Bit harsh that Fly, he's had to support Hillary to help overcome trump. I imagine it's made him feel as sick as Corbyn would having to support Blair to prevent Farage take over the UK.

That's the sham of politics.... and that's all I'm illustrating. The truth is Principles die easily when Pragmatism comes around.

Pr4wn wrote:Again, a complete lack of understanding.

And again, you refuse to answer my question. What should he have done, genius?

Not endorse Clinton... be real. It's Reality/Honesty that was his selling point - yes? A new way? Why should he stand up and endorse a person whose campaign train spread the news that he was 'unelectable'? Why should he ask his supporters to get behind someone he pretty much said was morally unfit for office?

I'll tell you why. Because he's a politician. He 'knows' she "didn't mean all the bad stuff" - that it was only a battle - all is fair in political battle - both candidates went for each other to increase their own chances of winning.
So Sanders understands the game - that's what his endorsement signified. He was telling his supporters to get back in the game. He fought, he lost and now it was time to 'unify'.

Balderdash - old politics - same old game - with Sanders playing along and expecting his supporters to follow along. "Here's my folks for you, Hillary - all present and correct - no hard feelings"

Must be tough getting through life being such a negative cynic.

He was faced with a choice, endorse Hillary and continue his movement behind the scenes or possibly be responsible for handing the presidency to Trump.

That's reality. You're being an idealist.

I'm being the realist, and realism is by definition well stocked with cynicism - you're the one being the idealist Pr4 - you don't like the idea of me besmirching the perceived 'idealism' and 'nobility' of a man called Sanders. That's idealism itself to assume or want to believe that he's a step above the rest.

I'm the realist. I'm telling you he's a politician - nothing more or less.

So you're saying you would stick to your guns despite the distinct possibility of handing the presidency to Trump, and you're saying you're not an idealist?

I'd have done exactly what Sanders did. I bet it made him feel awful, and it was certainly unpopular, but it was the only sensible choice.

Trump won't be a bad President....Probably be a good one....He'll sit on his arse for four years milking the title....."President"...That is all he wants..

"Honey, You've only called me Mr President twenty times today"

Wants the title and not the job..He'll be the laziest President in history.....He's a vain man on an ego trip....A "Last hurrah"..He's 70.

It will be Ulysses Grant all over again......"I'm playing golf...You lot in my cabinet do what you want"

There hasn't been a policy he hasn't U-turned on anyway...

His whole campaign reminds me of Richard Pryor in Brewster's millions.......The only reason it has been succesful like Bernie's is because the US like Britain is tired of the status Quo..

He'll do nothing for four years and considering the last few presidents...Doing nothing could be a good thing..

We have congress to reign in excesses anyway.....

He's no worse than Clinton......She only wants to be president to show the men...Women are better !!

Her ratings with white men are abysmal.......They read her too well.

Franklin D Roosevelt "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"..

Well, they say you get the government you deserve. It will be interesting to see how long the honeymoon period lasts, whoever ends up in the White House.

I've seen lots of people saying it a choice between the lesser of two evils. I'm guessing neither will have to do much to start peeing people off. Or maybe as Truss said, Hillary would take heat for trying to accomplish things, while Trump would be sat on his well-upholstered rear, somewhere a long way from Washington DC...an absentee President, if you will.

Seems to me the biggest issue either will face right now is to stop police brutality against (or killing of) various ethnic minorities.

First Presidential debate on Monday night....

Be interesting to see if anybody can stop Trump talking..

Just give me a roll of gaffa tape and a clear run at him

Unfortunately for Hillary, not only does she have to worry that the eejit at the other podium might actually begin to say some cogent things that rattles her, she also has to worry about and hope that the energy of the debate, which will undoubtedly use up some adrenaline on both sides, doesn't cause her to descend into another coughing fit.
She needs to appear strong on detail and strong physically.

Trump needs to get more black votes...

As Clinton is running as an Obama continuity candidate..

Ask...Why Home ownership among black people is down after 8 years.

Why Black unemployment has gone up ??

Why the pay gap between white and black workers has widened ??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Trump needs to get more black votes...

As Clinton is running as an Obama continuity candidate..

Ask...Why Home ownership among black people is down after 8 years.

Why Black unemployment has gone up ??

Why the pay gap between white and black workers has widened ??

'cause Obama was just a token candidate?  Thinking of which, that's kinda Hillary's best line too now - "vote for me, coz I'm a woman".  Didn't that Eagle woman try that and it didn't go down too swell when the chips were down?

Just watched the debate. Thought Donald Trump got stomped in the debate... but the subject matter were probably more inclined to make Hillary come off stronger. The next two should be interesting.

Seems like most are scoring this round solidly to Hillary. Consensus seems to be that Donald wasn't properly prepared.

Be interesting what happens when the e-mail/charity etc issues come up, as I'm sure they will. Still, Donald is a c*ck, so good that it seems most are having him as performing much the worse of the two for this one.

When ya gotta Hen and a C*ck wanting to rule the roost - vote for the C*ck!

You folks know I'm right, gotta tell ya. Vote for the C*ck, he knows how to crow good in the mornings when everyone else is fast asleep. He don't sleep on the job. He's got stamina. The C*ck, believe me, the C*ck's got the job.

The Navy Blank Screen Treatment!  

WHY ME????!! I been a good kid all my life

Oh sorry. I see now that it's that little cute lad in the desert. That's nice. I like him.

Because you're not funny or profound, despite your excruciating efforts.

I watched the debate last night. I found it hilarious that Trump questioned Hillary's stamina when he was clearly exhausted by the end of the debate. He ducked 9 out of the 10 questions. When confronted with something terrible that he said in the past, he just flat-out denied that he'd ever said it. He was proud of being a tax-dodger.

It was a child against an adult and Donald got absolutely mauled.

Thing is, it doesn't matter. Trump's moronic supporters aren't going anywhere and they're just shouting "bias" because he was incapable of answering some tough questions. This debate surely strengthened Hillary's position slightly, but they're scrapping over 10% that are voting for independents. There isn't much of a middle ground in this election.

How come it's always the people in the assumed ascendancy (Hillary won the debate by a landslide!!! Great news people of the World!) are always the ones in a bad, foul, po-faced mood and throwing the personal 'insults'?
Some of you guys would do well in the Trump battlebus. Some of you could write for him.

Relax.  Enjoy life.  So the mad C*ck guy might become President and might press the button on his Nuclear Arsenal...just to celebrate his first four years in office.
But don't worry.  Take the perpetual frown off your face Pr4.  You got nothing to worry about.  Them nukes will rebound off the wall he'll have already built around the entire US of A.
That's why he's certain them Mexicanos are going to pay for the wall - they already have the intel on how he plans to celebrate those first four years.

It's gonna cost...and cost bigly!

Case in point.

He played her game....Played by her rules and spent the best part explaining himself instead of going on offence...and there is plenty to attack..

Don't complain .....Don't explain...

He is way too sensitive to be President and she played to this huge negative..

He can't relate to the common man and he has no humility..

Only good thing for him is the first 30 mins he was at his best (Not saying much) and many switch off after that..

Should have killed her with kindness and prepared better.

Clinton slam dunk....He'll have to learn fast...

I'm not convinced he's capable of any plan B truss. Taking on a career politician on the national stage, looks out of his depth.

Only out of depth because he doesn't listen to his handlers - probably because most of them bore him.  He feels the cage of politics tighten around him - and with it those people around him increasing beg him to conform, conform, conform.  

And his attitude is fight, fight against the soundbyte generators and advisors.  The word 'Prepared' to him is the word 'False'.  So yes, he's a rebel and is being swallowed by the choreography of well practiced politics.

If there are enough people left to sympathise with that fight, then he still might pull off the 'surprising' win.  In fact, if he gets wise and tries to manufacture an image that he is now the increasingly bullied one, that he's now the victim of the smug processes of political conformity.... then he could be back on a bounce.

Hillary was smooth because she allowed her people to give her the tools and advise to be so.  Trump doesn't trust that process.  If I were his advisor now, I'd stop trying to get him to conform to the conventions and I'd also try to stop him trying to make the same points over and over about Hillary and corruption and walls etc.  I'd simply make him highlight the 'stunt' of statesmanship.  I'd have him ask Hillary directly who is writing her best lines, I'd congratulate her image consultants who check out all camera angles to see where their 'guy' looks most authoritative, when to hold the wry smile, when to look directly to camera etc.  I'd highlight the 'showbiz' of 'Preparedness' and highlight the falseness of it all.
He's a raw loose cannon, and that ironically is still his strongest bet on getting elected.

He's just got to stop explaining himself...........

She says he doesn't pay taxes.......Don't explain why you don't....

Bring up the Clinton foundation ??......Ask her to release her Wall Stret speeches ???...Why is she worth so much when she hasn't even got a business ??etc....Smokescreen !!.......

Perception is everything....


She starts to laugh at his foreign policy......Don't explain...

Ask her if she is proud of Benghazi and the true Americans that died and the lies she told about it.......She voted for Iraq is she proud ??

She beat him on a Russian hacking question.............Talking about him and Putin !!....

So he explained.....No...

Say Russia is the least of our problems with you as President....You can't even keep your own e-mails safe........A candidate being investigated by the FBI etc...


It's Debating ABC..."Smokescreening!!!!!"..

He's got to learn it fast !!.

He shouldn't bring up the Clinton Foundation because the Trump foundation is undoubtedly 1,000 worse.

He can't use Iraq because he was in favour of it. He can't use Benghazi because he was in favour of it. He can't use foreign policy because he has absolutely no experience in it whatsoever. He kept trying to use the power vacuum in Iraq when none of it was Clinton or Obama's fault, as was fully explained - coherantly - by Hillary.

I'm no fan of hers at all. She's a proven liar and a crook.

The Republicans must be kicking themselves. Any of the other candidates - well, maybe not Christie but especially Kasich - would be a shoo-in for the White House against her.

What makes one 'proven liar' more appealing/qualified than another one for an office that seeks the highest standards?

And how can a power vacuum in Iraq not be even partially the continuing fault of a President that has two terms and eight years in office?

No wonder Trump wants a crack at that office - no blame applies for continuing and perpetual and increasing military tensions in that neck of the woods with a highly intricate American presence?

Did you watch the debate?

The withdrawal date was agreed by Dubya. To change the date would have required the approval of the Iraqi government. Obama and Clinton attempted to put the date back but the Iraqis refused to move it and so they had to withdraw US troops. If they'd have left them in there then they wouldn't have been able to guarantee their safety.

The thing that, rather unfortunately, makes Clinton more qualified than Trump is her experience in diplomacy, her temperament (Trump is so easily baited into anger, there's no way he could hold that office) and how she is perceived internationally. She is far from being squeaky-clean but Trump is a joke to everyone outside of the USA.

Like it or not, the USA is in enormous debt and its position on the world stage is declining. The last thing the American people need is a President that the whole world laughs at.

'Withdrawal' is a public position - America has not withdrawn from Iraq - it continues to be heavily influential.  The instability, the increasing regional instability - the entrance of Russia onto the scene in that region - has much to do with the rhythms of the Obama administration.  One theatre does not exist in isolation.  That Russia is now in Syria - and influencing events in neighbouring Nations, including Iraq, is a direct result of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions, and troop movements in Europe and words spoken by the American administration.  If you're going to rattle a sabre, then know the consequences, predict some of them and have plans waiting.  Poor John Kerry has been floating around the world now for the last however many years and, truly, he doesn't ever know which country he's in or what he's there to talk about, so confused is the supposed 'diplomatic' trail and unstoppable tensions.  
Blame does not slide so easily away from a President eight years in office.  He has to accept his share.  

The difference between Clinton and Trump is that Clinton allegedly lied all over the place as an elected representative, as a career politician, as a administrator of high public office - Trump has allegedly lied all over the place as a private business man trying to gain an edge, embellish his credentials, move and shake in a world full of people just like him.  He wasn't alone - practically every businessman tries to pull fast moves.  You might say it's a definition of a successful one.

Neither was Clinton alone in allegedly being economical with the truth in public office - but her alleged lying had a much more direct implication for a greater percentage of American voters than Trump's has had to date.  Indeed, if we're going to talk about the wider world, her alleged lying would also have an impact on that wider world. - Trust from world leaders that she means what she says?  

So two alleged liars?  I say pick the fresher one and perhaps at least the nature of stagnant Government might change.  The potential for change is with Trump, not with same-as-you-were Clinton.

I'd say pick the one that's less likely to start a nuclear war, the one that hasn't called for foreign hackers to attack US citizens, the one that doesn't continually use racist, bigoted, sexist language on the international stage.

Trump is an absolute embarrassment to the USA and his tax plans will ruin the economy. Oh yes, billionaire proposes to slash taxes on billionaires.

Pr4wn wrote:He shouldn't bring up the Clinton Foundation because the Trump foundation is undoubtedly 1,000 worse.

He can't use Iraq because he was in favour of it. He can't use Benghazi because he was in favour of it. He can't use foreign policy because he has absolutely no experience in it whatsoever. He kept trying to use the power vacuum in Iraq when none of it was Clinton or Obama's fault, as was fully explained - coherantly - by Hillary.

I'm no fan of hers at all. She's a proven liar and a crook.

The Republicans must be kicking themselves. Any of the other candidates - well, maybe not Christie but especially Kasich - would be a shoo-in for the White House against her.

In favour of Benghazi ??

Benghazi was a terrorist attack on a US Embassy.....Clinton and Obama mishandled it and Embassy officials died..

Think before you write !!..

Apologies, he was in favour of the US intervention in Libya.

Well there you go.  We're all, as usual, back to square one.  Two candidates that practically every commentator says they wish were two different people - but still left to decide on democratic principles to pick one or the other.

On the Nuclear war thing - it's hard to predict which candidate would press the button quicker because you hope neither of them are fool enough to do it, but I'd seriously believe blustering Trump is less likely to do so.  Don't forget he's the man who makes an effort to tone down the tensions and angry language between Russia and America.
What does Hillary do?  Yep, she insults Putin in roughly Trumpesque ways.  
Russia isn't Putin.  We should bypass Putin and talk directly to Russians talk about the similarities of cultures between Russia and the 'West' not talk up the conflict any chance we get.  Russians go to work, go to school, go on holidays, watch TV, play sport, are smart and intelligent and educated people and not aliens with ray guns.  That Cold War tale was attempted before and who eventually helped bring that madness to an end?

Who?  Mad man, eternally the butt of all jokes, senile old Hollywood actor fool, Reagan.  The warmonger who talked hard in his early years, and the guy everyone was afraid might actually press the button, was one of the main players in ending the tensions and offering the hand of peace.  Don't always believe the cover of the book is the moral of the tale.

Pr4wn wrote:Apologies, he was in favour of the US intervention in Libya.

The art of debating....

In your haste to slap Trump over foreign policy.....You messed up on Benghazi in an otherwise good barrage.......I picked you up on it and with one or two lines have you explaining yourself.......

(I know you aren't ignorant on Benghazi)......But now I go for the kill by saying "If you are ignorant about a topic as large as Benghazi why should anybody take your opinion seriously on anything to do about foreign policy....

Debate is all about positioning, playing on your terms...........You don't always need the best arguments to win..

Trump has to get the fight on ground he is comfortable on.....

Mitt Romney v Ted Kennedy......"Kennedy taught me a lot...He defined me before I had a chance to define myself !!..

Trump is a successful man and a job creator who says he will be tough on terror............He has to use the debates to  define himself and sell that image....

She is defining him as a tax dodger...misogynist who is clueless on foreign policy........She is winning..

Who won last night's debate ??.... Polls...............

CNN................. Clinton 62 - Trump 27
Time magazine. Clinton 52 - Trump 48
Breitbart.......... Clinton 48 - Trump 43
Drudge............ Trump 62 - Clinton 38
Fox................. Trump 50 - Clinton 35

When you consider that Palin beat Biden 90-10 on a Fox poll in 2008.....

The fact Clinton polls only 15 behind Trump is quite revealing..

Add them all up and what do you get?

Clinton 47 - Trump 46

7 Undecided.

Not actually a bad night for a guy who had a bad night  Hillary should have expected a bigger margin I think, certainly going on the world media spin after the event.

Then again, what's in a poll?  Ratings.  Those pollsters are obligated to keep the show interesting to the end.

On average Clinton has bounced 4 points in all the polls since the debate...

Of course that is nationally..

Ohio...Florida..Colorado...Pennsylvania only really count....He's doing OK in Ohio but struggling elsewhere. ..

Pence has got to undo some of Trump's mess tomorrow night and try and get some momentum back in Trump's campaign...

Whitewater
Foundation
Bengazi
Server...
Illegal.

Are all words he needs to repeat ad nauseum.

I think he needs new words actually.  Even his own supporters are getting tired of the repeated limited Clinton bashing list.

I think he needs to start getting some detail on the economy and fleshing out how he's going to be a President of 'making America great again' in more than sound bites  Stop being negative, be positive - but with some needed detail added.

As a younger man in Interview he could be quite detailed and 'grown up' in assessments of finance.  Needs to stop the showmanship and get down and dirty on trade and China and American companies abroad etc.  That's what a lot of more 'normal' Americans might come back to, some real proposed policies for getting America working again.

Trump just can't relate to the middle classes and has no idea at all about what he needs to do to get elected...

Bragging about being such a shrewd businessman he managed to find ways to pay less tax than he should have.

Now we know guys like him have people to find loopholes..

But bragging isn't going to play well....with the middle class families working all hours to achieve a better life...Those floating voter types...

The guy just isn't taking this seriously ...He can't be !!.

Maybe he is treating this as a p!ss take. Either that or he's a bit stupid. Either way, I don't think he's the man for POTUS.

Re. the tax thing. What he (and his ilk) don't get is that people don't find that behaviour 'clever'. They just find it annoying and selfish. I'd love to know if he really did make a ~$1bn loss in the mid-90s or whether that's a lie too.