Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Trumpled (Alternative Leading) (Read 536068 times) previous topic - next topic
DJC and 42 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #16 –
countries and its people yearn for need .  Its hard to isolate left and right at a point in time overlayed against another point in time.
You take circa 1933 Germany, its high unemployment, inflation, occupation of productive regions by allies, ridiculous restitution..all gives rise to an alternative which was NSDAP. 4 years later, all of this was reversed to the amazement of the western world . Fast forward ....USA was tired of bush, but felt he was the best equipped to defend "threats" In hind sight, Gore was better? Rudd over howard...change for the sake of change?, all the economic factors were sound. USA today, the public fear special interest groups have too much power? perhaps this gives rise to the popularity of trump who clearly postures his wealth to make him appear impervious to subservience by these powerful outsiders?

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #17 –
Whilst Trump is only third in the betting odds, I think it will be Donald Trump or Jeb Bush that will almost certainly win the Republican vote and I think that Trump's policies (which almost every other Republican is blasting) are the exact reason why. He says things that hit a home run with a lot of American's, especially a lot of Republicans and they like that he doesn't care.

For a lot of American's they have a strong leaning towards a party and they see parties as simply being along the lines of the following

Republican -
Taxes..
IssueRepublicanDemocrat
Government RegulationsGovernments should interfere as little as possible and a free market place is required for growth.Government regulation is necessary to prevent exploitation and ensure companies don't ride over worker and consumers through monopolization for example.
TaxesShould never be raised, flat ratesTax share should be progressive and based on earning
MilitaryBuy another a bomb!!!Cut spending or keep status
Gun ControlThis country was formed on the back of the right to bear armsMore open to gun control
AbortionMore likely to be strongly againstMore likely to see it as a person's individual choise
Health CareStrongly (very strongly) against spending taxes on providing health care for all Support for government funded health care
ImmigationAs above, this is a massive issue for Republicans and generally they would want all undocumented worker deported. More open to a policy that says if they have been here a while, been good citizens etc etc then they should have an option to apply for citizenship
Death PenaltyMajority approve, few don'tMajority approve, some NE states don't
Minimum WageNo minimum wage, if a person will work for $1 an hour a company should be able to pay them that.Minimum wage prevents exploitation of workers*
* It doesn't really, it only shields them a touch, the US minimum wage is an absolute joke.

Overall for a number of people in America it doesn't matter if it is Donald Duck vs Mickey Mouse.
A republican wants their gun, they do NOT want THEIR wages TAXED for other benefit.
My ex-wife was married to a guy in the military for me and she worked on an Army base so a lot of her friends were military and I can say that an extremely large portion of them are hard core republicans and if it was Donald Trump or Donald Duck up against Hilary, they would be voting hard for either Donald.

In saying that..

The republicans could be described as..
God fearing people who believe the founding fathers and god determined how this country should be run and by god and the founding fathers all decisions should be made.

This makes them very pro gun, anti-abortion, anti-gay etc etc ...

But this is becoming out-dated and Mav touched on a reason with the sheer numbers of the population changing, but even more than that, everyone on social media is developing a conscience. More and more if you were to post anti-abortion or anti-gay slogans, you would be shot down.
If you ran a business and were openly promoting these standards, it would be the end of you unless it was a local shop in the heart of Texas.
The "America" that the Republican party hold is disappearing, but they still have at least a few elections left in them and it would not completely surprise to see Trump as the next president. In essence in the future being called a republican will the same as being called a bigot or backwards or anything of the like, being called liberal is usually considered more in trend.

If I had stayed on and gone from resident to citizen, I would have actually joined the democrat party as I think I am against basically every Republican policy, I think most Australian's who like the Australian way of life would be democrats (though not all).

All of the above goes out the window if there was a war.
If there was a war tomorrow, a White American Republican Male would be the president (Bush or Trump, doesn't really matter).

Goals for 2017
=============
Play the most anti-social football in the AFL

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #18 –
I suspect the next President of the United States hasn’t entered the race yet.
If they have ……get ready for President Trump. ::)

On the Republican side of things the ''Mad Hairdo’’ is wiping the floor with his opponents

Jeb Bush seems to be the least intelligent and effective of all the Bushes
Ted Kruz is a Canadian that nobody likes.
Rubio looks the part and speaks well but is only a baby and never goes to work.

On the Democratic side…..
Hilary could possibly end up in gaol and Bernie Sanders is a “Commie”  (neither claim is actually true…but Fox news thinks it is) ;)

Funny times ;D

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #19 –
Ironically, Ted Cruz might be ineligible.  The "birthers" have spent the last 8 years disputing that Obama is a "natural born American".  In his case, they alleged that he wasn't born in Hawaii but in Kenya.  Trump was a prominent birther, demanding that Obama release his full birth certificate and when Obama did so he alleged it was a forgery.

It now looks as though the right wing loonies may finally have found someone who wasn't born in America but he's one of the favourites of right wing loons.

Cruz was born in Canada.  His mother was a US citizen at the time but his father was a Canadian citizen after arriving in the US as a refugee without taking US citizenship.  Cruz remained a Canadian citizen until about 8 years ago when he renounced it.  He had always been a US citizen because of his mother's citizenship.

Most had assumed that his US citizenship was enough to make him eligible.  There's a strong argument, however, that it isn't.  John. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, then a US territory, where both his parents were serving in the US military.  Constitutional scholars believe McCain was eligible because his parents were serving the US Government at the time and it didn't hurt that it was technically US territory.  In Cruz's case, his mother wasn't serving the US in any capacity. 

Some legal scholars also believe that the citizenship of the mother is irrelevant - only that of the father counts. Again, it's ironic that the right wing obsession that the Constitution should be interpreted only as the founding fathers intended and all social advancements since then should be ignored.  For Cruz, the fact that women have obtained full rights might not matter as they were effectively property back then.

The legal scholars believe that "natural born citizen" doesn't mean simply a US citizen - it means that he was born there.

Cruz and Trump are both darlings of the far right wing Republican base.  And Trump is already telling everyone that Cruz may be ineligible.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #20 –
I wonder how the Zika virus will affect the election.

The Zika virus is generally no worse than the flu but recently the outbreak in Brazil has demonstrated how devastating it can be for pregnant women with many giving birth to microcephalic babies (where the skull doesn't expand and compresses the growing brain causing serious disabilities).  It also appears it might cause Guillain-Barré syndrome in which the immune system attacks one's own nerves causing muscle weakness and even paralysis.

This will cause havoc in the upcoming Rio Olympics.  Female Australian athletes have been warned against going if they may be pregnant.

It will also cause panic soon in the US if the virus arrives in the US as feared.  Texas has conditions which are particularly conducive to the spread of the virus.

As we know from the Tampa incident and 9/11, some events can turn elections.  Already, the ISIS-related massacres in Paris have propelled national security to the forefront in the current campaign.  But how will the Zika virus affect it?

The lunatic Christian extremists might see such a plague as divine retribution against immoral governments which tolerate homosexuality and abortion.  The Westboro Church rejoiced when the Tsunami killed thousands in Thailand for this reason.  But generally such an outbreak would hurt the Republicans.  Popular sentiment might have it that the Republicans are better at national security but the Democrats are seen as better managers of public health issues.

The spotlight would also be turned on issues which wouldn't suit the Republicans: abortion rights, climate change, the need for federal health funding and expertise, and vaccinations.

Texas has been leading attempts by Republican States to undermine the right to abortions.  It has sought to dramatically stiffen regulations applying to abortion centres to put them out of business and has tried to close down Planned Parenthood in the wake of some taped conversations which were deceptively edited to prove that the organisation was selling "baby parts".  How will it react if pregnant women demand abortions if they contract the Zika virus, particularly if there are women who want late-term abortions?  What will the Republican candidate say about this?

Will scientists suggest that climate change has left the US at the mercy of tropical diseases?  If the argument moves from the fate of polar ice caps and polar bears to the health and safety of US citizens, the Republican candidate might not be able to dismiss climate change so easily. 

The Republican candidate also wouldn't be crazy about having to pledge an increase in the size of the health budget and the federal government's health apparatus.  He (Carly Fiorini being an also-ran) would prefer to leave health issues to the States and the private sector but a Zika outbreak would be a national health issue which would demand Federal intervention.

If a vaccination can be found for the Zika virus, this will undercut the Libertarian viewpoint that vaccinations may cause harm and so each person should be able to decide whether to submit to a vaccination.  Refusing to vaccinate and leaving pregnant women at risk of having severely disabled babies or miscarriages wouldn't be easy to defend.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #21 –
Quote from: Lods – on
I suspect the next President of the United States hasn’t entered the race yet.
If they have ……get ready for President Trump. ::)

On the Republican side of things the ''Mad Hairdo’’ is wiping the floor with his opponents

Jeb Bush seems to be the least intelligent and effective of all the Bushes
Ted Kruz is a Canadian that nobody likes.
Rubio looks the part and speaks well but is only a baby and never goes to work.

On the Democratic side…..
Hilary could possibly end up in gaol and Bernie Sanders is a “Commie”  (neither claim is actually true…but Fox news thinks it is) ;)

Funny times ;D

How is Martin Sheen atm?  - he did a good job in The West Wing.  ::) :))
Reality always wins in the end.
 

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #22 –
The problem in the USA is quite simple, money can buy you the Presidency if your pockets and the pockets of your supporters are deep enough.

I suspect Trump's motives will be nothing more than mega-profit for himself and his supporters. He will be offering his mates billions, and they will probably rape the USA and other countries in the process!

These blokes have no national loyalty, and if a country like China or India offered them a better financial deal they would jump ship faster than a Murdoch!
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #23 –
I wouldn't panic re: Trump until he gets the nomination. He could still flame out.

If he gets it, it will be like watching a car crash. He doesn't have to play by the rules. He would be saying and doing some outrageous things.

 Also have to keep in mind that not all of the US are redneck idiots. Trump would still need to win the big states like NY, California etc... The republicans have struggled to get votes outside of their shrinking base in the past two elections.

So even if he gets it, I don't think he could win.

If he did win, then panic would be an understatement.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #24 –
Quote from: Bear – on
So even if he gets it, I don't think he could win.

If he did win, then panic would be an understatement.

It would be safe to entertain the idea of many gunmen on many grassy knolls if he did win.
IN WADA WE TRUST

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #25 –
Quote from: LP – on
The problem in the USA is quite simple, money can buy you the Presidency if your pockets and the pockets of your supporters are deep enough.

I suspect Trump's motives will be nothing more than mega-profit for himself and his supporters. He will be offering his mates billions, and they will probably rape the USA and other countries in the process!

These blokes have no national loyalty, and if a country like China or India offered them a better financial deal they would jump ship faster than a Murdoch!
to become prime minister of Australia you need Gina's tick of approval.

Let's not pretend modern democracy is anything like the ideals first created.

For starters the public were able to vote a representative into exile in disgrace in the ancient Greece.

I'd say this is probably relevant the world over.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #26 –
But in the US, things are much worse because of a ridiculous Supreme Court decision.  In Citizens United, the Court struck down a law that tried to reform campaign financing by limiting donations from the wealthy and corporations.  Unbelievably, the Court found that corporations are people too and donating money to politicians is protected by the First Amendment as freedom of speech.  The majority reasoned that it's the essence of democracy to allow the rich and big corporations to use their money to persuade politicians to act in their interests.  Now, billionaires are free to form PACs and Super-PACS (political action committees) and raise big money anonymously to support candidates of their choice.  The Koch Brothers have been doing that on the Republican side now for a while.  They have been thwarted by Trump who refuses to play by their tune but then again he's a billionaire too and he hasn't needed even his own money as the media gives him so much coverage he doesn't have to buy advertising time.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #27 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
to become prime minister of Australia you need Gina's tick of approval.

Let's not pretend modern democracy is anything like the ideals first created.

For starters the public were able to vote a representative into exile in disgrace in the ancient Greece.

I'd say this is probably relevant the world over.

It's not even close to being the same, here donations have to be declared, are limited in various ways and subject to senate scrutiny.

In the US donations can be completely anonymous, I've even heard stories of Republicans supporting Democrats so that their preferred opponent has a better chance of being nominated. If you tried that on here or in the UK you would be on the way to the big house for a conspiracy of some sort.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #28 –
Quote from: Mav – on
Now, billionaires are free to form PACs and Super-PACS (political action committees) and raise big money anonymously to support candidates of their choice.  The Koch Brothers have been doing that on the Republican side now for a while.  They have been thwarted by Trump who refuses to play by their tune but then again he's a billionaire too and he hasn't needed even his own money as the media gives him so much coverage he doesn't have to buy advertising time.

The US situation is made worse by the fact that voting is not compulsory, the wealthy vote is worth far more than it should be.

Do you think Trump will pull the pin once the "offer" to do so is valuable enough, or does he see himself as the next Putin? The USAs first ever Oligarch!
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #29 –
Quote from: LP – on
It's not even close to being the same, here donations have to be declared, are limited in various ways and subject to senate scrutiny.

In the US donations can be completely anonymous, I've even heard stories of Republicans supporting Democrats so that their preferred opponent has a better chance of being nominated. If you tried that on here or in the UK you would be on the way to the big house for a conspiracy of some sort.


Its the biggest scam in the world.

Provide the people the illusion of choice and they will comply.  Remove their choice and freedom and they rebel.

Morons like trump serve the ruling class by distracting the masses from who has the real power in government.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson