Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Trumpled (Alternative Leading) (Read 781298 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 30 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #165 –

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #166 –
John Kasich seems to be the quiet achiever, he could benefit the most from other candidates stepping out of the race, if he can survive long enough.

If I were Clinton I think Kasich is the one I would want to go up against the least!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #167 –
Quote from: LP – on
John Kasich seems to be the quiet achiever, he could benefit the most from other candidates stepping out of the race, if he can survive long enough.

If I were Clinton I think Kasich is the one I would want to go up against the least!

Best option for the Republicans....but he has to win his home state of Ohio next week.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #168 –
All Hell may break loose if Trump wins the most delegates leading in to the convention but a contested convention nominates someone else.  Trump may well run as an independent Presidential candidate.  Yes, he has declared that he won't do this but we know he is quite prepared to do this.

Initially, I thought that would help the Dems.  It would split the Rep vote and leave the Dem candidate with the most delegates.  But here's the rub - if the Dem candidate doesn't win 270 delegates, namely a majority of delegates, he or she wouldn't win the election. 

What happens then?  The House of Representatives will choose the President!  The representatives from each state will have just 1 vote amongst them and vote on a nominee.  As there is currently a gerrymander in place which guarantees the Republicans control of the House until 2020, it matters not whether it's the current House or the one following the forthcoming elections which will decide.  Either way, the Republicans will pick the new President.

Trump is likely to pull blue collar democratic votes away from Hillary but perhaps not from Bernie while hobbling the Republican candidate. An unelectable ideologue may end up President.

PS: It looks like the House of Reps has to vote for one of the Presidential candidates and can't draft in an outsider.  In other words, the Republican-controlled House would choose between Trump and the Republican nominee.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #169 –
I can't believe Trump is never asked to say how he'd "bring back jobs to America".  He talks about bad free-trade deals being to blame.  But he's either saying he'd rip up free-trade deals and bring back tariffs and trade quotas or he'd somehow force countries covered by those deals to renegotiate and take it up the proverbial.  Unless he used the military to force renegotiations, we're back to protectionist policies.  But no one wants to say it.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #170 –
Quote from: Mav – on
All Hell may break loose if Trump wins the most delegates leading in to the convention but a contested convention nominates someone else.  Trump may well run as an independent Presidential candidate.  Yes, he has declared that he won't do this but we know he is quite prepared to do this.

Initially, I thought that would help the Dems.  It would split the Rep vote and leave the Dem candidate with the most delegates.  But here's the rub - if the Dem candidate doesn't win 270 delegates, namely a majority of delegates, he or she wouldn't win the election. 

What happens then?  The House of Representatives will choose the President!  The representatives from each state will have just 1 vote amongst them and vote on a nominee.  As there is currently a gerrymander in place which guarantees the Republicans control of the House until 2020, it matters not whether it's the current House or the one following the forthcoming elections which will decide.  Either way, the Republicans will pick the new President.

Trump is likely to pull blue collar democratic votes away from Hillary but perhaps not from Bernie while hobbling the Republican candidate. An unelectable ideologue may end up President.

Add in the fact that many committed Republicans and Democrats are very likely to not vote at all in the general election should their candidate of choice fail to gain the nomination and it becomes even more of a "dog's breakfast".

This is a likely scenario given the polarising and "different to traditional" nature of some of the candidates.

It's impossible to pick at the moment.


Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #171 –
Quote from: Mav – on
I can't believe Trump is never asked to say how he'd "bring back jobs to America".  He talks about bad free-trade deals being to blame.  But he's either saying he'd rip up free-trade deals and bring back tariffs and trade quotas or he'd somehow force countries covered by those deals to renegotiate and take it up the proverbial.  Unless he used the military to force renegotiations, we're back to protectionist policies.  But no one wants to say it.

They have hinted at that, they want the TPP gone and they want to extend the limits put on trade with China and Japan. But the rub is of course that most of the big China Made import bills are products owned by American companies like Apple, he wants those jobs to exist on American soil, but will they be on American wages?

The US press are pretty much lame ducks, they ask questions that are assumed for a 10 year old audience and that is insulting to 10 year olds.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #172 –
No, Trump says he's for free trade.  He tries to say he'll do better deals.  But to do a better deal than one that already exists involves having some negotiating power.  Someone trying to renegotiate an existing trade deal has no negotiating power at all. 

The problem for the US is that one of its biggest economic resources is intellectual property.  That's one of the main things that their trade deals try to protect.  Ripping up trade deals throws away those advantages and would alarm many business interests in the US. 

Trump has hardly had any involvement in manufacturing and I can't see why anyone would believe he has the remotest interest in promoting manufacturing and blue collar workers.  His thing has been property development which obviously doesn't face the same problems.  He's not even doing much of that personally, preferring to licence other developers to use his name.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #173 –
Quote from: Mav – on
No, Trump says he's for free trade.  He tries to say he'll do better deals.  But to do a better deal than one that already exists involves having some negotiating power.  Someone trying to renegotiate an existing trade deal has no negotiating power at all. 

The problem for the US is that one of its biggest economic resources is intellectual property.  That's one of the main things that their trade deals try to protect.  Ripping up trade deals throws away those advantages and would alarm many business interests in the US. 

Trump has hardly had any involvement in manufacturing and I can't see why anyone would believe he has the remotest interest in promoting manufacturing and blue collar workers.  His thing has been property development which obviously doesn't face the same problems.  He's not even doing much of that personally, preferring to licence other developers to use his name.

Trump wants IP protected by returning manufacturing onshore, he stated that in the last major debate. He used the Apple employing Americans example during his reply to a question and referred to making stuff onshore as a way of protecting American technology, that's his idea of doing better deals. But privately he employs Mexicans to work in his hotels and leaves locals collecting leftovers at the back door!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #174 –
Jamie Gilt for gun sense - oh, the irony  ;D

Good looking but brain dead.  She boasts that her need to protect her child trumps safety concerns.  But she needs protection from her own child after her 4 year old grabbed a loaded handgun lying around the backseat of her car and shot her in the back while she was driving.  As they say, the only way to stop a bad 4 y.o. with a gun is with a good 4 y.o. with a gun.

I can't imagine why strangers would be concerned about a sensible gun activist like her carrying around loaded guns.  Like, what could possibly go wrong?

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #175 –
Quote from: Lods – on
I'm no Trump fan, and it is politics so there's nothing to be done about it (and Donald adds his own fuel to the fire)..... but one of the concerns about this politics of personality and demonising of a candidate in the States is there are no shortage of 'nut jobs' who might look to other options to stop thmeir campaign.
I think the greater problem is that Trump is dogwhistling to his fans that they should use violence against the press and protesters.  Dogwhistling might be too anaemic a word to describe what he's doing.

So far, there have been 3 outbreaks of serious violence at his rallies, leaving aside frequent manhandling of protesters:
  • a press photographer was body-slammed by a secret service agent for the serious offence of stepping out of the pen Trump insists they use to try to photograph the expulsion of protesters.
  • a female journalist was grabbed by the arm and almost pushed to the ground by Trump's own campaign manager.
  • a Trump supporter king hit a protester who was being ejected by police and Trump and his staff have refused to criticise or comment on that assault
Trump's campaign manager was lucky that the female journo was from Breibart, a right-wing political comment site which is friendly to Trump.  The campaign manager apparently explained he didn't recognise her and thought she was a critic. Briebart has gone soft on the incident.

Trump has said at rallies that he would like to punch protesters in the face and called on his supporters to eject them.  It is well known that white supremacist groups attend his rallies wearing T-shirts promoting their cause.  Is it possible that they'll act?  Why is he so keen to prevent the press photographing or seeing these ejections?

Now you have him orchestrating pledges that are reminiscent of Hitler rallies.

It has all the hallmarks of the infamous calls to arms made by Sarah Palin and others leading up to the Tucson shootings at a Gabby Giffords rally in a shopping centre car park.  Giffords, a congressional Dem, was shot in the head and left with a permanent disability while 6 others, including a Federal court judge, were killed.  Palin had run ads featuring crosshairs and calling for a reload.  Of course, conservatives say this had nothing to do with what happened, just as Trump would say he was just making a whimsical comment as Henry II had once done.

The funny thing is that Trump and his supporters would have no doubt that the inflammatory rhetoric of radical Imans causes their followers to engage in terrorism.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #176 –
No doubt there are aspects of Trumps campaign that are inflamatory and also likely to lead to violent acts...(although I do think comparing his pledge to a Hitler salute is drawing a pretty long bow. :D)

I guess the point here is of all the candidates which one is most likely to invoke the passions that would see them as a target of a nut case.
Trump (and some of it is of his own making) is the one who would most likely touch that nerve.....and it would not necessarily come from left or right, Republican or Democrat. There are many on his own side who dislike where the results are heading.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #177 –
The most dangerous would-be terrorists in the US are white supremacists and right-wing extremists.  Trump has little to fear from them.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #178 –
Quote from: Mav – on
The most dangerous would-be terrorists in the US are white supremacists and right-wing extremists.  Trump has little to fear from them.

Most dangerous yes, but not the only group.
If you start comparing him to Hitler or a dictator you're talking the politics of extremism.
It's that type of language that places "fear of the possibilities" in the minds of people....and fearful people can react in the same way as hateful folk.
 

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Reply #179 –
If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck ...