Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!

[littlebabyjesus]

Of course we have a good way of telling. It's Donald fucking Trump for Christ's sake. I'm guilty of taking the whole "oh they're all the same" line with politicians myself, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that Trump winning would mean WW3.

I'm not saying they're all the same - I don't think Bernie Sanders would be the same. However, Clinton could well turn out to be an energetic 'liberal interventionist', which is a very dangerous thing to be.

 

[Nylock]

You think the GOP want him to win, what on earth make you think that? Are you American? You seem to think the rest of the world will somehow be effected by a clown in the whitehouse. If they elect him then they will get what they voted for and what they deserve, I don't have a vote. Most yanks I meet seem to think the world starts and ends in the USA, when you point out that they have over 4 million people living in tent cities, they have the highest child poverty rate, the highest murder rate and the highest number of minorities in jail of any country in the developed world, they just say "fuck me, you must be a god-dam socialist".

I personally am rather prejudiced against America having lived most of my life in south-America, where those cunts decided to overthrow elected governments and put in their place killing machines.

That was badly worded by me. The GOP are desperate for him to lose, the loons that support him are desperate for him to win. The GOP deserve to have him in office as it's a by-product of all of their obstructive shenanigans during the last 8 years. The loons deserve him as it will be an illustration in 'be careful what you wish for'. The rest of the US and the rest of us? Not convinced a Trump (or Clinton) white house would be any good for anyone looking on with a growing sense of alarm at how things are, on the face of it, unravelling in the politics of the world largest conventional and nuclear power...

I understand your point of view as the US is guilty of a catalogue of heinous activities in South America but hoping for a president with a pretty dark agenda just to punish the whole of the US at large strikes me as a tad short sighted...

 

[1%er]

But a whole series of cunts did this to Latin America, from Eisenhower and Guatemala onwards...

and they were very different times, it would be so easy nowadays

 

[Cid]

I'm not saying they're all the same - I don't think Bernie Sanders would be the same. However, Clinton could well turn out to be an energetic 'liberal interventionist', which is a very dangerous thing to be.

Pilger reckons so.

 

[J Ed]

and they were very different times, it would be so easy nowadays

You mean wouldn't I think, and well I agree mostly but 2011 in Honduras was very effective, Clinton has already proved herself a very capable golpista.

 

[bi0boy]

 

[Idris2002]

New rumours about Ted Cruz being not entirely faithful to Mrs. Cruz floating around. . .

http://gawker.com/people-have-been-talking-about-the-thing-with-ted-cru-1767029781

And according to some of the comments on that gawker piece, there may be a somewhat oatenesque quality to Mr. Cruz's more intimate activities. . .

 

[Vintage Paw]

Which reminds me of this tweet:

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Donald Trump GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

 

[coley]

Of course we have a good way of telling. It's Donald fucking Trump for Christ's sake. I'm guilty of taking the whole "oh they're all the same" line with politicians myself, but in this case I think it's pretty clear that Trump winning would mean WW3.

Not really, though he's a total loon, he is basically an isolationist loon, he wants to ignore the rest of the world, or let them get on with their affairs without America.

 

[coley]

Trying to understand the selection process here, what's a "super delegate" and what's the difference atween a Caucus and a primary?

 

[coley]

Good idea, mebbes they will end up shooting each other

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Not really, though he's a total loon, he is basically an isolationist loon, he wants to ignore the rest of the world, or let them get on with their affairs without America.

I'll quote this back to you if he ever gets into power, because I don't believe for a second he will be isolationist. But let's imagine he does turn out to be so, what exactly does this mean in an interconnected world where we are all interlinked through economic and environmental systems? You think his actions even domestically will be without consequence for us?

How will his views on climate change impact upon global agreements that we so desperately need? And what about the emboldening effect that a Trump victory will have on the far-right in Europe? Do you think that we won't then see a ramping-up of the extremism that is already beginning to rear its ugly head? Don't forget that eastern Europe has a very recent history of ethnic cleansing.

Trust me, a Trump presidency will be far worse than a Clinton one.

 

[coley]

I'll quote this back to you if he ever gets into power, because I don't believe for a second he will be isolationist. But let's imagine he does turn out to be so, what exactly does this mean in an interconnected world where we are all interlinked through economic and environmental systems? You think his actions even domestically will be without consequence for us?

How will his views on climate change impact upon global agreements that we so desperately need? And what about the emboldening effect that a Trump victory will have on the far-right in Europe? Do you think that we won't then see a ramping-up of the extremism that is already beginning to rear its ugly head? Don't forget that eastern Europe has a very recent history of ethnic cleansing.

Trust me, a Trump presidency will be far worse than a Clinton one.

I agree on most of what you say, he would be an utter disaster, but on provoking WW3? not really, that's the isolationist point I was making.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

I agree on most of what you say, he would be an utter disaster, but on provoking WW3? not really, that's the isolationist point I was making.

Where to you get the idea he is going to be isolationist?

I believe that any credible American foreign policy doctrine should be defined by at least seven core principles:

1. American interests come first. Always. No apologies.
2. Maximum firepower and military preparedness.
3. Only go to war to win.
4. Stay loyal to your friends and suspicious of your enemies.
5. Keep the technological sword razor sharp.
6. See the unseen. Prepare for threats before they materialize.
7. Respect and support our present and past warriors.

Time to Get Tough, by Donald Trump, p. 87

Doesn't sound very isolationist to me. Also, all of this.

All freedoms flow from national security

3% of GNP for military is too low

 

[DrRingDing]

Pilger reckons so.

Great article. I hope that puts to bed the shrill, red faced liberal bleating here.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

...liberal bleating here.

Where's that then?

 

[DrRingDing]

Where's that then?

Everyfuckingwhere. From mods to posters.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Everyfuckingwhere. From mods to posters.

Examples?

 

[DrRingDing]

The best one was fridge magnet. I've never seen such fury....for him.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

The best one was fridge magnet. I've never seen such fury....for him.

I'm still not sure what you're referring to specifically.

 

[DrRingDing]

I'm still not sure what you're referring to specifically.

I'm not surprised.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

I'm not surprised.

You're really shit at this, btw.

 

[DrRingDing]

You're really shit at this, btw.

That's not what yer mum said.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

That's not what yer mum said.

Now you're just proving my point.

 

[DrRingDing]

Now you're just proving my point.

....and you've just answered your own question.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

So shit. So, so shit.

 

[DrRingDing]

^^^angry liberal

 

[Nylock]

I'm not surprised.

Quote the post then.... Would help to contextualise things better than what's currently being said....

 

[DrRingDing]

Read the thread.