Freesolo Posted 13 October 2015 Posted 13 October 2015 America is insane, imagine Trump actually became president it would be the funniest 4 years in history. The only sensible thing i have heard him say is that Putin is in the right cleaning up the mess in Syria.
leicsmac Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Looking back at the 2012 election thread, I actually asked a question that I didn't really get an answer for so I'll ask it again here. For all those who want to endorse a Republican candidate here...what about their policies at a social level seem vaguely attractive? I mean economically you could make an argument, but socially...anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-affordable healthcare - is that really attractive? I mean, we call Cameron a right wing leader but by comparison to them he's milquetoast. So why? I'm curious. Cruz is a Baptist nutter, Carson is smart but I don't think he'll appeal to the entire base, Jeb will always (right or wrongly) be tainted by the terrible failure that his brother was (and backing him even now), and Trump...is well, Trump. Rubio seems the most moderate, but he still wants to isolate Cuba once again. And to a man they deny climate change is happening - whether caused by man or not. Additionally, just like in 2012 with so many candidates they're still racked by infighting over how extreme they want to be which means whoever gets the nomination is going to have a really hard time uniting everyone. Of course the Dems may well face the same problems this time around depending on whether Hillary or Bernie win the nomination (and how their supporters respond to that), but I think they will find it much easier to unite. In any case, the key states are going to be Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and most importantly Ohio - whoever gets three or more out of those four will likely get the whole thing. The polls right now show it to be pretty close in each, and there's a long way to go.
Freesolo Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 As a UK citizen I have never felt less close with the US than now, they talk about the "special relationship" but in reality we have little in common apart from some history. Donald Trump running for president is like Alan Sugar running for Prime Minister.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 October 2015 Author Posted 14 October 2015 I think Sanders has said "1%" about 10 times now. Also, Hilary's facts are wrong again, same old.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 October 2015 Author Posted 14 October 2015 Looking back at the 2012 election thread, I actually asked a question that I didn't really get an answer for so I'll ask it again here. For all those who want to endorse a Republican candidate here...what about their policies at a social level seem vaguely attractive? I mean economically you could make an argument, but socially...anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-affordable healthcare - is that really attractive? I mean, we call Cameron a right wing leader but by comparison to them he's milquetoast. So why? I'm curious. Cruz is a Baptist nutter, Carson is smart but I don't think he'll appeal to the entire base, Jeb will always (right or wrongly) be tainted by the terrible failure that his brother was (and backing him even now), and Trump...is well, Trump. Rubio seems the most moderate, but he still wants to isolate Cuba once again. And to a man they deny climate change is happening - whether caused by man or not. Additionally, just like in 2012 with so many candidates they're still racked by infighting over how extreme they want to be which means whoever gets the nomination is going to have a really hard time uniting everyone. Of course the Dems may well face the same problems this time around depending on whether Hillary or Bernie win the nomination (and how their supporters respond to that), but I think they will find it much easier to unite. In any case, the key states are going to be Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and most importantly Ohio - whoever gets three or more out of those four will likely get the whole thing. The polls right now show it to be pretty close in each, and there's a long way to go. I would have backed Ron Paul all the way in 2012, Romney is possibly one of the worst candidates for presidency in US history, I mean the fakeness was so clear; and also how Paul got barged out by the media is pretty damning.. so I backed Obama in 2008 and 2012 because of how poor the GOP seriously were, and due to Bush's awful tenure. If Paul had been the candidate, who knows,, speculation etc.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 October 2015 Author Posted 14 October 2015 "Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?" what kind of a bullshit loaded question is that haha
Merging Cultures Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 I voted Rand Paul, he wont get in, but I do like his libertarian ideas. Although, I think they do need to be tempered somewhat with infrastructure investment and ensuring a safety net for the poor.
Hollism Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Whoever it is they can't be any worse than the long legged mack daddy, he'll be remembered for little more than his skin colour and being the US president that started his country being taken the piss out of by the Russians again. He'll be remembered for being the first black president, and for Obamacare, and for killing Bin Laden.
SMX11 Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 He'll be remembered for being the first black president, and for Obamacare, and for killing Bin Laden. Obamacare is a bad thing.
Merging Cultures Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Obamacare is a bad thing. In what way? It's the same policy that Romney introduced in his state...
leicsmac Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 I would have backed Ron Paul all the way in 2012, Romney is possibly one of the worst candidates for presidency in US history, I mean the fakeness was so clear; and also how Paul got barged out by the media is pretty damning.. so I backed Obama in 2008 and 2012 because of how poor the GOP seriously were, and due to Bush's awful tenure. If Paul had been the candidate, who knows,, speculation etc. Paul said a lot of stuff that appealed to the libertarian in me, but he could never appeal to the base he would have needed to get the nomination. I also agree the media dealt him a bad hand. Romney was simply dire.
leicsmac Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Obamacare is a bad thing. In comparison to the kind of healthcare system the world's leading country really should have, then yes, it's a bad thing. In comparison to the profit-before-treatment, saddle-you-with-horrific-debt-just-to-get-better-again nightmare the U.S. was doing before it...not so much.
ozleicester Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Sanders. The world is undergoing change and people like Sanders are the only real hope, that said, it is America we are talking about so, most likely will be Trump with Kim Kardashioan as Deputy.
Guest MattP Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Thought Clinton comfortably won the debate if I'm honest and fully expect her to win the candidacy, they had quite a bit of dirt on her and she rode it well, what struck me was the amount of women she seemed to connect with, the crowd went wild for her, if she picks up a massive proportion of the female vote in the same way Obama got the black vote she'll win easily. (She's 1/3 at the bookies and if you have the dough I'd advise you to hammer that) Sanders was the that usual anti austerity candidate that turns up in all these debates these days, blame everything on the 1% and pretends to you are going to take their money off them to, that's in reality the last thing a country like America needs, if he did win though the rest of the World should rubs it's hands, plenty of wealth would be looking to leave and many nations would be making a play for the business it would bring. Don't think he even believes it himself. Sung the national anthem though I liked the guy who was a republican turned democrat (name escapes me), that shows someone can change their opinion on things, also he was the only republican who voted against the Iraq war, that shows balls of steel. Jim Webb - the audience really don't want to know who you have killed, that was just weird.
leicsmac Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Think you're right on Hillary winning the nomination (though I'm more of a Sanders fan myself), but where do you stand on the big one itself, Matt? Think the Repubs can put up someone who can challenge her? I think if they go for Rubio or (perhaps) Jeb they might have a chance, but anyone else and they might as well give Hillary the keys to the White House now.
Guest MattP Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Think you're right on Hillary winning the nomination (though I'm more of a Sanders fan myself), but where do you stand on the big one itself, Matt? Think the Repubs can put up someone who can challenge her? I think if they go for Rubio or (perhaps) Jeb they might have a chance, but anyone else and they might as well give Hillary the keys to the White House now. I think Clinton is a pretty strong favourite, the USA seems ready for a female president now in the same way they were for a black president in 2008. As for the Republican bid I'd go with Bush or Rubio, both are moderate bright guys who I could see in the Whitehouse. I really hope Jeb doesn't have to pay for the sins of his brother. Though it would be just like America to have had the choice of three Bush's and the only one who couldn't win was the articulate and intelligent one.
Far Post Gerry Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 If Sanders gets the Democrat nomination the Republicans will tear him to pieces. Black president, female president, no problem. Socialist president, no chance. Hate to say it but it's either Trump or Clinton. From a country of 300m people, that's a frankly shit choice.
Detroit Blues Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Jim Webb - the audience really don't want to know who you have killed, that was just weird. That moment of the debate was cringe worthy.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 October 2015 Author Posted 14 October 2015 I think Clinton is a pretty strong favourite, the USA seems ready for a female president now in the same way they were for a black president in 2008. As for the Republican bid I'd go with Bush or Rubio, both are moderate bright guys who I could see in the Whitehouse. I really hope Jeb doesn't have to pay for the sins of his brother. Though it would be just like America to have had the choice of three Bush's and the only one who couldn't win was the articulate and intelligent one. I hate to agree with this, but it's sadly true. Race and gender shouldn't be issues in something like this, but they always are. I'd like to think that Obama won based on merit; he probably was a better option to John McCain in 2008 but the democratic voting rhetoric of "it's time for a black president" doesn't sit well with me. I'm already hearing and reading the same rhetoric for Hilary. She even said in the debate that she doesn't want to be elected because of her name, rightly so -- but when the host asks if she would be different to another 4 years of Obama policies, she said something along the lines of... i'm different because I have a vagina. It's worse than racebaiting if you ask me, because she's clearly aware that her policies and previous political background alone would definitely not win her the primary. I'd rather Bernie win the primary than have Clinton win just because she doesn't have a cock and balls; at least Bernie has libertarian tendencies amongst his 'free stuff' rhetoric. But Obama didn't win in 2008 and 2012 because of the black vote, the black vote is very miniscule compared to the hispanic vote - he won for many reasons quite frankly, but mostly because on the face of it, 4 years of Obama just looked better and safer than 4 years of the republican counterparts.
Detroit Blues Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 Obama was the most charismatic of the candidates in 2008 and 2012. I think he was able to rally enthusiasm out of young people and moderate voters unlike any candidate I've seen. Even though the republicans have demonized him, i think he would win again (if he could still run) against this weak field of candidates. I believe Hilary Clinton is a great behind the scenes politician. She certainly has the experience in both the executive and legislative branch that would make her a qualified candidate. But to me she just seems so fake: she has a fake smile, she fakes her enthusiasm, and she changes her position to make herself more electable. I like Bernie Sanders, but I don't think he can win a general election in such a conservative country. America was not ready for universal healthcare (Obamacare), and they will not be ready to pay additional taxes for "free" college education. Republicans will label him as a scary, godless socialist and drum up fear of big government. It's a shame because I think he is the kind of politician we need right now. He is someone who actually plans on doing something about the growing divide between the rich and poor, and he wants to reduce the influence money has on politics. I absolutely loathe the top two Republican candidates. Donald Trump is a bully who will do anything for personal gain. He has no integrity, no convictions, and no filter. He would be a disastrous foreign policy maker. He appeals to the uneducated masses that care more about clever quips and punchlines than they do about his stances on issues. This pretty sums up Ben Carson: https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/3oktig/the_craziest_thing_about_the_republican/cvy3rrv?context=3 It will be interesting to watch the election in 2016, but in more of a "train wreck" kind of way.
Dr The Singh Posted 14 October 2015 Posted 14 October 2015 I think Clinton is a pretty strong favourite, the USA seems ready for a female president now in the same way they were for a black president in 2008. As for the Republican bid I'd go with Bush or Rubio, both are moderate bright guys who I could see in the Whitehouse. I really hope Jeb doesn't have to pay for the sins of his brother. Though it would be just like America to have had the choice of three Bush's and the only one who couldn't win was the articulate and intelligent one. I think the US public want change ie from a democratic government. Swings and roundabouts will mean the Republicans will be back in
MPH Posted 15 October 2015 Posted 15 October 2015 Obama was the most charismatic of the candidates in 2008 and 2012. I think he was able to rally enthusiasm out of young people and moderate voters unlike any candidate I've seen. Even though the republicans have demonized him, i think he would win again (if he could still run) against this weak field of candidates. I believe Hilary Clinton is a great behind the scenes politician. She certainly has the experience in both the executive and legislative branch that would make her a qualified candidate. But to me she just seems so fake: she has a fake smile, she fakes her enthusiasm, and she changes her position to make herself more electable. I like Bernie Sanders, but I don't think he can win a general election in such a conservative country. America was not ready for universal healthcare (Obamacare), and they will not be ready to pay additional taxes for "free" college education. Republicans will label him as a scary, godless socialist and drum up fear of big government. It's a shame because I think he is the kind of politician we need right now. He is someone who actually plans on doing something about the growing divide between the rich and poor, and he wants to reduce the influence money has on politics. I absolutely loathe the top two Republican candidates. Donald Trump is a bully who will do anything for personal gain. He has no integrity, no convictions, and no filter. He would be a disastrous foreign policy maker. He appeals to the uneducated masses that care more about clever quips and punchlines than they do about his stances on issues. This pretty sums up Ben Carson: https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/3oktig/the_craziest_thing_about_the_republican/cvy3rrv?context=3 It will be interesting to watch the election in 2016, but in more of a "train wreck" kind of way. Well I can honestly say that's the first time I have heard Obama and charismatic mentioned in the same sentence.
leicsmac Posted 15 October 2015 Posted 15 October 2015 Well I can honestly say that's the first time I have heard Obama and charismatic mentioned in the same sentence. Really? Say what you like about the guy but he's a massively skilled orator if nothing else.
The God Emperor Posted 15 October 2015 Posted 15 October 2015 In what way? It's the same policy that Romney introduced in his state... Not to step on SMX11's toes, but it is a bad policy becuase it's yet another piece of corporate welfare sold as policy to benefit ordinary people. The big money behind it was from the Pharmaceutical lobby and the 5 biggest health insurance providers in the US, who have since seen thier share prices and profits sky rocket. It's a plutocrat trougher's wet dream since now it is written in law that people have to buy their product. It hasn't benefited ordinary people since now insurance rates are increasing to pay for people who weren't insurable before. This will benefit the troughers even more since they'll probably get a nice big subsidy from the American tax payer to try and keep rates down. Pre Obamacare health care was an awful fascistic mess thats now only been made worse and will continue to be made worse by the next piece of legislation.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.