Trump seems to be doing well so far...

not the most intellectual! by far...
I wouldn't hesitate to call it like it is.... he's the stupidest candidate for that office I've seen in 40 years of voting

his competitors aren't much better. when politics and religion are discussed simultaneously, they become just as toxic as Wahhabis. please give up on government based on unproven mythology, and move forward using factual evidence!!

Politics is always the lesser of two evils at best. The ideal candidates probably wouldn't bother to throw their hats in the ring because they like their lives as they are and not scrutinized and criticized down to the last detail. Trump, already being a well-known public figure who trades on his name, has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Danno said:

Politics is always the lesser of two evils at best. The ideal candidates probably wouldn't bother to throw their hats in the ring because they like their lives as they are and not scrutinized and criticized down to the last detail. Trump, already being a well-known public figure who trades on his name, has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting view on Trump in this context, I have to say I thought exactly the opposite... here is a guy late in life, with more money than he could possibly spend, clearly able to do whatever he wishes in life, yet he chooses to get into politics. I can only assume that this is either down to absolute egotism or a genuine desire to 'do something' in the political arena. Its has to be one or the other of these, it can't be in the middle.

Which I find interesting, as in his shoes, I'd be very tempted to say 'f**k them all, I have nothing to prove and I'm OK, so why bother?'

well mr Eddie something tells me you're not a privileged megalomaniac with a small dick. trump is obviously trying to get even with how his personal life has shortchanged his emotional needs. he offers nothing but anger and stupidity. we'd be better off with someone like Nixon!

VOTE BERNIE SANDERS

It seems to me that the American public should not be responsible for electing an American president.

The fact is that America (with the Queens permission) is effectively the leader of the modern western world.

Therefore, it only seems fair for other countries to vote too. And to nominate candidates...

I would therefore like to nominate Boris Johnson for US presidential candidate...

Fast Eddie said:

It seems to me that the American public should not be responsible for electing an American president.

The fact is that America (with the Queens permission) is effectively the leader of the modern western world.

Therefore, it only seems fair for other countries to vote too. And to nominate candidates...

I would therefore like to nominate Boris Johnson for US presidential candidate...

Click to expand...

sorry Mr. Eddie, though I'm sure Johnson would make an appropriate republican candidate, most thinking people in the states are seeing conservatism for what it is... an attempt to divide the electorate with dog whistle issues: abortion (really? in 2016?) gays lesbians and transsexuals (life is way too short to worry about what makes others happy) immigrants (unless your ancestors were here 400 years ago you came from another place.) It's these "issues" that republicans have been using since Reagan to detract from the facts of massive income inequality and the ownership of our government by a select few.

I do think American politicians could learn something from you Brits, (besides bubble+squeak and proper fish+chips) and that is the historical cost of empire. I personally knew a family right down the road from me; Ray was an old school republican, a decent guy who did a lot of volunteer work in the cumminity, Korean War vet. His son Mike was an easy go lucky guy who raised his son Ray II by himself. Ray II went to high school with my boy, and after graduating, enlisted. two years later, he was a field medic in Baghdad when he was gunned down saving one of the guys in his platoon. Less than a year later, Mike drank himself to death. not long after that, after condemning bush, Cheney, and neocons, the old boy died of a heart attack. Just one story, there are millions of them now, thanks to the genius of Bush, his crowd, and queen Hillary as Secretary of State. Now all candidates, except Sanders, are calling for an escalation in that region. when will we ever learn?

Some years ago, there s an interview on a US news program during the run-up to a Parliamentary election in the UK. The reporter asked a man in the street if he always voted a party line. His reply was "Oh no. I always review the party manifestos and then look at the records of the competing candidates I will be voting for. I decide which of them is the worst, then I vote for the other one."

It's a shame that so many political competitions result in the least obnoxious candidate winning!

Politics is always the lesser of two evils. The two major parties here have flipped back and forth for many years. The Republicans freed the slaves by prosecuting The Civil War. For years, the South was predominately Democrat. Then, in 1964, Lyndon Johnson signed The Civil Rights Act. Since then, the South has become predominately Republican. Over time, the Republicans have been getting more and more radically right-wing, eschewing any and all movement toward bipartisan compromise. Bipartisanship is seen by the right wing as Democratic initiative, to be avoided at all political costs. Donald Trump's "populism" is merely this radicalization taken to extreme, and the main reason his rise has been compared to that of Hitler. As I asked previously, does anyone really know what this guy would do if elected?

Johnm has it right, change now or Trump will change you into the United States of China with his attitude. I reckon 2/3 or Americans don't even know who he is, but 100% of Mexicans do!

Mind you, they might as well adopt many of our ways, they use the English Gallon. The other good thing is that a US Pint is 16 fl oz - saves having to drink too much of that awful beer, (excludes Rolling Rock - nice when I can get it)

Thankfully you have that really good voting system, someone tried explaining it it when I was in Point Loma for a while, we should use it here, everyone likes to vote, but you can vote for nobody. It seems that US citizens value the vote and will do it as it is a right even if they don't vote for someone.

It has been suggested (not by me but I don't remember by whom) that every election should include the option of "None of the above" and If that option wins, the election should be re-run and none of the candidates that lost should be allowed a second shot.

Danno said:

As I asked previously, does anyone really know what this guy would do if elected?

Click to expand...

With his ego, I would expect him to do something like re-name the Grand Canyon "Trump's Grand Canyon",
or at least try to get his face added to Mt. Rushmore.

Then again.......
Maybe this guy was never serious about becoming President and has only entered the race to disrupt the
Republican party enough to guarantee Hillary Clinton wins the election.
If so, I'd say he is doing a pretty good job.

They are all politicians , I don't believe a word any of them say.

Mark said:

Danno said:

As I asked previously, does anyone really know what this guy would do if elected?

Click to expand...

With his ego, I would expect him to do something like re-name the Grand Canyon "Trump's Grand Canyon",
or at least try to get his face added to Mt. Rushmore.

Then again.......
Maybe this guy was never serious about becoming President and has only entered the race to disrupt the
Republican party enough to guarantee Hillary Clinton wins the election.
If so, I'd say he is doing a pretty good job.

They are all politicians , I don't believe a word any of them say.

Click to expand...

Or put up a big neon sign with his name on it at the edge of the canyon.

Nothing wrong with healthy cynicism, but being totally dismissive of all politicians as abject liars only leads to apathy and low election turnouts. The biggest shame, no matter who gets elected, is all the folks who sit on their asses and don't bother voting because Jesus, Winston Churchill or Harry Truman aren't running. When those elected get in with less than a simple majority of eligible voters, democracy is eroded through neglect.

Danno said:

Nothing wrong with healthy cynicism, but being totally dismissive of all politicians as abject liars only leads to apathy and low election turnouts.

Click to expand...

Yep.... and I totally expect a low voter turnout.
In fact, if it comes down to Hillary VS. Trump, This will probably be the first presidential election that I don't vote in.
If politics are truly about choosing the lesser of two evils, I think I may have to sit this one out.

This has nothing to do with apathy, more to do with me not wanting to back either of them.

Although I don't agree with not voting (there are always write-ins) I understand your frustration. Just about everyone on any side of politics feels it. Obama made some remarks today in Austin, TX, when queried about the rise of Donald Trump and the idea that his Presidency has contributed to the anger everyone seems to be under the spell of;

“What is happening in this primary is just a distillation of what’s been happening inside their party for more than a decade. I mean, the reason that many of their voters are responding is because this is what’s been fed through the messages they’ve been sending for a long time – that you just make flat assertions that don’t comport with the facts. That you just deny the evidence of science. That compromise is a betrayal. That the other side isn’t simply wrong, or we just disagree, we want to take a different approach, but the other side is destroying the country, or treasonous. I mean, that’s – look it up. That’s what they’ve been saying.

“So they can’t be surprised when somebody suddenly looks and says, ‘You know what, I can do that even better. I can make stuff up better than that. I can be more outrageous than that. I can insult people even better than that. I can be even more uncivil.” I mean, conservative outlets have been feeding their base constantly the notion that everything is a disaster, that everybody else is to blame, that Obamacare is destroying the country. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not. It’s not, ‘We disagree with this program,’ ‘We think we can do it better,’ it’s, ‘Oh, this is a crisis!’

“So if you don’t care about the facts, or the evidence, or civility, in general in making your arguments, you will end up with candidates who will say just about anything and do just about anything. And when your answer to every proposal that I make, or Democrats make is no, it means that you’ve got to become more and more unreasonable because that’s the only way you can say no to some pretty reasonable stuff. And then you shouldn’t be surprised when your party ultimately has no ideas to offer at all.”

And he also had this to say, a direct jab at the other side ingeneral and Trump in particular;

Postscript: At the same Austin event, the president also took a bit of a victory lap, pushing back against GOP rhetoric that the nation has suffered in the Obama era. “When the cynics told us we couldn’t change the country, they were dead wrong; we proved them wrong,” he said. “Think about it: if somebody told you seven years ago we’d have 4.9% unemployment, 20 million newly insured, gas is $1.80, deficits cut by three-quarters, marriage equality a reality, bin Laden out of the picture, Wall Street reform in place you wouldn’t have believed me…. Imagine what Trump would say if he actually had a record like this – instead of selling steaks.”

Now I'm not trying to make a case for Hilary, but a non-vote is a half-vote for Trump. The non-votes are what got us our wonderful governor in Illinois, another billionaire who thinks everyone makes too much money but him. Ideally one would like to vote FOR a candidate, but sometimes it's necessary to vote AGAINST one. I'm sure anti-Hilary voters would agree.

that quote of Obama is spot on... read about the meeting on the night of his first inauguration at the caucus room restaurant in DC. it has been obstruction and bullshit ever since, and many of us have been hurt real bad by that "strategy";because Obama is only 1/2 white?

and "Trumpenstein" is what republicans have created; they sure got what they wanted didn't they?

What does trump really offer? rounding up and deporting 11 million illegals? who's going to work the farms, slaughterhouses, and other non-white jobs, the slobs who go to his rallies??

if HRC, gets elected, you can expect more of the gross incompetence that has haunted her entire "career". Just look at Libya and Syria to start.

IF Bernie manages to get the nomination, (and they said he would loose Michigan by 30) and then voters get with the idea that WE can get the government wey deserve, we could take Congress too. depending in what happens Tuesday, ALL BETS COULD BE OFF

yep Danno, Mrs and I agree (for once) if we can't get Bernie, we'll vote what's-her-name

Hilary is not my heroine, but her husband's Presidency coincided with the best economy of my working lifetime, and was accomplished with a Republican Congress in place, obstructing much as they have the last eight years. The difference was, Slick Willie was able to turn public opinion against the obstructionism, whereas Obama has not been so blessed. Still, the last six years have been an improvement over the previous ten, after the Wall Street-Gone-Wild crowd nearly sank the whole ship. I don't care about rhetoric, promises or insults, I go by tangible results. All the haters just want to see someone get screwed and Trump is the perfect guy to screw someone. Bill Clinton might have been slick, but he can't hold a candle to The Donald.

Isn't it amazing that probably two of the most polarizing individuals in this country are
the ones in the running for the top position in this country?

Seriously...... 300 million people in this country and these are the best we can find to be our next leader????
God help us!

Mark said:

Isn't it amazing that probably two of the most polarizing individuals in this country are
the ones in the running for the top position in this country?

Seriously...... 300 million people in this country and these are the best we can find to be our next leader????
God help us!

Click to expand...

Exactly my point.

Vote Boris Johnson...!