Jump to content

Donald Trump Appreciation Thread


Guided Missile

Saints Web Official US election  

100 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for?

    • Biden
      77
    • Trump
      23


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Broadly agree and Starmer did his job at CPS, arguably too well. But prisons weren’t his remit. This is a succession of governments, New Labour as well with their ‘tough on crime and tough on causes of crime’. And the short prison sentences gained pace under Major going that far back.

We’ve got to find different deterrents for lower-medium risk offences and focus on who is the biggest risk to the public. 

It was Cameron’s austerity that sparked the huge decline in prisons funding. Not popular vote winner but an absolute necessity as shown by the lack of resources now and letting criminals out early.  Seems nothing can be a bipartisan issue nowadays and already the right wing press screaming it’s Starmer’s fault after he’s been in office for 2 minutes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Take off a hand for stealing? Public birching and ritual stoning for anti social behaviour?

I was thinking more of different forms of restorative justice for lower/social level offences and more effective freezing of assets for white collar premeditated offences.

But I suppose those are other options too….

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Donny is very upset about Labour volunteers flying to the States to support the Democrats. Apparently this isn’t unusual and Tory MPs have also been involve in supporting the Republicans in the past. Let’s not forget the support given to Trump by a Leader of a major political party here too. Does he really believe that a few Labour MPs will make any difference at all in the way the US votes? I doubt it, just another example of him playing the victim card.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

So Donny is very upset about Labour volunteers flying to the States to support the Democrats. Apparently this isn’t unusual and Tory MPs have also been involve in supporting the Republicans in the past. Let’s not forget the support given to Trump by a Leader of a major political party here too. Does he really believe that a few Labour MPs will make any difference at all in the way the US votes? I doubt it, just another example of him playing the victim card.

I think it will make zero difference to the outcome but Trump will pick up on any grievances for fuel in a close contest.

It just shouldn’t have happened with any kind of Labour involvement even if informal as it was given the highly volatile and toxic atmosphere. If he does elected, that is now awkward for the UK, NATO and it doesn’t help Ukraine at all.

Putting my work hat on, where’s the accountability if they knock on the door with a Democrat of a hard core Trump supporter with a million guns he just bought from Walmart? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trump wins Trump will do what he always does and play whatever situation he finds himself in to his advantage. If it suits him to be pally with Starmer I am sure that is what he will be.

I don’t see that Labour should pull any support from volunteers for their party as the leader of Reform supports Trump and the Tories are behind the Tepublican party. If they are going to worry about every single political optic they are going to hamstring themselves while the other parties carry on doing exactly what they want.

From what is in the public domain so far, neither Starmer nor the Labour Party have done anything wrong. Do we really want a PM who is going to worry about what Trump thinks of him and us all the time? Remember the bit in Love Actually between our PM and the POTUS? 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

 

From what is in the public domain so far, neither Starmer nor the Labour Party have done anything wrong. Do we really want a PM who is going to worry about what Trump thinks of him and us all the time? Remember the bit in Love Actually between our PM and the POTUS? 😉

Lammy and co will be kissing his arse should Trump win

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Best way is to defeat him again, if he’d died it would have created a groundswell for extremist populism. 

The country is fucked anyway. The only good thing is that fat senile old cunt won’t be alive for much longer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

If Trump wins Trump will do what he always does and play whatever situation he finds himself in to his advantage. If it suits him to be pally with Starmer I am sure that is what he will be.

Exactly. J. D. Vance said that Trump was a cynical asshole like Nixon and later said he was America’s Hitler. 

Vance later did a U turn and kissed Trump's arse who then chose him as his running mate.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dark Munster said:

Exactly. J. D. Vance said that Trump was a cynical asshole like Nixon and later said he was America’s Hitler. 

Vance later did a U turn and kissed Trump's arse who then chose him as his running mate.

Forgot Vance said that, the Democrats shouldn’t. John Kelly quote is haunting him https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/10/23/donald-trump-fascist-hitler-john-kelly-claims/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/10/2024 at 13:41, whelk said:

Jeff Bezos another colossal cunt. These mega rich cunts ruining what were prestigious respected papers. 

From uncovering Watergate to the billionaire owner having head up Trump’s arse. 

Remember, the Republican party looks after the ‘little guy’ against East Coast elites.

And if you believe that, I have some magic beans to sell you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/10/2024 at 13:41, whelk said:

Jeff Bezos another colossal cunt. These mega rich cunts ruining what were prestigious respected papers. 

Any newspaper endorsing a candidate is pathetic. A newspaper isn't a person and anyone being influenced to vote based on what they say is just as thick as anyone else you've called thick on here. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Any newspaper endorsing a candidate is pathetic. A newspaper isn't a person and anyone being influenced to vote based on what they say is just as thick as anyone else you've called thick on here. 

Newspapers are declining and sure always been same but editorial interference just undermines any integrity. 
I’m sure even the Daily Mail readers are tiring of constant scare Tories of Labour. No news just like a Conservative election pamphlet.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Newspapers are declining and sure always been same but editorial interference just undermines any integrity. 
I’m sure even the Daily Mail readers are tiring of constant scare Tories of Labour. No news just like a Conservative election pamphlet.

 

We all know there's plenty of bias on both sides in the newspapers. I still think newspapers endorsing a political candidate is retarded. A bit like when the sun had those opinion pieces with the Sun thinks as if its some random person down the pub. Retarded. 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, whelk said:

Newspapers are declining and sure always been same but editorial interference just undermines any integrity. 
I’m sure even the Daily Mail readers are tiring of constant scare Tories of Labour. No news just like a Conservative election pamphlet.

 

It was in Private Eye that the Express have recently been formally been warned about exactly that after the former editor returned after a failed spell working for Schapps, and after he’d openly been saying within Reach the parent firm that the paper would be gone within 12 months. Humble pie…

It also stated that the Mail had a headline screaming about how the Tories were more trusted in a piece of research on economic policy. Sadly for them, it was only measure of several on economic competence and Labour were considerably ahead on all of the others.

Ted Verity might be the next to get a warning I suspect. Not even as if the Tories have a leader in place or seem to even be encouraging it, let alone directing it. Takes brown nosing to a whole new level. 

Edited by Gloucester Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

We all know there's plenty of bias on both sides in the newspapers. I still think newspapers endorsing a political candidate is retarded. A bit like when the sun had those opinion pieces with the Sun thinks as if its some random person down the pub. Retarded. 

Plus the papal puffs of smoke - cringeworthy at the time. They cottoned on quicker than most that their political influence is way more limited now.

That’s why the main two papers I read when I do are the Indy and the Times. Don’t like giving Murdoch money but it’s a smidgen right of centre and it gives the other parties a bit of a go. And Murdoch will look like Mary Poppins when Paul Marshall takes over the Telegraph. GB News in broadsheet format - marvellous. Whilst only one man, his American Bully XL and a can of Special Brew watch it, it’s polluted our watercourse to the extent you’ve now got politicians of all parties interviewing their colleagues and in some cases spouses.

FFS. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

America has to be the ultimate warning about highly toxic, abusive and divisive politics https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-kick-off-final-week-campaign-with-madison-square-garden-rally-2024-10-27/

To refer to an island 🏝️- a beautiful one having been there - of 3.2m people as a floating island of garbage - is astonishingly disrespectful. Even so, I’ve given up hope that Trump will be punished for it. Latinos in Pennsylvania, allied to the horrific comments about ‘Latinos love making babies’ will probably vote for him even more.

Edited by Gloucester Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

America has to be the ultimate warning about highly toxic, abusive and divisive politics https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-kick-off-final-week-campaign-with-madison-square-garden-rally-2024-10-27/

To refer to an island 🏝️- a beautiful one having been there - of 3.2m people as a floating island of garbage - is astonishingly disrespectful. Even so, I’ve given up hope that Trump will be punished for it. Latinos in Pennsylvania, allied to the horrific comments about ‘Latinos love making babies’ will probably vote for him even more.

It will be like Brexit. Trump will win and then thick fuckers who voted for him will moan I didn’t think they were going to deport my mates. Not that I necessarily believe they will get away with mass deportations.

Edited by whelk
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

America has to be the ultimate warning about highly toxic, abusive and divisive politics https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-kick-off-final-week-campaign-with-madison-square-garden-rally-2024-10-27/

To refer to an island 🏝️- a beautiful one having been there - of 3.2m people as a floating island of garbage - is astonishingly disrespectful. Even so, I’ve given up hope that Trump will be punished for it. Latinos in Pennsylvania, allied to the horrific comments about ‘Latinos love making babies’ will probably vote for him even more.

Not that there's not a very long list of Trump comments, but this was a warm up act, that they have already distanced themselves from. So doubt there's any Trump punishment, except at the ballot box.

"Danielle Alvarez, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign, told Reuters that the joke about Puerto Rico "does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign."

Why the comedian felt comfortable saying those things, and the response he got is telling though. As is Trump's labelling of criminals and mass deportation.

As you say, so much that is beyond the pale for us, in terms of divisive toxicity.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Plus the papal puffs of smoke - cringeworthy at the time. They cottoned on quicker than most that their political influence is way more limited now.

That’s why the main two papers I read when I do are the Indy and the Times. Don’t like giving Murdoch money but it’s a smidgen right of centre and it gives the other parties a bit of a go. And Murdoch will look like Mary Poppins when Paul Marshall takes over the Telegraph. GB News in broadsheet format - marvellous. Whilst only one man, his American Bully XL and a can of Special Brew watch it, it’s polluted our watercourse to the extent you’ve now got politicians of all parties interviewing their colleagues and in some cases spouses.

FFS. 

I agree with you re The Times although I only read the Sunday version.
For a Murdoch owned rag it is relatively (and I do underscore the term 'relatively') even handed re politics.
I despair of the Mail, Express and the Sun comic as well as the Guardian at the other end of the spectrum.
As for GB News, its on the way of replicating Truth Social and Fox News.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, whelk said:

It will be like Brexit. Trump will win and then thick fuckers who voted for him will moan I didn’t think they were going to deport my mates. Not that I necessarily believe they will get away with mass deportations.

The US version of The Rest is Politics has one host who worked for Trump, but now supports Harris. He was saying that there are different scenarios for Trump. There are those close to him that say he's going to have lots of sound items, have lots of spur of the moment ideas that aren't enforceable and get nowhere, and the rest of the time he'll be playing golf.

I think you can add nest feathering and immunity forever to that.

Some others, there but perhaps not as close, have valid concerns about the think tanks post Bannon, waiting to get their own ideas into place.

However, their websites claim they got loads in under Reagan and others, so it's not a new threat, which some hyperbole would suggest.

21 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

We all know there's plenty of bias on both sides in the newspapers. I still think newspapers endorsing a political candidate is retarded. A bit like when the sun had those opinion pieces with the Sun thinks as if its some random person down the pub. Retarded. 

I know my views were shaped by newspapers. My parents would have bought those they agreed with. But the papers would have reinforced that daily, more than any opinions expressed by them.

It takes a lot of years to not only see other sides, but be open to unpicking your own views.

Endorsing candidates is just an extension of the daily bias. On one hand our press has some standards to adhere to, and you know what to expect. There are other platforms outside of that (often by former journalists) that provide more incisive investigations. But without the same levels of oversight (although they often have to fight financially ruinous legal action before vindication) and the risk of entering incorrect echo chambers.

I'm happy to see more platforms to express views and criticism. Sadly, the press are on a race to a polarised bottom, desperate to hang onto the core support of their bias. But better to have them than rely solely on social media. Their decline has also removed a lot of local journalists for the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone on here saw it, but Trump did Joe Rogan last week and has tens of million of views for a three hour podcast. Harris hasn't yet committed to doing it despite receiving an invite. Personally I think it would be a mistake not to do it. Surely the people who watch Rogan are the exact type of people she needs to win over? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure if anyone on here saw it, but Trump did Joe Rogan last week and has tens of million of views for a three hour podcast. Harris hasn't yet committed to doing it despite receiving an invite. Personally I think it would be a mistake not to do it. Surely the people who watch Rogan are the exact type of people she needs to win over? 

How did Trump do?

I know it is popular but never listened to know if good format. Assume Harris has some smart minds to evaluate an effective strategy but dont think Harris is sharp in responses either - seems to fall back on stock replies rather than being natural. I would level the same against many MPs here as well. Need to look at Wes Streeting in natural response rather than being at pains to avoid a gotcha mistake. 
 

going to be interesting next week, polls are close but bookies odds aren’t and Trump is now strong favourite. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure if anyone on here saw it, but Trump did Joe Rogan last week and has tens of million of views for a three hour podcast. Harris hasn't yet committed to doing it despite receiving an invite. Personally I think it would be a mistake not to do it. Surely the people who watch Rogan are the exact type of people she needs to win over? 

I'm not following everything they do. But a combination of Trump's personality and Harris's weak spots seems to result in some second guessing from her team.

From the Rogan bits I heard. Trump was himself. Rambling (he calls it weaving), borderline lunacy with some answers. But he nearly always has some answer, or some approach. He's done so much of this that he will no doubt have engaged his supporters. Rogan was asking some tough questions like the disputed result (that Trump did a little stumble on).

Where Trump is far more in command of his responses than his team, Harris is much more the standard politician that you expect in these elections. But she's not strong on policy, still caught between supporting Biden and having some individuality, and has the standard suite of political diversions when called out, that often comes across as weak.

Trump clearly disrupts the opposition. His approach is so different, they can't go head to head with it (and considering who it is, you wouldn't really want to).

She could do the show, and be far more coherent than Trump. But 3 hours leaves her open to all the things she struggles with, that Trump eases through.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it incredible that the US is possibly going to elect a convicted criminal as president, especially after all that went on after the last election. For all their faults, I always had the Yanks down as big believers in the constitution and the rule of law. I’m hoping that despite what the polls are saying, when it comes to actually casting their vote, enough people’s moral compass will kick in and Harris wins - who knows though, that place seems to have really lost the plot.

Usually I don’t give a monkeys who runs that country, it doesn’t effect me in the slightest but the Ukraine thing is a real concern, having a fan of Putin in charge has to be a bad thing. If military support is pulled then god knows where that leaves Ukraine and Europe.
 

Edited by aintforever
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I find it incredible that the US is possibly going to elect a convicted criminal as president, especially after all that went on after the last election. For all their faults, I always had the Yanks down as big believers in the constitution and the rule of law. I’m hoping that despite what the polls are saying, when it comes to actually casting their vote, enough people’s moral compass will kick in and Harris wins - who knows though, that place seems to have really lost the plot.

Usually I don’t give a monkeys who runs that country, it doesn’t effect me in the slightest but the Ukraine thing is a real concern, having a fan of Putin in charge has to be a bad thing. If military support is pulled then god knows where that leaves Ukraine and Europe.
 

I am with you but the Pentagon is a very powerful lobby, well far more than a lobby. One thing Trump’s vanity won’t want to be seen as weak and caving in. Although does feel like they are more insular than ever in not caring what is going on in the world. US empowering Putin and N Korea, Iran and even China is not going to be a move Trump will be happy taking…….hopefully 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

I find it incredible that the US is possibly going to elect a convicted criminal as president, especially after all that went on after the last election. For all their faults, I always had the Yanks down as big believers in the constitution and the rule of law. I’m hoping that despite what the polls are saying, when it comes to actually casting their vote, enough people’s moral compass will kick in and Harris wins - who knows though, that place seems to have really lost the plot.

Usually I don’t give a monkeys who runs that country, it doesn’t effect me in the slightest but the Ukraine thing is a real concern, having a fan of Putin in charge has to be a bad thing. If military support is pulled then god knows where that leaves Ukraine and Europe.
 

Europe can always fill the void….?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Europe can always fill the void….?

Of course we may have to, that's my point. It's not a great situation to be in, it would be expensive and an emboldened Russia invading Europe is the last thing we want.

 

 

Edited by aintforever
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Europe can always fill the void….?

The USA out of the way suits Putin big time. How would you feel about Europe going it alone in NATO too?

Edited by sadoldgit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, whelk said:

How did Trump do?

I know it is popular but never listened to know if good format. Assume Harris has some smart minds to evaluate an effective strategy but dont think Harris is sharp in responses either - seems to fall back on stock replies rather than being natural. I would level the same against many MPs here as well. Need to look at Wes Streeting in natural response rather than being at pains to avoid a gotcha mistake. 
 

going to be interesting next week, polls are close but bookies odds aren’t and Trump is now strong favourite. 

It was a bit boring to be honest but I was also surprised. Trump doesn't come across like a bumbling idiot even if some of the things he says makes you roll you're eyes. I can see why people like him because he's entertaining, funny and most of the time what you see is what you get. Sort of like the opposite of a regular politician. Of course that's not going necessarily what you want in a serious politician but you can see why he's had a long career in entertainment.

Not sure it's going to make people change their vote but I think it would really help people to see who Kamala Harris is really without all the scripts and random phrases that don't mean anything. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aintforever said:

I find it incredible that the US is possibly going to elect a convicted criminal as president, especially after all that went on after the last election. For all their faults, I always had the Yanks down as big believers in the constitution and the rule of law. I’m hoping that despite what the polls are saying, when it comes to actually casting their vote, enough people’s moral compass will kick in and Harris wins - who knows though, that place seems to have really lost the plot.

Usually I don’t give a monkeys who runs that country, it doesn’t effect me in the slightest but the Ukraine thing is a real concern, having a fan of Putin in charge has to be a bad thing. If military support is pulled then god knows where that leaves Ukraine and Europe.
 

I think the fact you find it incredible is the same reason that hardcore Democrats find it incredible and can't believe they might actually lose. How about putting up a decent candidate and running on something rather than running almost solely on not being Trump? In general people want something to vote for rather than something to vote against (not true with our election this time round but it is normally.) If Trump gets in it is largely on them and how they handled the utter shitshow under Biden and then Harris. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It was a bit boring to be honest but I was also surprised. Trump doesn't come across like a bumbling idiot even if some of the things he says makes you roll you're eyes. I can see why people like him because he's entertaining, funny and most of the time what you see is what you get. Sort of like the opposite of a regular politician. Of course that's not going necessarily what you want in a serious politician but you can see why he's had a long career in entertainment.

Not sure it's going to make people change their vote but I think it would really help people to see who Kamala Harris is really without all the scripts and random phrases that don't mean anything. 

Another day of interviewees on Beeb completely avoid answering, relying on 30 seconds of repeating a line knowing that soundbites will be fine. Contrast with a 3 hour interview. Not many would want to go anywhere near that. He does engage. I'd wonder about the fact checking (but both sides have issues there when it suits them), but the style he has does have an entertainers cunning behind it. He broadly knows what he wants.

Another popular appearance for the candidate with by far the most name recognition. That he did it, engaged, while the Harris team didn't is only going to go his way.

As I mentioned in other posts both sides are so used to trotting out the same rubbish. Our lot inherited it. Trump is different, and opponents used to dealing the standard soundbites are on the defensive and unable to compete. As the way both parties dismissed a lot of voters and views, Trump offers an alternative.

The democrats lost last time  in part because of it, yet still still can't get out of their standard thinking.

41 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I think the fact you find it incredible is the same reason that hardcore Democrats find it incredible and can't believe they might actually lose. How about putting up a decent candidate and running on something rather than running almost solely on not being Trump? In general people want something to vote for rather than something to vote against (not true with our election this time round but it is normally.) If Trump gets in it is largely on them and how they handled the utter shitshow under Biden and then Harris. 

Harris' coherency and energy to interact has made this closer than it would have been under Biden. Perhaps Biden, having been VP himself, would have made Harris more prominent rather than it being a lame appointment, stuck in the background. But that's hindsight, and how the roles are projected. She doesn't have the decades of craft he has, but he simply isn't up to the punishment of it now.

It does seem incredible that someone like Trump is running this close. But some of that is due to both parties being a distant elite. Trump's populism has cracked that a bit. And that it took someone like that to do it, shows how rotten the whole thing is.

Not that a core of Democrats and the side of the media that supports them seems to grasp what they could have done to stop it happening. Since they didn't last time either, makes you wonder just how remote they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Another day of interviewees on Beeb completely avoid answering, relying on 30 seconds of repeating a line knowing that soundbites will be fine. Contrast with a 3 hour interview. Not many would want to go anywhere near that. He does engage. I'd wonder about the fact checking (but both sides have issues there when it suits them), but the style he has does have an entertainers cunning behind it. He broadly knows what he wants.

Another popular appearance for the candidate with by far the most name recognition. That he did it, engaged, while the Harris team didn't is only going to go his way.

As I mentioned in other posts both sides are so used to trotting out the same rubbish. Our lot inherited it. Trump is different, and opponents used to dealing the standard soundbites are on the defensive and unable to compete. As the way both parties dismissed a lot of voters and views, Trump offers an alternative.

The democrats lost last time  in part because of it, yet still still can't get out of their standard thinking.

Harris' coherency and energy to interact has made this closer than it would have been under Biden. Perhaps Biden, having been VP himself, would have made Harris more prominent rather than it being a lame appointment, stuck in the background. But that's hindsight, and how the roles are projected. She doesn't have the decades of craft he has, but he simply isn't up to the punishment of it now.

It does seem incredible that someone like Trump is running this close. But some of that is due to both parties being a distant elite. Trump's populism has cracked that a bit. And that it took someone like that to do it, shows how rotten the whole thing is.

Not that a core of Democrats and the side of the media that supports them seems to grasp what they could have done to stop it happening. Since they didn't last time either, makes you wonder just how remote they are.

Democrats needed to bin off Biden ages ago, had a proper primary and chosen the most competent and most inspiring character they had. That isn't Kamala or Joe. It should have been pretty easy to present a competent and sensible face to middle America and storm to a win but instead they have manufactured this shitshow. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, aintforever said:

Of course we may have to, that's my point. It's not a great situation to be in, it would be expensive and an emboldened Russia invading Europe is the last thing we want.

 

 

Expensive? Better to pay for your own security rather than sub contract it out to the USA???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Another day of interviewees on Beeb completely avoid answering, relying on 30 seconds of repeating a line knowing that soundbites will be fine. Contrast with a 3 hour interview. Not many would want to go anywhere near that. He does engage. I'd wonder about the fact checking (but both sides have issues there when it suits them), but the style he has does have an entertainers cunning behind it. He broadly knows what he wants.

Another popular appearance for the candidate with by far the most name recognition. That he did it, engaged, while the Harris team didn't is only going to go his way.

As I mentioned in other posts both sides are so used to trotting out the same rubbish. Our lot inherited it. Trump is different, and opponents used to dealing the standard soundbites are on the defensive and unable to compete. As the way both parties dismissed a lot of voters and views, Trump offers an alternative.

The democrats lost last time  in part because of it, yet still still can't get out of their standard thinking.

Harris' coherency and energy to interact has made this closer than it would have been under Biden. Perhaps Biden, having been VP himself, would have made Harris more prominent rather than it being a lame appointment, stuck in the background. But that's hindsight, and how the roles are projected. She doesn't have the decades of craft he has, but he simply isn't up to the punishment of it now.

It does seem incredible that someone like Trump is running this close. But some of that is due to both parties being a distant elite. Trump's populism has cracked that a bit. And that it took someone like that to do it, shows how rotten the whole thing is.

Not that a core of Democrats and the side of the media that supports them seems to grasp what they could have done to stop it happening. Since they didn't last time either, makes you wonder just how remote they are.

The vast majority are ‘low information’ voters. Politics is generally fucked as Trump knows chaos and lies works. The populism of your life is shit because of this and vote for me I will sort that and make it better. The funny thing is Biden has helped the US economy recover significantly over others yet it is spun that is tanked as fuel is no longer $1.50 a gallon. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Expensive? Better to pay for your own security rather than sub contract it out to the USA???

Would you honestly be happy for the USA to return to the days of “splendid isolation?” That worked well for us 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...