Donald Trump Appreciation Thread

[hypochondriac]

21 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Trump’s supporters laughed at these comments yet we are supposed to get upset about them being called “garbage.” Perhaps scumbags is more appropriate?

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/trump-says-liz-cheney-should-have-guns-trained-on-her-face-lets-see-how-/amp_articleshow/114849787.cms

Deliberately taking something out of context and twisting it's meaning does Democrat supporters no favours. Trump says enough objectionable stuff without having to invent things he said. 

[hypochondriac]

Still looks to be very close according to the polling with maybe a slight favouring of Harris to win. I'll be interested to see how accurate the polling has been. 

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Still looks to be very close according to the polling with maybe a slight favouring of Harris to win. I'll be interested to see how accurate the polling has been. 

I get how many could be undecided by Harris but no idea who would not have made up their mind about Trump by now.

[hypochondriac]

15 minutes ago, whelk said:

I get how many could be undecided by Harris but no idea who would not have made up their mind about Trump by now.

Looking at some Americans, it's a case that they felt the economy was better under trump and the immigration situation, they like some of the proposals and the team he is proposing for government and they aren't Kamala fans thinks she stands for nothing and object that she got the nomination without going through the proper process. Obviously doesn't help when some on the Democrat side denigrate people who have voted Trump in the past. It's not entirely about people not making their mind up about a candidate though, it's motivating people to actually vote. If voting were mandatory like Australia you'd imagine Harris would win handily. 

A unifying candidate is sorely needed in America if that is even possible. Obama was always embarrassingly superior to both of these candidates for example. 

Edited November 2 by hypochondriac

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Looking at some Americans, it's a case that they felt the economy was better under trump and the immigration situation, they like some of the proposals and the team he is proposing for government and they aren't Kamala fans thinks she stands for nothing and object that she got the nomination without going through the proper process. Obviously doesn't help when some on the Democrat side denigrate people who have voted Trump in the past. It's not entirely about people not making their mind up about a candidate though, it's motivating people to actually vote. If voting were mandatory like Australia you'd imagine Harris would win handily. 

A unifying candidate is sorely needed in America if that is even possible. Obama was always embarrassingly superior to both of these candidates for example. 

At the risk of patronising the voters very few understand the economy. US is very strong but many don’t see it. Inflation was inevitable after all the global Covid injections into the economy and cyclical as if there was a way of nailing it we would surely have discovered it by now. But yeah Biden brought it all on in their eyes.

Trump is seen as stronger on the economy but many cheering tariffs have no real understanding of what it will mean for their economy. Unfortunately we’re a global village however much people wish for a return to the 1950s 

If Trump does win think there will be a lot of anger in the Democrats towards Biden for not stepping down earlier to allow a stronger candidate. 

[hypochondriac]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

At the risk of patronising the voters very few understand the economy. US is very strong but many don’t see it. Inflation was inevitable after all the global Covid injections into the economy and cyclical as if there was a way of nailing it we would surely have discovered it by now. But yeah Biden brought it all on in their eyes.

Trump is seen as stronger on the economy but many cheering tariffs have no real understanding of what it will mean for their economy. Unfortunately we’re a global village however much people wish for a return to the 1950s 

If Trump does win think there will be a lot of anger in the Democrats towards Biden for not stepping down earlier to allow a stronger candidate. 

I don't necessarily disagree but this was known prior to the start of this election campaign and is a charge you could level at a lot of voters in national elections. A big positive for Trump is that he is entertaining, can talk to a working class person and is seen as more 'authentic' than a proper politician despite some of the shocking things he says. I accept this is hard to counter but since Obama the Democrats have never been able to crack trying to talk without soundbites, without sounding robotic or scripted and in America presentation matters. 

Democrats could have forced Biden out a lot earlier. They will only have themselves to blame if they lose. The fact it's this close is already a shocking indictment of how they run their party to be honest even if they win. 

Edited November 2 by hypochondriac

[LVSaint]

 

[Tamesaint]

I am prepared to be shot down in flames but I think that Harris is going to win this and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. Why? 

1. She has the money and resources to afford a much better organisation. She will get the vote out better than an out sourced PAC does for Trump. 

2. Early voting returns in the 3 rust belt states favour her and internally each party knows that. If Trump was as confident as he claims he would not have tried to get some of the early Pennsylvania votes disqualified. 

3. Trump appeals to people who do not necessarily vote. Harris is hitting home with women who do tend to vote. 

4. The mid term elections in 2022 were meant to be a Democrat bloodbath. They were not with the thinking being that voters were tired of the Trump  bombast and abortion rights energised women to vitr Democrat . Trump is certainly not any less bombastic this time and abortion is still an issue. 

I accept that I may be completely wrong and there could be a Trump victory  - perhaps even a landslide. I just think it is very unlikely. 

[hypochondriac]

20 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

I am prepared to be shot down in flames but I think that Harris is going to win this and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. Why? 

1. She has the money and resources to afford a much better organisation. She will get the vote out better than an out sourced PAC does for Trump. 

2. Early voting returns in the 3 rust belt states favour her and internally each party knows that. If Trump was as confident as he claims he would not have tried to get some of the early Pennsylvania votes disqualified. 

3. Trump appeals to people who do not necessarily vote. Harris is hitting home with women who do tend to vote. 

4. The mid term elections in 2022 were meant to be a Democrat bloodbath. They were not with the thinking being that voters were tired of the Trump  bombast and abortion rights energised women to vitr Democrat . Trump is certainly not any less bombastic this time and abortion is still an issue. 

I accept that I may be completely wrong and there could be a Trump victory  - perhaps even a landslide. I just think it is very unlikely. 

A few polls going for Harris this morning so you may be right. 

[LVSaint]

24 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

I am prepared to be shot down in flames but I think that Harris is going to win this and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. Why? 

1. She has the money and resources to afford a much better organisation. She will get the vote out better than an out sourced PAC does for Trump. 

2. Early voting returns in the 3 rust belt states favour her and internally each party knows that. If Trump was as confident as he claims he would not have tried to get some of the early Pennsylvania votes disqualified. 

3. Trump appeals to people who do not necessarily vote. Harris is hitting home with women who do tend to vote. 

4. The mid term elections in 2022 were meant to be a Democrat bloodbath. They were not with the thinking being that voters were tired of the Trump  bombast and abortion rights energised women to vitr Democrat . Trump is certainly not any less bombastic this time and abortion is still an issue. 

I accept that I may be completely wrong and there could be a Trump victory  - perhaps even a landslide. I just think it is very unlikely. 

'm pretty confident she will win. For all the points you bring up above, plus the overnight Seltzer Iowa poll. Yes it's a poll and I've not been paying them much attention for a few weeks, but it's a pollster that's been historically accurate amongst the sea of shit that polls have been in recent years. Not expecting Iowa to necessarily flip but it might be an indication that those battleground states aren't as close as they appear.

[whelk]

Bookies recently made Trump massive favourite but now gone back to being much closer but he still is shorter price. And for those that deride the odds they are normally best indicator as using same data financial markets would use although of course reflect where the bets are going and was substantial money for Trump in last few weeks.

[Tamesaint]

27 minutes ago, whelk said:

Bookies recently made Trump massive favourite but now gone back to being much closer but he still is shorter price. And for those that deride the odds they are normally best indicator as using same data financial markets would use although of course reflect where the bets are going and was substantial money for Trump in last few weeks.

Agree that betting odds are often a good way to judge how a vote is going. There is a view however that this time some of the Trump supporting billionaires  are trying to distort the odds. A bet of 24 million dollars was placed  on Trump for example. 

The aim is to encourage the view that Trump is going to win this easily. Several polls lately which have found Trump to be leading have come from Republican backing organisations. If everyone starts to think he is bound to win and he doesn't win it means that Harris must have cheated and a whole new ballgame starts. 

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

I am prepared to be shot down in flames but I think that Harris is going to win this and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. Why? 

1. She has the money and resources to afford a much better organisation. She will get the vote out better than an out sourced PAC does for Trump. 

2. Early voting returns in the 3 rust belt states favour her and internally each party knows that. If Trump was as confident as he claims he would not have tried to get some of the early Pennsylvania votes disqualified. 

3. Trump appeals to people who do not necessarily vote. Harris is hitting home with women who do tend to vote. 

4. The mid term elections in 2022 were meant to be a Democrat bloodbath. They were not with the thinking being that voters were tired of the Trump  bombast and abortion rights energised women to vitr Democrat . Trump is certainly not any less bombastic this time and abortion is still an issue. 

I accept that I may be completely wrong and there could be a Trump victory  - perhaps even a landslide. I just think it is very unlikely. 

Plus her endorsements from huge stars with immense social media followings.

Her campaign has focused on this in the last couple of weeks which will likely give her the popular vote by quite a margin.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

4 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

I am prepared to be shot down in flames but I think that Harris is going to win this and it won't be as close as the polls suggest. Why? 

1. She has the money and resources to afford a much better organisation. She will get the vote out better than an out sourced PAC does for Trump. 

2. Early voting returns in the 3 rust belt states favour her and internally each party knows that. If Trump was as confident as he claims he would not have tried to get some of the early Pennsylvania votes disqualified. 

3. Trump appeals to people who do not necessarily vote. Harris is hitting home with women who do tend to vote. 

4. The mid term elections in 2022 were meant to be a Democrat bloodbath. They were not with the thinking being that voters were tired of the Trump  bombast and abortion rights energised women to vitr Democrat . Trump is certainly not any less bombastic this time and abortion is still an issue. 

I accept that I may be completely wrong and there could be a Trump victory  - perhaps even a landslide. I just think it is very unlikely. 

Nothing to be shot down about. All perfectly valid points.

I've also been thinking that it's not going to be quite as close as suggested. I was just wondering if I was thinking that, because the majority of news sources I'm listening to, are pro Harris.

Trump needed to get over the line on a wave of populism, partly lifting up unregistered, disaffected voters. But that wave hasn't quite been large enough to get him there.

Harris has been stronger on areas that drew early criticism and that focus is coming across. Her biggest issue this week was Biden. Meanwhile Trump spends his time criticising a mic stand.

It's probably too much to hope that if she does win, that the Democrats look at areas where they lost support, and consider making some changes there.

[hypochondriac]

Think I agree with the consensus on here. A large percentage of Trump's support come from people who aren't going to vote. 

[Gloucester Saint]

Not that it matters to what happens tomorrow and Weds but a You Gov sample of European thought about the outcome 

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50844-who-do-europeans-want-to-win-the-2024-us-presidential-election

All main UK parties supporters want a Harris win by some margin, it’s only Reform UK voters who don’t but even that’s marginal - 51%-49%. 

Edited November 4 by Gloucester Saint

[benjii]

One thing you can guarantee is that Trump will start claiming victory prematurely and start claiming misdoings by the Republican parties before half the count is even in. 

The fat, lying, raping, thieving, cunt.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Couldn't find a link, but from Sky.

Professor who correctly predicted nine of last 10 elections says he's 'sure' of who will win tomorrow

A historian who has successfully predicted nine out of the last 10 elections in the US believes Kamala Harris will win the keys to the White House.

Polls have been suggesting it will be a neck-and-neck race between Republican nominee Donald Trump and his Democratic opponent.

But Professor Allan Lichtman's system, called "The Keys to the White House", involves disregarding the polls entirely.

Instead, 13 metrics on a checklist are used to try and figure out who the successful candidate will be.

"Why am I sure that Harris is going to win? Because it's only close on the polls, and my system ignores the polls," Professor Lichtman told CNN.

The professor, who correctly predicted Mr Trump's win against Hillary Clinton in 2016, described polls as "snapshots" and said: "People don't respond to pollsters, they lie, they change their minds, and they have to guess who the likely voters are."

His system, which he developed in the early 1980s with the Russian geophysicist Vladimir Keilis-Borok, analyses the political landscape through the lens of 13 true-false statements focused on the incumbent president's party.

If six or more of the statements are false, then the challenger — in this case, Mr Trump — is predicted to win.

As detailed below, his system currently concludes that eight of the 13 keys are in Ms Harris's favour - while three favour her Republican rival.

    Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. FALSE
    Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE
    Incumbency: The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. FALSE
    Third party: There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. TRUE
    Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. TRUE
    Long-term economy: Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. TRUE
    Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. TRUE
    Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
    Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
    Incumbent charisma: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
    Challenger charisma: The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. TRUE
    Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. LEANS FALSE
    Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. LEANS TRUE

The election he got wrong was in 2000, when there were five false keys against the incumbent Democrats and Prof Lichtman predicted Democratic candidate and vice president Al Gore would win.

Mr Gore won the popular vote, but Republican nominee George W Bush was declared the winner of the Electoral College by the Supreme Court 36 days after election day, following a lengthy legal battle.

[whelk]

16 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Couldn't find a link, but from Sky.

Professor who correctly predicted nine of last 10 elections says he's 'sure' of who will win tomorrow

A historian who has successfully predicted nine out of the last 10 elections in the US believes Kamala Harris will win the keys to the White House.

Polls have been suggesting it will be a neck-and-neck race between Republican nominee Donald Trump and his Democratic opponent.

But Professor Allan Lichtman's system, called "The Keys to the White House", involves disregarding the polls entirely.

Instead, 13 metrics on a checklist are used to try and figure out who the successful candidate will be.

"Why am I sure that Harris is going to win? Because it's only close on the polls, and my system ignores the polls," Professor Lichtman told CNN.

The professor, who correctly predicted Mr Trump's win against Hillary Clinton in 2016, described polls as "snapshots" and said: "People don't respond to pollsters, they lie, they change their minds, and they have to guess who the likely voters are."

His system, which he developed in the early 1980s with the Russian geophysicist Vladimir Keilis-Borok, analyses the political landscape through the lens of 13 true-false statements focused on the incumbent president's party.

If six or more of the statements are false, then the challenger — in this case, Mr Trump — is predicted to win.

As detailed below, his system currently concludes that eight of the 13 keys are in Ms Harris's favour - while three favour her Republican rival.

    Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. FALSE
    Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE
    Incumbency: The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. FALSE
    Third party: There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. TRUE
    Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. TRUE
    Long-term economy: Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. TRUE
    Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. TRUE
    Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE
    Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. TRUE
    Incumbent charisma: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. FALSE
    Challenger charisma: The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. TRUE
    Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. LEANS FALSE
    Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. LEANS TRUE

The election he got wrong was in 2000, when there were five false keys against the incumbent Democrats and Prof Lichtman predicted Democratic candidate and vice president Al Gore would win.

Mr Gore won the popular vote, but Republican nominee George W Bush was declared the winner of the Electoral College by the Supreme Court 36 days after election day, following a lengthy legal battle.

No one knows but God himself but even he must be having doubts about his chosen one, Trump. As to why see Benji’s last sentence in above post

[Holmes_and_Watson]

47 minutes ago, benjii said:

One thing you can guarantee is that Trump will start claiming victory prematurely and start claiming misdoings by the Republican parties before half the count is even in.

Also from Sky, Trump already calling foul. A couple of podcasts saying there's behind the scenes blame games already starting up.

Donald Trump admits he could lose the election

Donald Trump has conceded there is a possibility he might lose the presidential election.

ABC's Jonathan Karl asked Mr Trump if there was a chance he could lose. The former president replied: "Yeah, I guess, you know, I guess you could lose, can lose. I mean, that happens, right?"

"But I think I have a pretty substantial lead, but, you could say, yeah, yeah, you could lose. Bad things could happen.

"You know, things happen, but it's going to be interesting," he added.

The Republican nominee also said he believes the outcome of his race against Kamala Harris will be declared tomorrow night.

Yesterday, he told a campaign rally in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, the only way he could lose would be if he was cheated, as he once again called into question the integrity of the electoral system.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

5 minutes ago, whelk said:

No one knows but God himself but even he must be having doubts about his chosen one, Trump. As to why see Benji’s last sentence in above post

Old Testament version probably isn't fussed with any of those. 🙂

[tdmickey3]

1 hour ago, benjii said:

One thing you can guarantee is that Trump will start claiming victory prematurely and start claiming misdoings by the Republican parties before half the count is even in. 

The fat, lying, raping, thieving, cunt.

Why have you just highlighted his best bits?  

Lets have the truth, tell us how bad he really is FFS

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Beeb breakdown on the areas that could see each candidate over the line.

Eyewateringly expensive

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj0jq134y91o

[Gloucester Saint]

5 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Also from Sky, Trump already calling foul. A couple of podcasts saying there's behind the scenes blame games already starting up.

Donald Trump admits he could lose the election

Donald Trump has conceded there is a possibility he might lose the presidential election.

ABC's Jonathan Karl asked Mr Trump if there was a chance he could lose. The former president replied: "Yeah, I guess, you know, I guess you could lose, can lose. I mean, that happens, right?"

"But I think I have a pretty substantial lead, but, you could say, yeah, yeah, you could lose. Bad things could happen.

"You know, things happen, but it's going to be interesting," he added.

The Republican nominee also said he believes the outcome of his race against Kamala Harris will be declared tomorrow night.

Yesterday, he told a campaign rally in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, the only way he could lose would be if he was cheated, as he once again called into question the integrity of the electoral system.

Not a coincidence either that Steve Bannon, the effective founder of MAGA, was recently released from the slammer. Fair to say that some others jailed for the violent 6 January insurrection haven’t become reformed prisoners either https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/patriot-wing-january-6-rioters-insurrectionists-jail-cell-block.html

[Gloucester Saint]

On 03/11/2024 at 11:54, Weston Super Saint said:

Plus her endorsements from huge stars with immense social media followings.

Her campaign has focused on this in the last couple of weeks which will likely give her the popular vote by quite a margin.

And high profile Republicans - the Cheneys, Arnie and many, many more https://www.cbsnews.com/news/republicans-endorsing-kamala-harris-2024/

Not to mention the Lincoln Project were formerly GOP as well.

[Hamilton Saint]

Harris and her team have run an almost flawless campaign--impressive, given the relatively brief amount of time they've had. Every tactic seems to be the correct one (not playing the race card, for example, or dwelling on the "glass ceiling" she is about to shatter).

Trump's campaign, on the other hand, (especially in the last month or so) has been a never-ending catalogue of pratfalls and strategic errors. Compare Trump's choice of VP candidate, for example, with the smart selection that Harris made.

The focus of press coverage on polling results is foolish--the majority of polls are highly suspect (tainted by a practice known as "herding"). 

The key factor is the Democratic ability to get their supporters to the polls ("pulling the vote"). Anecdotal reporting suggests the Democrats are fired up and riding a wave of enthusiasm. There is a palpable sense of momentum in their favour. And they have a huge financial advantage (the campaign has raised over a billion dollars since Harris became the candidate), funding organisation and canvassing at the local level.

Meanwhile, Trump's campaign seems to have run out of steam, and Trump himself is a much-diminished figure--physically and mentally. And his mental decline has led to alarming moments of disinhibited remarks and behaviours. To those outside the MAGA-cult, every event reinforces the fact that he is unfit for the job he is seeking.

And, more prosaically, in the US system, electors tend to lean towards the more likable candidate, and the one who exudes confidence and talks about what they will do to improve things. Trump is nothing but an endless litany of grievance and hate. 

 

Edited November 5 by Hamilton Saint

[sadoldgit]

Let us hope there are enough sane voters to keep him out of the White House.

[whelk]

So 18% of Brits want Trump to win. Saintweb poll similarish numbers in 2020. Who are these 22 cunts?

 

 

Edited November 5 by whelk

[whelk]

Not sure if true but funny if it is on Newsagents podcast said that Trump’s garbage truck stunt has largely backfired as many Puerto Rican community seeing it as Trump doubling down on the Puerto Rico ‘joke’ as many hadn’t heard of Biden’s subsequent comment

[sadoldgit]

This is what millions of Americans will be voting for…

https://www.nj.com/politics/2024/11/why-did-donald-trump-simulate-oral-sex-with-his-microphone-at-milwaukee-rally.html?outputType=amp

[tdmickey3]

28 minutes ago, whelk said:

So 18% of Brits want Trump to win. Saintweb poll similarish numbers in 2020. Who are these 22 cunts?

 

 

One of them is nutty nic

[east-stand-nic]

1 minute ago, tdmickey3 said:

One of them is nutty nic

Utter moron as ever.

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, east-stand-nic said:

Utter moron as ever.

Here is one for you nic, given that you believe that there isn’t any difference between the candidates for the next POTUS.

On a phone-in on the radio today, a caller said when given the choice between voting for a rapist and voting for a non rapist, she would vote for the non rapist every time. So there, you have your difference.

[Gloucester Saint]

The demographic to watch is non-College educated women, especially comparatively older ones. Used to vote Republican often but the group apparently breaking for Harris. Striking down Roe Vs Wade might be about to rebound on the GOP. Trump has been trapped on the issue a bit like Corbyn was with Brexit - as soon as he says anything vaguely pro-choice, the GOP fanatics and evangelicals have kicked off. 

Even if they aren’t of child bearing age any longer, they have daughters and grandchildren. And women vote more than men in America by an average of 4%.

Edited November 5 by Gloucester Saint

[badgerx16]

8 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

Utter moron as ever.

Self aware. Well done.

[RedArmy]

8 hours ago, whelk said:

So 18% of Brits want Trump to win. Saintweb poll similarish numbers in 2020. Who are these 22 cunts?

 

 

I’d be more embarrassed to admit to being one of the 77 that wanted Biden. 

[Gloucester Saint]

18 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

I’d be more embarrassed to admit to being one of the 77 that wanted Biden. 

William Hague doesn’t agree, and gets it spot on 

 

[Lighthouse]

I find it amazing that freedom loving Americans can cheer so loudly for a man who so brazenly tried to overthrow democracy itself four years ago and take the Capitol by force. Left or right, it’s mental that people will even go to the polls for a man like that and makes you realise how good we have it, relatively speaking, in the U.K.

[Gloucester Saint]

29 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I find it amazing that freedom loving Americans can cheer so loudly for a man who so brazenly tried to overthrow democracy itself four years ago and take the Capitol by force. Left or right, it’s mental that people will even go to the polls for a man like that and makes you realise how good we have it, relatively speaking, in the U.K.

Quite. Also, some of the Americans of Arabic descent saying they’ll vote for Trump because of the lack of a Gaza ceasefire - err forgotten the travel ban Trump introduced on a whole heap of Arab and Muslim nations when he first came to power?

[Lighthouse]

5 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Quite. Also, some of the Americans of Arabic descent saying they’ll vote for Trump because of the lack of a Gaza ceasefire - err forgotten the travel ban Trump introduced on a whole heap of Arab and Muslim nations when he first came to power?

Plus Trump being the man who pulled the plug on the Iranian nuclear treaty last time and sabre rattling to the point that a Ukrainian airline got shot down is hardly going to placate Tehran.

[whelk]

Sean Spicer is an obnoxious American. Kick the arrogant prick off the panel 

[Gloucester Saint]

11 minutes ago, whelk said:

Sean Spicer is an obnoxious American. Kick the arrogant prick off the panel 

Was he that Head of Media who claimed Trump had the biggest inauguration crowds ever and it was less than half full compared to Obama, Bush, Clinton and Reagan?

He should work for the skates, they also love myths and false boasting. Hopefully 🤞 he gets the same result they just got at Plymouth tonight.

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Was he that Head of Media who claimed Trump had the biggest inauguration crowds ever and it was less than half full compared to Obama, Bush, Clinton and Reagan?

He should work for the skates, they also love myths and false boasting. Hopefully 🤞 he gets the same result they just got at Plymouth tonight.

Yes the first White House Press Secretary much derided. He was just being incredibly rude to Maitlis and obviously talking BS and hated being called out for it. 

[Turkish]

13 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Let us hope there are enough sane voters to keep him out of the White House.

If trump wins I’ll be hitting the gym Thursday morning, fasting until 12, working hard during the day, taking care of things that impact my immediate sphere of influence 

If Harris wins I’ll be hitting the gym Thursday morning, fasting until 12, working hard during the day, taking care of things that impact my immediate sphere of influence 

what I won’t be doing is grizzle gutting or celebrating on an internet forum thousands of miles away about stuff I have literally zero impact In the result 

that’s your problem SOG. Maybe if you cared more about what was in front of you and not what you can’t impact then your life wouldn’t have been such a disaster 

 

Edited November 5 by Turkish

[Guided Missile]

Game, set and match.

[AlexLaw76]

So much for Harris win predictions, or it being close.

[AlexLaw76]

LBC right now…..

[tdmickey3]

The yanks are special

[Turkish]

59 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

LBC right now…..

Looking forward to the updates on here about the interesting phone ins on there 

[trousers]

Hot on the heels of Brexit, another win for the "thickos".... I wonder when the penny is going to drop in the minds of the cleverati that the more you ridicule the thickos the more they turn out to vote..? 

#youreapwhatyousow

Edited November 6 by trousers