Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Would You Vote Trump?

Recommended Posts

As Trump now seems to have secured the nomination to stand for President, would you vote for him?

I'm not sure what I would do if I was in the US, Hilary seems mired in Libya. Don't really know enough about Sanders. Trump was born with a silver spoon and appears to have ridden his luck well but on some area's seems a complete loon, but on others clearly spouts pure populism. His tag line of making America win again on the surface is pure genius.

So would you vote Trump if he was an election choice? I honestly don't know and I'm not certain he really would bring much of a change anyway despite his rhetoric.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah F'kin A.

USA! USA! USA!

They have just had the worst president in the history of the USA, for like ever. How bad could he be? What's he going to do, start a race war in his own country? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talked to a British friend of mine who lives in the States on FB on the night Kaisch dropped out, he seemed to think Hilary had it in the bag. It surprised me and i reminded him that history would need to be made again with a first ever Female President of the United States.

He quipped that Bill would be First Lady.

NB: Also both Hilary & Trump will be the oldest ever POTUS's which ever one wins it.

& Yes i would vote trump i like it when walls get built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why i suspect one or both candidates may step down and offer up a running mate before November.

What would the situation be in this event? being as the people have already voted directly for Hilary & Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump pro's

He's not Clinton

War with Russia off the cards

Not politically correct/beholden to islam

Con's

He's probably all talk, no trousers

He wants to spend MORE on the military, so presumably will continue to ****** up the middle east.

As the Abortion invtervew showed, he's not all principle, a populist when pressed.

But, hes still not clnton.

id have rather Perot done this in the 90s though, or Buchanan in 2000, or Ron Paul. Trump does seem a loose cannon. But still not clinton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching You've Been Trumped...absolutely not...nasty bullyboy who intimidates and threatens....Comes over as an arsole, and sulks when he can't get his own way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I would not vote for Trump because at heart I think he is a just another dodgy Yank billionaire exploiting the problems of ordinary U.S. citizens for his own aggrandizement but neither would I vote for Hilary Clinton as an alternative since I think she is simply an establishment goon batting for the one percenters. If Trump did actually manage to get any of his manifesto policies through Congress then I do n't see your average U.S. man in the street would be any worse off than they are now. The fact that some Sanders supporters may well switch to vote for Trump in November tells you all you need to know about what some U.S. Democrats think about their own party leadership. Anyway as we are not American voters no U.S. politician gives a toss how we would vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching You've Been Trumped...absolutely not...nasty bullyboy who intimidates and threatens....Comes over as an arsole, and sulks when he can't get his own way...

Agreed but Anthony Baxter and Montrose Pictures who made the film are locals whose sympathies obviously lie with those who opposed Trumps proposed development so it is not exactly a balanced documentary is it.

Is Trump any more of a meglomaniac or ruthless businessman than Ross Perot who would probably have forced all Muslims to shave off their beards if he had become President ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Health might become a factor.

Blimey, I suspect you could probably find more examples of my coughing over the space of 8 years. That is an acute rather than chronic cough. If she had a persistent slight cough which turned up in practically every public appearance then I think there would be more cause to worry.

Re: the poll. Trump v Sanders - Sanders. Trump v Clinton - abstain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, probably. There is something repellant about him, though, I can barely watch him for more than 5 secs.

Would you vote for Alan Sugar, or Phillip Green, against identicit clones like Cameron, Burnham, Clegg. Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I talked to a British friend of mine who lives in the States on FB on the night Kaisch dropped out, he seemed to think Hilary had it in the bag. It surprised me and i reminded him that history would need to be made again with a first ever Female President of the United States.

He quipped that Bill would be First Lady.

NB: Also both Hilary & Trump will be the oldest ever POTUS's which ever one wins it.

& Yes i would vote trump i like it when walls get built.

Hillary Clinton does not have this in the bag, not by a long shot. This is going to be a very interesting election.

I'm an American, so I'll vote in the election this year. I have never voted for a Republican in my entire life, but I might vote for Trump. Most of my family in the US are the same -- life-long Democrats who will find it very difficult to vote for Hillary. The fact that so many Democrats will be tempted to vote for such a complete buffoon like Trump goes to show how deep the problems are for Clinton. She has the highest negative ratings of any presidential candidate in the past 40 years (other than Trump). The Clintons left the White House in 2000 having followed a very short-term strategy -- the Marc Rich pardon, an economy based on the tech bubble, repeal of Glass-Steagal, DOMA, etc. But now, sitting on top of their billion dollar private foundation, they want to pretend that it's all just water under the bridge. Obama turned out to be change you couldn't believe in, and Hillary isn't even promising that. It will just be the same old rich insiders using Washington corruption to make themselves even richer at the expense of the country as a whole.

At the same time, I would never publicly admit that I would vote for Trump. I know people who work or have worked for Hillary, and it would cause real problems if they knew I wasn't voting for her. The Democratic Party has morphed into the party of the upper middle class in the US while still considering itself the champion of the working people. This election might very well bring about the reckoning of the new reality with that delusional self-image, and it might get very ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, probably. There is something repellant about him, though, I can barely watch him for more than 5 secs.

Would you vote for Alan Sugar, or Phillip Green, against identicit clones like Cameron, Burnham, Clegg. Probably not.

The more apt comparison is a choice between Alan Sugar and Cherie Blair. Who would you vote for in that scenario?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary Clinton does not have this in the bag, not by a long shot. This is going to be a very interesting election.

I'm an American, so I'll vote in the election this year. I have never voted for a Republican in my entire life, but I might vote for Trump. Most of my family in the US are the same -- life-long Democrats who will find it very difficult to vote for Hillary. The fact that so many Democrats will be tempted to vote for such a complete buffoon like Trump goes to show how deep the problems are for Clinton. She has the highest negative ratings of any presidential candidate in the past 40 years (other than Trump). The Clintons left the White House in 2000 having followed a very short-term strategy -- the Marc Rich pardon, an economy based on the tech bubble, repeal of Glass-Steagal, DOMA, etc. But now, sitting on top of their billion dollar private foundation, they want to pretend that it's all just water under the bridge. Obama turned out to be change you couldn't believe in, and Hillary isn't even promising that. It will just be the same old rich insiders using Washington corruption to make themselves even richer at the expense of the country as a whole.

At the same time, I would never publicly admit that I would vote for Trump. I know people who work or have worked for Hillary, and it would cause real problems if they knew I wasn't voting for her. The Democratic Party has morphed into the party of the upper middle class in the US while still considering itself the champion of the working people. This election might very well bring about the reckoning of the new reality with that delusional self-image, and it might get very ugly.

I'd say that the labour party has done the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that the labour party has done the same

Yeah, funny thing that. Walking around Cambridge (and bedford actually, where I found myself for an auction) before last years elections the odd thing I noticed was ALL the big old steamer houses near the centre of both places had Labour placards. The public sector fat cats are the only ones rich enough to live in such places perhaps.

Interesting though that the only group hillary has consistently got is the over $200k earners.

The people who have it good, the people who like the status quo and dont like change. Its not women Clinton is consistently getting, or boomers, or the LGBTs, its the top couple of percent.

Labour didnt get a look in, but during Carswells UKIP defection in Clacton, I noticed Clacton (poor, older than average, but not a complete OAP concentration camp) was full of UKIP posters, Frinton (basically 100% rich retiree population) full of tory ones.

I really think the working class labour vote should be up for grabs. People call Corbyn 'old labour', but he's really not. Old labour is pre 1970s, class issues, economic issues, not much else, and staffed largely by people who once did hard work and moved up through the unions. Corbyn is more 'wedge labour', that odd period between the 1970s and 1994 when it was defined by inner city kooks more bothered about race issues and foreign policy issues (first apartheid, later Islam and Israel), and populated by what are in effect perennial students and lawyers. I have trouble believing that your average footy watching, beer drinking, darts playing northern voter is really that bothered about the middle east. And yet Labour seem to talk about little else nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/06/donald-trumps-idea-to-cut-national-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html

Trump raises prospect of defaulting on US debt.

House price crash guaranteed if that happens.

Reading that actually, its hardly controversial stuff. Surely any legit president would consider all options if they were in such a position. Odd how currency debasement (sorry, QE) that effects those least able to weather inflation (ie, those without assets, the poorest) we can discuss (well, discuss how much) but haircuts that can be targeted at the richest, cant discuss that.

Once again, the media has simply illustrated their hostility to speaking about the unspeakable. Debate must be constrained to a few, narrow, pre-approved topics. I thank Trump for showing us this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary Clinton does not have this in the bag, not by a long shot. This is going to be a very interesting election.

I'm an American, so I'll vote in the election this year. I have never voted for a Republican in my entire life, but I might vote for Trump. Most of my family in the US are the same -- life-long Democrats who will find it very difficult to vote for Hillary. The fact that so many Democrats will be tempted to vote for such a complete buffoon like Trump goes to show how deep the problems are for Clinton. She has the highest negative ratings of any presidential candidate in the past 40 years (other than Trump). The Clintons left the White House in 2000 having followed a very short-term strategy -- the Marc Rich pardon, an economy based on the tech bubble, repeal of Glass-Steagal, DOMA, etc. But now, sitting on top of their billion dollar private foundation, they want to pretend that it's all just water under the bridge. Obama turned out to be change you couldn't believe in, and Hillary isn't even promising that. It will just be the same old rich insiders using Washington corruption to make themselves even richer at the expense of the country as a whole.

At the same time, I would never publicly admit that I would vote for Trump. I know people who work or have worked for Hillary, and it would cause real problems if they knew I wasn't voting for her. The Democratic Party has morphed into the party of the upper middle class in the US while still considering itself the champion of the working people. This election might very well bring about the reckoning of the new reality with that delusional self-image, and it might get very ugly.

Well, I've had several friends who live in America say that if Trump wins they won't be going into any ethnically diverse areas for a couple of weeks, due to a percieved risk of backlash against whites.

Look at the violence caused by left wings at Trumps rallies, and imagine that rage after the loss of the Whitehouse to Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, funny thing that. Walking around Cambridge (and bedford actually, where I found myself for an auction) before last years elections the odd thing I noticed was ALL the big old steamer houses near the centre of both places had Labour placards. The public sector fat cats are the only ones rich enough to live in such places perhaps.

Interesting though that the only group hillary has consistently got is the over $200k earners.

The people who have it good, the people who like the status quo and dont like change. Its not women Clinton is consistently getting, or boomers, or the LGBTs, its the top couple of percent.

Labour didnt get a look in, but during Carswells UKIP defection in Clacton, I noticed Clacton (poor, older than average, but not a complete OAP concentration camp) was full of UKIP posters, Frinton (basically 100% rich retiree population) full of tory ones.

I really think the working class labour vote should be up for grabs. People call Corbyn 'old labour', but he's really not. Old labour is pre 1970s, class issues, economic issues, not much else, and staffed largely by people who once did hard work and moved up through the unions. Corbyn is more 'wedge labour', that odd period between the 1970s and 1994 when it was defined by inner city kooks more bothered about race issues and foreign policy issues (first apartheid, later Islam and Israel), and populated by what are in effect perennial students and lawyers. I have trouble believing that your average footy watching, beer drinking, darts playing northern voter is really that bothered about the middle east. And yet Labour seem to talk about little else nowadays.

You have absolutely nailed where Corbyn is coming from in that post and that is precisely why Labour's performance north of Watford was so lacklustre in the local elections last week. He is just as much blinded by his own metropolitan view of politics as any Blairite. Labour are not going to recover the lost voters in Scotland, Wales or the North East with agit prop manifesto and tired sloganeering about Middle East issues that they can do nothing to resolve even if they are in government. I have seen Corbyns ilk increasingly influential in certain Trade Unions in the UK as well in recent decades who spend all their time campaigning about Black Sections and LBGT issues while their sub paying union members regardless of race, colour or creed all get made redundant or don't receive a pay rise for years. It as though they have forgotten that socialism is meant to be about economic and social issues that impact everyone not just race and sexual political struggles of certain groups. I would add that the Tories have similar issues with keeping contact with the aspirations of their own voters as some of the recent government U turns on certain policies have revealed. The strength of the Conservatives in the UK has generally been their pragmatism and lack of dogmatism but sometimes Cameron's government has behaved in ways which seem equally ideologically driven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the same time, I would never publicly admit that I would vote for Trump. I know people who work or have worked for Hillary, and it would cause real problems if they knew I wasn't voting for her.

I would argue they were people not worth knowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mafia have been running the States since the goons got wildly rich during prohibition.

Funny, when I was watching Peaky Blinders the other night I found myself wondering if the time when it was set was about the same time as the Kennedy clan began to buy respectability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   91 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.