you really think anyone in the west will ever press the button without a prior nuclear attack on them? If so your more nuts than you claim Trump to be.
I don't think anyone is saying that Donald is silly enough to pull the trigger, but it does seem fair to say the he's less inclined to a more diplomatic type approach to things, as some others. The fears being raised about him are real, they are mentioned on a daily basis, by the media at large. His merits are even discussed here by folk from the far, flung corners of the globe. He's not trusted by a large section of society, and I guess that only time will tell whether the peoples of the USA will take him to heart, or consider him too big a risk. I'm happy to go out on a limb and say that in the end, he'll finish among the cap catchers.
I may well be nuts but if you seriously think that Trump would make the government work for the rank and file then I'm in good company. I think Cyc is right, he'll be an also ran in the end.
Americans certainly do have a history of putting, on occasions, a right jackass into power? More often than not, a Republican.
I do not think he is going to win, he does not have the "real power people" on his side like Bush/Clinton and they would use the press to end his hopes if needed. Bush is the likely winner of the Rep ticket.
Trump's hair is sufficient evidence to prove him deluded, egotistical and untrustworthy. As for Farage, I have a lot of good friends who are unpredictable purple faced drunks, but I wouldn't want any of them running the country.
G'day, everyone, and a sunlit and prosperous autumn to you all. No real reason to resuscitate this thread except that it's exactly two months since the original post, and it seemed worth a quick review of progress. Which is pretty much nil. Haven't seen much to change my initial feeling that the last two standing will still (probably) be Jeb and Hillary. The Trump thing has lasted longer than I'd have expected, but I still don't regard him as a credible final party-nominee. No doubt he's very sharp, and on some issues he talks a considerable amount of sense: but he's an entrepreneur and - however successful - party machines don't like them. Entrepreneurs like making quick decisions, and knowing that their employees will jump when the boss says jump. US politics - it seems to me - is much more about building a powerbase within one of the parties and then reaching accommodations with the heavy hitters - Big Oil, Big Fruit, Big Pharma, Big Auto and so on. Ross Perot, whose billions were in actual stuff and not highly-volatile real estate, and who seemed to have a firm grasp of international and domestic ;issues, could never make any serious progress towards the White House, and I can't make The Donald better than a 33-1 shot. A couple of million people will love him and vote for him, but that won't beat the machine. As a penance, and to get inside US voters' heads, I've been watching a lot of Fox news/current events programmes. The only two things which have struck me are: * how obsessed US media, and presumably the electorate, are with trivia. Donald's hair ? Hillary's emails ? What Joe Biden may have said in 1984 ? Get over it. * how quickly Fox women journalists/commentators talk. As soon as you've processed one sentence, they're three paragraphs down the line. One thing which may change the climate is Russia's (apparently) upping the ante in the Middle East. You'd expect that, together with a heightened emphasis on the war on terror, to work for an emerging hawkish Republican. Can't actually see one (apart from Trump),but there'll be one out there somewhere who'll get a couple of retired generals on the payroll to bang the drum and roll out the guns. So, no bet yet. And the way things are moving, maybe no bet until next October.
I want Trump to get the nomination and then ask Sarah Palin to be his Vice president. They'll teach us a whole new language
My guess is not, Cyc. He's 72, his son died earlier this year, and his theme-tune at the moment is that he's not emotionally prepared to do justice to This Great Office. Against that, he rocks up at every conceivable political event and, for a man not running a campaign, he's certainly doing it energetically. General view is that he wants to make life difficult for Hillary, as part of some obscure Democrat tribal war. If he was on a racecard, you'd write 'unelectable' in the margin.
I've noticed that a little bit of Trump goes a long way. In fact I'm now completely bored of his novelty nutcase act. Surely the majority of the us electorate must feel the same way? Actually Bush appears to be the sole GOP candidate who is not certifiable, and Clinton has the Democratic gig in the bag despite all the media nonsense. It has to be Bush 3 vs Clinton 2, surely?
Shooting at a college in Oregon; thirteen killed and another twenty at least injured. Will any of the candidates, Republican or Democrat, have the guts or, in Clinton's case, the cojones to speak up for gun control?
America really are a bunch of simpletons, any idiot knows that if you allow the whole nation to have guns then on a regular basis a gun is going to fall into the hands of the latest nutter, and many people are going to be killed. You've had a lunatic sniping half of Washington and countless school, cinema and college shootings but still no one does anything about it. I know they like hunting and things like that, but you don't need guns for that, all you need is a few big dogs. Obama really should ban guns now, as he has nothing to lose seeing as he can't stand for a 3rd term. But doubt he will. I wouldn't imagine any of the new presidential candidates will take that risk and say they will ban them, as there are so many idiots in America who think they need a gun to protect there homes. But they fail to realise that if the criminals breaking in didn't have such easy access to them, then they wouldn't need them for protection either. It's just a vicious cycle that could easily be resolved by an outright ban
Having lived and worked in the US it is not that straight forward. The culture is they love their guns a bit like over here we have no interest in them we are polar opposites so can't really grasp each others ideas and feelings on the topic. A lot of Americans say they do not trust their Gov to not have guns to defend themselves from it, with the track record of invasion and being trigger happy around the world I can well agree. Also to defend themselves from each other, I can agree again but my own viewpoint is okay let people have pistols or rifles that only hold 6 bullets and not the automatic multi round ones they have now. That should be the first step. It is all down to the $$$ like everything else, guns and ammo is big business. A massive drive to eradicate as many weapons possible the world over is needed.
Very wise words Where do IS get their weapons? Or Assad's murderers? Or the rebel armies tearing central Africa apart in bloody rampage? Making machines to kill people is big business and, at the end of the day, big business is what runs the planet, not governments.
It's certainly a complex issue and any gun regulation will be vehemently opposed by the gun lobby. They will always have the Second Ammendment of the U.S Constitution on their side.
There is no shortage of simpletons over on this side of The Pond, but we tend not to brag about it. I know quite a few well educated, intelligent Americans and I only know one lady who owns a gun. One time we were shopping at an all-night supermarket in a town on the outskirts of Atlanta and there were a bunch of lads in a pickup who kept driving into the car park, leaving and returning a couple of minutes later giving the impression that they were sizing it up for some sort of skulduggery. When I mentioned this suspicious behaviour to my lady friend, she whipped her gun out of the glovebox and put it on the seat beside her just in case. Correct – big business (not the President) runs America. That is why the medical profession were so against Obama’s Medicare legislation because providing health care for the poor does not make doctors rich. Getting rid of guns would cut patient numbers so they probably do not favour repealing the 2nd Amendment. If they put former Alaska governor Sarah Palin in the White House, she would probably change the 2nd Amendment to make it the Right to Arm Bears. IS get their weapons from Iran and from a few wealthy countries in the Middle East who covertly support them. Since we (along with most Western arms manufacturing countries) sell weapons to rich Arabs, they probably get some from us indirectly. Assad gets his weapons from Russia and China; hence their continual refusal in the United Nations to back any sort of measure against his regime. In Africa the weapons come from various sources depending on which religion the militia is claiming to represent.
Well, how's about those apples? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...sidential-candidate-to-drop-out-a6706841.html
Hillary is a mortal lock for next president. There are no other credible candidates, anywhere. And while the good ol usa does appear tossuffer from collective insanity in many ways, they usually end up going for the best on offer.
