Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
johnh

Trump in charge (ex race for the US presidency thread)

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Palfy said:

When it comes down to the facts of the matter, you’re just a spectator in British politics your not a contributor, you don’t have a vote or say on the future direction of the country, so again what’s with the we business. 

Because I am a British citizen, have the right to live and work in UK, hold a British passport and spent 12 years in the Forces doing my very small bit to preserve the freedom of people such as yourself to spout the rubbish that you do.

One does not have to be resident in a country to be impacted by the events within it.

And, at 11-00pm on 31st January I shall be cracking open a bottle of champagne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RPG said:

Because I am a British citizen, have the right to live and work in UK, hold a British passport and spent 12 years in the Forces doing my very small bit to preserve the freedom of people such as yourself to spout the rubbish that you do.

One does not have to be resident in a country to be impacted by the events within it.

And, at 11-00pm on 31st January I shall be cracking open a bottle of champagne.

That’s freedom of speech and my right to express my opinion, just because it doesn’t suit your agenda tough. 
Now I’m sticking you back on ignore because you’re boring me again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Palfy said:

That’s freedom of speech and my right to express my opinion, just because it doesn’t suit your agenda tough. 
Now I’m sticking you back on ignore because you’re boring me again. 

You misunderstand dear boy. My opinion is that you speak utter tosh, but I would defend to my last breath your freedom to spout it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also like how reactionaries are still trying to claim that Brexit has something to do with sovereignty and our relationship with the EU when you can't find a single poll pre-vote where those things were registering seriously in the concerns of voters.

How many of those 17.4m (+ Reactionary Party Guru) are going to be disappointed when they realise the immigration continues, the economy is contracting and the Tory party are now New Labour 2.0.

 

image.thumb.png.6f32cc099d2ba9e74618691367013fad.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fundamental issue raised by Donald Trump is whether any means can justify an end. I have plenty of friends who believe that the thriving stock market and the possibility that abortion might be banned justifies supporting an immoral, narcissistic liar. I cannot agree, however. For me, a person's character is more important than their policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

The fundamental issue raised by Donald Trump is whether any means can justify an end. I have plenty of friends who believe that the thriving stock market and the possibility that abortion might be banned justifies supporting an immoral, narcissistic liar. I cannot agree, however. For me, a person's character is more important than their policies.

And if there policies and beliefs are equally as bad as their character then you have a Donald Trump in the making. 
Purely out of interest if someone was condoning Trump as a good leader and making a case for his policies and actions, would you feel compelled to challenge their argument or just ignore it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chach said:

I also like how reactionaries are still trying to claim that Brexit has something to do with sovereignty and our relationship with the EU when you can't find a single poll pre-vote where those things were registering seriously in the concerns of voters.

How many of those 17.4m (+ Reactionary Party Guru) are going to be disappointed when they realise the immigration continues, the economy is contracting and the Tory party are now New Labour 2.0.

 

image.thumb.png.6f32cc099d2ba9e74618691367013fad.png

Another misunderstanding by the anti brexit brigade. All brexiteers I know are not anti immigration at all. They are anti uncontrolled immigration. Big, big difference. Moving to a points based 'Australia style' system is just fine. I have experienced exactly that style of immigration myself during periods of expat work (or temporary immigration if you prefer the term) in three separate countries over a 24 year period. In each country my right to remain resident was tied to my keeping my job, and either I or my company had to pay for very expensive PHI for myself and my family so that neither I nor my family were ever a financial drain on the host country. We also have to behave. If I am sent to jail for any reason then I serve the sentence followed by immediate deportation.

It is a system that works well. It is lucrative for the expat and allows the host country to keep control of its population base. All you have to do is work hard, respect indigenous culture and obey the law. Is it really too much to expect exactly the same from those who try to move to UK?

So, to answer your questions in your last sentence;

Immigration continuing is fine provided we have more control over it and concentrate on immigrants who will be an asset to our country, agree to assimmilate and will not be a drain on our limited resources.

All indications re post brexit economy are far more positive than you suggest.

The Tory party are never going to be Labour 2.0 but I think I know where you are coming from with that comment and the levelling of the playing field between north and south and committed expenditure to NHS, police, Armed Forces etc can only be a good thing, irrespective of left or right, can't it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

The fundamental issue raised by Donald Trump is whether any means can justify an end. I have plenty of friends who believe that the thriving stock market and the possibility that abortion might be banned justifies supporting an immoral, narcissistic liar. I cannot agree, however. For me, a person's character is more important than their policies.

It depends on the environment in which you assess the means, for me.

As an example, when in the military I worked for a boss who was, outwardly, an absolute pita, always moving the goal posts and very Trump-like in his attitude. He was universally hated, knew it, and didn't appear to give a toss what other people thought of him. However, if we ever went to war, he was absolutely 100% the guy you wanted to be leading you.

Several years after I ceased working for him I learned of many good things he had done for people, quietly, behind the scenes and often at great (financial and time) expense to himself. It altered my opinion of him as a human being immensely, but, sadly, too late to do anything practical about it.

As POTUS, Trump is 'unconventional' and is not afraid to ruffle feathers and tell it how it is but is that such a bad thing? He is certainly having a positive effect on jobs, economy, immigration - all the things that we are also supposed to care highly about and he is not afraid to meet difficult issues head on. Surely that is a more effective approach than continuing to ignore a room full of elephants.

So, imho 'any means to justify an end' has to be applied differently to different situations.There will be situations when that approach is justified and others where it is not. Provided I can trust (in a leadership capacity) the judgement of a leader then I don't really care what the rest of his character is like. Whether I like him as a person or not is irrelevant.

As you mentioned character, we are also duty bound to look at the other side of the argument and examine the character of the US electorate and those non US citizens who opine on the subject. In the case of Trump he was elected in accordance with USA due process that has been deemed satisfactory for many elections so why can't those who did not vote for Trump (or the non US citizens who feel they have a right to snipe from the sidelines) demonstrate the strength of character to accept the democratic outcome of the USA's due process?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Palfy said:

And if there policies and beliefs are equally as bad as their character then you have a Donald Trump in the making. 
Purely out of interest if someone was condoning Trump as a good leader and making a case for his policies and actions, would you feel compelled to challenge their argument or just ignore it.  

If I apply your own argument back at you. Wrt USA you are just an outside observer with no vote so why do you feel entitled to comment on the leader of a country that you have no association with, yet presume to tell a British citizen that he should offer no opinion on what is happening in his own country?

Incongruous, to say the very least.

Personally, I am in favour of free speech, whether I agree with it or not.

It would appear, though, that the EU does not share the same liberal views.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Palfy said:

And if there policies and beliefs are equally as bad as their character then you have a Donald Trump in the making. 
Purely out of interest if someone was condoning Trump as a good leader and making a case for his policies and actions, would you feel compelled to challenge their argument or just ignore it.  

I challenge it - every day. Given his increasingly cult-like status, it's cost me more than a couple of friends. So be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

I challenge it - every day. Given his increasingly cult-like status, it's cost me more than a couple of friends. So be it.

It's a shame it has cost you friends. On a board like this, especially, we should be able to have diametrically opposed opinions without cutting people off.

That is a human failing (on the part of one, the other or both) imho, and not related to the subject matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RPG said:

If I apply your own argument back at you. Wrt USA you are just an outside observer with no vote so why do you feel entitled to comment on the leader of a country that you have no association with, yet presume to tell a British citizen that he should offer no opinion on what is happening in his own country?

Incongruous, to say the very least.

Personally, I am in favour of free speech, whether I agree with it or not.

It would appear, though, that the EU does not share the same liberal views.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

Oh dear I’ve obviously hit a raw nerve, it’s not my fault you never got a vote on the EU referendum yet you love to crow your a winner, and the people on here who voted to remain you took great pleasure branding them as losers.  
Also it’s not my fault you don’t get a vote in the General Election, yet you claim your a winner of that as well, have you never heard the phrase you need to be in it to win it, and you weren’t. 
Now you look after your British passport you never know you might need to come scuttling back here with your tail between your legs one day. 
I sincerely hope not for everyone’s sake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Palfy said:

Oh dear I’ve obviously hit a raw nerve, it’s not my fault you never got a vote on the EU referendum yet you love to crow your a winner, and the people on here who voted to remain you took great pleasure branding them as losers.  
Also it’s not my fault you don’t get a vote in the General Election, yet you claim your a winner of that as well, have you never heard the phrase you need to be in it to win it, and you weren’t. 
Now you look after your British passport you never know you might need to come scuttling back here with your tail between your legs one day. 
I sincerely hope not for everyone’s sake. 

No nerve hit at all Palfy.

Merely highlighting the rank hypocrisy of your position.

When 'we' beat Brighton last week, neither you nor I were on the pitch. But it is still 'we' isn't it - whether we support from within Goodison or by expensive overseas tv subscriptions!

Further, just as I don't have to be in UK to be impacted by events there, neither do I have to be in UK to influence some people's votes there. So, yes, I am very happy with the brexit vote thank you very much. I am also delighted with the landslide Tory victory in GE19 which, inter alia, will ensure that democracy is respected and brexit happens.

We may choose, one day, to live in UK. We may not. It is a decision entirely under our own control. But if we do, it will be with heads held high, no regrets and with every reason to be both proud and happy. It's nice to be in a position to have the choice. We also have other non UK, non EU, options but, for the time being, it makes excellent personal, professional and financial sense for me to remain non UK resident. But none of us can predict the future 100% can we! Being expats has certainly made our life a fantastic adventure.

It is you who doesn't like the direction UK is now headed. I am delighted with it. So are 17.4 million plus others. That doesn't mean we are unsympathetic to those who say they may be adversely affected in the short term by brexit - though the attitude of people such as yourself does not help them one iota.

Maybe you should stick to your word by putting me on ignore - and get back to your rijoca before it gets the better of you once again.

I'll have the champagne on ice for 31st January.

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RPG said:

Another misunderstanding by the anti brexit brigade. All brexiteers I know are not anti immigration at all. They are anti uncontrolled immigration. Big, big difference. Moving to a points based 'Australia style' system is just fine. I have experienced exactly that style of immigration myself during periods of expat work (or temporary immigration if you prefer the term) in three separate countries over a 24 year period. In each country my right to remain resident was tied to my keeping my job, and either I or my company had to pay for very expensive PHI for myself and my family so that neither I nor my family were ever a financial drain on the host country. We also have to behave. If I am sent to jail for any reason then I serve the sentence followed by immediate deportation.

It is a system that works well. It is lucrative for the expat and allows the host country to keep control of its population base. All you have to do is work hard, respect indigenous culture and obey the law. Is it really too much to expect exactly the same from those who try to move to UK?

So, to answer your questions in your last sentence;

Immigration continuing is fine provided we have more control over it and concentrate on immigrants who will be an asset to our country, agree to assimmilate and will not be a drain on our limited resources.

All indications re post brexit economy are far more positive than you suggest.

The Tory party are never going to be Labour 2.0 but I think I know where you are coming from with that comment and the levelling of the playing field between north and south and committed expenditure to NHS, police, Armed Forces etc can only be a good thing, irrespective of left or right, can't it.

You absolutely swerved the key part of the post where no one gave a toss about any of the things you keep claiming Brexit is about.

Immigration will continue because both sides of politics understand it's a key driver of economic growth and diversity and creativity in an economy.

A points based system is going to do nothing to alleviate the concerns of people that feel their communities are changing quicker than they would like, at least with a points based system there will be some truth to the claims "they are coming and taking our jobs" because only skilled/qualified people will be coming and they will be.

My experience of living in a points based system is all the concern about the levels of migration get projected onto very small vulnerable sections of society like asylum seekers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

The fundamental issue raised by Donald Trump is whether any means can justify an end. I have plenty of friends who believe that the thriving stock market and the possibility that abortion might be banned justifies supporting an immoral, narcissistic liar. I cannot agree, however. For me, a person's character is more important than their policies.

I'm sorry Steve but this is the kind of virtue signalling post that have our conservative friends levelling claims that the Off Topic forum is a liberal echo chamber, you've said nothing there other than that you consider your morals to be greater than others, to the point you also say you are losing real life friends over it?

That is how the left will continue to lose, in politics I am fairly sure a large proportion of the electorate hold their nose and vote for what they see as the lesser of two evils and conservatives have just as much right to do that as anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chach said:

You absolutely swerved the key part of the post where no one gave a toss about any of the things you keep claiming Brexit is about.

Immigration will continue because both sides of politics understand it's a key driver of economic growth and diversity and creativity in an economy.

A points based system is going to do nothing to alleviate the concerns of people that feel their communities are changing quicker than they would like, at least with a points based system there will be some truth to the claims "they are coming and taking our jobs" because only skilled/qualified people will be coming and they will be.

My experience of living in a points based system is all the concern about the levels of migration get projected onto very small vulnerable sections of society like asylum seekers.

My understanding is that genuine asylum seekers (as opposed to economic migrants chasing free welfare) will not have their situation changed at all - apart from possibly for the better due reduced demand on the system elsewhere allowing for more resources to be focussed on their needs.

Wrt your first para and your list; Economy came in first (I commented that it will improve post brexit), Immigration was second on your list (I commented about the points based system being an improvement) and NHS was third on your list (I commented about huge increase in post brexit spending on NHS under Johnson). So, your argument that 'noone gives a toss about what I think brexit is about' (GE19 was a second referendum by proxy) tends to unravel a bit as it actually covers the top 3 items on your own list.

There are other things of course. But if you don't believe in sovereignty and are unable or unwilling to differentiate between nationalism and patriotism then there is no point in debating those issues with you.

I sincerely believe that life in UK will be better post brexit. Others do not. That is fine. Neither of us is likely to convince the other. All I can suggest is that it would be much easier all round if those that do not agree with brexit could at least accept it is happening. We have already lost over 3 years due to dirty, underhand manoeuvres and it is, imho, time for everyone to accept the reality and embrace brexit if you welcome it or to make the best of it if you don't.

Either way, it is happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Chach said:

I'm sorry Steve but this is the kind of virtue signalling post that have our conservative friends levelling claims that the Off Topic forum is a liberal echo chamber, you've said nothing there other than that you consider your morals to be greater than others, to the point you also say you are losing real life friends over it?

That is how the left will continue to lose, in politics I am fairly sure a large proportion of the electorate hold their nose and vote for what they see as the lesser of two evils and conservatives have just as much right to do that as anyone else.

That's fine. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I've always been more of an idealist than a pragmatist. It's not that I claim to have superior morals or anything like that: I'm suggesting that the journey can be more important than the destination. How can a less compassionate leader result in a more compassionate society? How can a leader who mocks and ignores the law lead to a more just society? How can a war-monger lead to greater peace among nations? How can an intolerant narcissist encourage society to be more tolerant and inclusive? I just don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RPG said:

My understanding is that genuine asylum seekers (as opposed to economic migrants chasing free welfare) will not have their situation changed at all - apart from possibly for the better due reduced demand on the system elsewhere allowing for more resources to be focussed on their needs.

Wrt your first para and your list; Economy came in first (I commented that it will improve post brexit), Immigration was second on your list (I commented about the points based system being an improvement) and NHS was third on your list (I commented about huge increase in post brexit spending on NHS under Johnson). So, your argument that 'noone gives a toss about what I think brexit is about' (GE19 was a second referendum by proxy) tends to unravel a bit as it actually covers the top 3 items on your own list.

There are other things of course. But if you don't believe in sovereignty and are unable or unwilling to differentiate between nationalism and patriotism then there is no point in debating those issues with you.

I sincerely believe that life in UK will be better post brexit. Others do not. That is fine. Neither of us is likely to convince the other. All I can suggest is that it would be much easier all round if those that do not agree with brexit could at least accept it is happening. We have already lost over 3 years due to dirty, underhand manoeuvres and it is, imho, time for everyone to accept the reality and embrace brexit if you welcome it or to make the best of it if you don't.

Either way, it is happening.

You are literally just rambling incoherently now in the hope somewhere you accidentally address an argument.

All the modelling shows a reduction in GDP, with the economy being 6% smaller in 2030 than it would have been in the EU, if the reduction in GDP is a solitary 1% public finances will be no better off that if they had stayed in the EU.

The economy will still grow over that time though and you will claim Brexit a roaring success!

Net immigration will continue to increase as the birthrate continues to fall, the jobs will go to the smartest, most educated and hardest working people and those people will not necessarily be indigenous to the Albion of your youth.

Life will not be discernibly better and after the union breaks up and England's political clout recedes further and all the people who thought Brexit would put the globalist genie back in the bottle are either dead or in some final irony have scarpered on a retirement visa to Spain, those left will hold another referendum to Rejoin.

This is a blip, more cooperation and more union is the only answer in a modern world that has problems that do not have a national solution.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

That's fine. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I've always been more of an idealist than a pragmatist. It's not that I claim to have superior morals or anything like that: I'm suggesting that the journey can be more important than the destination. How can a less compassionate leader result in a more compassionate society? How can a leader who mocks and ignores the law lead to a more just society? How can a war-monger lead to greater peace among nations? How can an intolerant narcissist encourage society to be more intolerant and inclusive? I just don't see it.

Thats why beating Trump has to be the priority, he's not even a conservative so it should be easy if you can nominate a candidate who can speak to middle America, isn't woke enough to get drawn into the fringe of the culture wars issues and who is young enough to not die during the campaign.

For some reason that seems like a bridge too far. The best candidate is a married gay man.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/01/2020 at 13:31, Chach said:

You are literally just rambling incoherently now in the hope somewhere you accidentally address an argument.

All the modelling shows a reduction in GDP, with the economy being 6% smaller in 2030 than it would have been in the EU, if the reduction in GDP is a solitary 1% public finances will be no better off that if they had stayed in the EU.

The economy will still grow over that time though and you will claim Brexit a roaring success!

Net immigration will continue to increase as the birthrate continues to fall, the jobs will go to the smartest, most educated and hardest working people and those people will not necessarily be indigenous to the Albion of your youth.

Life will not be discernibly better and after the union breaks up and England's political clout recedes further and all the people who thought Brexit would put the globalist genie back in the bottle are either dead or in some final irony have scarpered on a retirement visa to Spain, those left will hold another referendum to Rejoin.

This is a blip, more cooperation and more union is the only answer in a modern world that has problems that do not have a national solution.

 

 

Ok, lets see shall we!

I actually agree with one point you make - more cooperation is, indeed, required. But, post brexit, that can still be done and will present additional opportunities to cooperate with countries that silly EU rules may well prevent us from so doing at the moment.

The way I describe it is that brexit isn't a destination or a solution in itself. It is an opportunity. And it is up to all of us to make the best out of that opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Palfy said:

Great your jobs done mission achieved, now do us all a favour and fuck off. 

When you dig yourself a hole Palfy, you really dig it deep don't you!

I can only guess at what might be in front of each of your eyes and obscuring your vision, but lesson 1-0-1 of debating requires you to see that he who loses his temper or resorts to foul and abusive language instantly loses credibility, respect and the argument.

Such a shame that you, apparently, still can't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/01/2020 at 20:48, StevO said:

Pete Buttigieg then?

I did this WaPo quiz and turns out I agree with Yang's policies the most (14 out of 20), Mayor Peter second (Sanders and Gabbard last with 7/20 a piece)

Interested to see what others get.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/quiz-which-candidate-agrees-with-me/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chach said:

I did this WaPo quiz and turns out I agree with Yang's policies the most (14 out of 20), Mayor Peter second (Sanders and Gabbard last with 7/20 a piece)

Interested to see what others get.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/quiz-which-candidate-agrees-with-me/

 

Capture.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chach said:

@MikeO how does that jive with what you thought before taking the test?

I didn't really have much idea about any of them to be honest, not really been enervated by it; the only thing that surprises me is that Sanders is so low. From the little I know about him, based mostly on what's been posted on here, I thought I was politically pretty aligned with him but it seems not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MikeO said:

I didn't really have much idea about any of them to be honest, not really been enervated by it; the only thing that surprises me is that Sanders is so low. From the little I know about him, based mostly on what's been posted on here, I thought I was politically pretty aligned with him but it seems not.

Yeah same, I wouldn't have picked me putting him last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got Bloomberg 10 and Biden 9, none of which makes much sense to me. 
Besides being a dick which I know before anyone says, am I more of a Democrat or Republican honest answers only please. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Chach said:

I did this WaPo quiz and turns out I agree with Yang's policies the most (14 out of 20), Mayor Peter second (Sanders and Gabbard last with 7/20 a piece)

Interested to see what others get.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/quiz-which-candidate-agrees-with-me/

 

I had Yang as well, but I'm not surprised. I've been a fan of his, and he's actually my first choice even though I doubt he'll come close to getting the nomination. 

Also had Buttigieg/Biden close second at 10/20.

Edit: I had Sanders last with 6/20 and Warren/Gabbard second last at 7/20. I'm kind of surprised by that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Palfy said:

I got Bloomberg 10 and Biden 9, none of which makes much sense to me. 
Besides being a dick which I know before anyone says, am I more of a Democrat or Republican honest answers only please. 

bloomberg is a rich guy, so are you.  shoe fits ;)  i think you are a lefty Palfy, i would say you are more left than democrats are (obama was pretty centrist), so a Sanders or Green party might be more your thing.  But the green party here is non existent, just Dems and Repubs sadly, so you're a dem.

 

the thing is the questions are put in a way where you they are kinda the outlier opinion of most of these candidates.  universal income is only yang, but it gives you yes or no, most would say yes, that's a Yang and no for everyone else.  It's a more nuanced issue than that.  

 

But overall fun quiz, thanks for posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, markjazzbassist said:

bloomberg is a rich guy, so are you.  shoe fits ;)  i think you are a lefty Palfy, i would say you are more left than democrats are (obama was pretty centrist), so a Sanders or Green party might be more your thing.  But the green party here is non existent, just Dems and Repubs sadly, so you're a dem.

 

the thing is the questions are put in a way where you they are kinda the outlier opinion of most of these candidates.  universal income is only yang, but it gives you yes or no, most would say yes, that's a Yang and no for everyone else.  It's a more nuanced issue than that.  

 

But overall fun quiz, thanks for posting.

Thanks 🙏 mate I feel pleased  that my political views as a left of centre person are the same in America as here, it’s good to be Democrat I can recommend it to all republicans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sibdane said:

I had Yang as well, but I'm not surprised. I've been a fan of his, and he's actually my first choice even though I doubt he'll come close to getting the nomination. 

Also had Buttigieg/Biden close second at 10/20.

Edit: I had Sanders last with 6/20 and Warren/Gabbard second last at 7/20. I'm kind of surprised by that.

 

We're must be quite politically aligned then, so on that basis (if you're not already familiar) I recommend this podcast which I can't get enough off :) Outstanding guests and analysis. He's a German political scientist but based in US.

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-good-fight/id1198765424

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Initial reports that today's 'accident' was a civilian B737 crash are now starting to look incorrect.

Claims now that the downed aircraft is a Bombardier 11A used by US Forces for surveillance. Aircraft went down South West of Kabul in a strong Taliban area.

I wonder how Trump might react if the aircraft was brought down rather than suffered an accident. Early days yet, of course, but worth monitoring.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51264744

Edited to add: Just seen a video of the downed aircraft. Definitely a military surveillance aircraft but looks like a forced landing while on fire rather than a shoot down.

Hope the crew got out and have been recovered safely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently part of the wall got toppled by high winds (which is encouraging!) and they’ve also found a really sophisticated tunnel recently. These pieces of news made me happy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matt said:

Apparently part of the wall got toppled by high winds (which is encouraging!) and they’ve also found a really sophisticated tunnel recently. These pieces of news made me happy. 

it was always going to be.  a wall will stop nothing and has stopped nothing.  you need to go to the heart of the issue which is US/European influence in latin america dating back to bolivar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chach said:

Bloomberg slips into 3rd.

One thing I like about this guy is he makes Trump look like a pauper which is what Trump is uber sensitive about.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-democrats-poll/movin-on-up-bloomberg-glides-past-warren-to-no-3-in-democratic-race-reuters-ipsos-idUSKBN1ZT30A

He has grown insanely fast the last few weeks. I'm seeing his ads everywhere (youtube, TV, etc.). He's a bit more center so not surprised he's getting some of the independents. From what I know of him he seems to have done a good job when mayor of New York City. 

Also, I just read where he's worth almost $61 billion. Trump must absolutely hate that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sibdane said:

He has grown insanely fast the last few weeks. I'm seeing his ads everywhere (youtube, TV, etc.). He's a bit more center so not surprised he's getting some of the independents. From what I know of him he seems to have done a good job when mayor of New York City. 

Also, I just read where he's worth almost $61 billion. Trump must absolutely hate that. 

He’s worth more than U.K. 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Chach said:

The longer Bernie is in the race the less chance we have of winning.

Agreed. I like him well enough, but I feel he's too far left for the current political climate over here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/02/2020 at 17:04, MikeO said:

Powerful stuff.

 

Bernie Sanders would be the Democrats' Jeremy Corbyn. Because of some of the things he's done in the past (such as praise Venezuela's Hugo Chavez), he would be unelectable - the easiest candidate to defeat in an election. Sad but true. At this point, I don't see a viable candidate, and I fear that big money will once again come into play (Michael Bloomberg).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

Bernie Sanders would be the Democrats' Jeremy Corbyn. Because of some of the things he's done in the past (such as praise Venezuela's Hugo Chavez), he would be unelectable - the easiest candidate to defeat in an election. Sad but true. At this point, I don't see a viable candidate, and I fear that big money will once again come into play (Michael Bloomberg).

This seems to be the Democrats on-going problem.  The above could have been written about Hilary (and probably was).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Chach said:

People who want to defeat Trump.

none of them are in a great position to beat Trump, but Sanders is better than most.  He has a lot of similar positions to Trump on things like free trade, manufacturing, US jobs, the things that the blue collar workers voted for Trump for.  I'd argue he's the best candidate of who the democrats have.  Neo- Liberalism is not the answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

none of them are in a great position to beat Trump, but Sanders is better than most.  He has a lot of similar positions to Trump on things like free trade, manufacturing, US jobs, the things that the blue collar workers voted for Trump for.  I'd argue he's the best candidate of who the democrats have.  Neo- Liberalism is not the answer. 

Sanders represents old style socialism and that is the platform they will fight him on.

Liberalism is the only answer, the sooner the left get that in their head the sooner they'll start winning again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Chach said:

Sanders represents old style socialism and that is the platform they will fight him on.

Liberalism is the only answer, the sooner the left get that in their head the sooner they'll start winning again.

I agree with what I think you mean but 2 things;

1) socialism doesn’t truly exist at the moment 

2) definitions of basically all sides have been simplified to such an extent that they’ve become nonsense / labels for people to affiliate themselves too. 

for example, I’m apparently a right wing centralist liberal according to my beliefs purely because I’ve got a range of opinions. But that doesn’t fit in with the media and the “easy to understand”, or “woke” ( :lol: ) times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Matt said:

I agree with what I think you mean but 2 things;

1) socialism doesn’t truly exist at the moment 

2) definitions of basically all sides have been simplified to such an extent that they’ve become nonsense / labels for people to affiliate themselves too. 

for example, I’m apparently a right wing centralist liberal according to my beliefs purely because I’ve got a range of opinions. But that doesn’t fit in with the media and the “easy to understand”, or “woke” ( :lol: ) times. 

1) The idea of socialism exists and its not an election winner in any western democracy, this is demonstrably true, its a demonstrable failure and I'm not sure how many times we have to run the experiment before we realise that it doesn't correlate with human nature.

2) Identifying as left wing doesn't mean you have to have all left wing positions if you understand that human culture is diverse. If people who identify as progressive haven't been made a little bit more conservative by Trump, Brexit, what's going on in Eastern Europe, Brazil. Turkey etc then I would argue they're not really progressive. They're just the other end of the reactionary spectrum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...