Donald Trump

[Jon Guy]

Hi Jon I'm not convinced at all by that. There were also several other lies about immigration that clearly swung things in favour of Brexit.

Hi John

This is all regarding the campaign, and not the actual democratic process of the referendum.

Most of the people I know who made their referendum decision based on immigration didn`t need facts and figures to influence their decision as they have their own first hand first hand experience.

Also, the terrorists currently shuttling around the open borders of Europe probably played a part in people making their decision.

[GUT]

But he says that was where he was writing it.

Strange man.

[ChrisGeorge]

Trump tweeted out this rather odd photograph of him supposedly writing the inaugural speech. It turns out the photo was taken for some reason in the concierge area of his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida.

[John Wheat]

Hi John

True, some interesting facts were bandied about. But, were voters really persuaded by some of the so called facts ? These facts were questioned and called out by the opposing side before the actual referendum. We all knew the NHS £350 million a day or whatever it was, was a load of bollocks.
In fact, one could argue that without these exaggerated facts from the leave campaign, the result may have been even more in favour of the leave campaign.

Hi Jon I'm not convinced at all by that. There were also several other lies about immigration that clearly swung things in favour of Brexit.

[Pcdunn]

This inauguration has polarized the country, even to the extent that performers or fashion designers who choose to support (or not support) the event are being called out in social media. A Rockette who objected to the event is now an ex-Rockette, for instance.

I've been around over 60 years, and have never seen so much uproar and nastiness over a simple thing like getting a new President. I've even slipped up myself, and said things I later regretted.

I find Mr. Trump personifies the "ugly American", and is a unrepentant satyrist. BUT-- he's going to be the President of the United States, and we need to calm down about all of this.

I think President Obama was right when he said, "We're gonna be all right."
Yeah, we will. America has come through many times worse than this. She's a strong old gal, and she's gonna bounce back.

Still-- I hope there's good security in Washington come Friday.

[sdreid]

Trump gave John Lewis a wedgie and scared him away from the inauguration.

[Patrick S]

No, if you recall, it was Trump who was talking about vote rigging, which he would have shouted out even more loudly if he had lost. I don't think there was any actual vote rigging, in other words, I believe that the actual election voting was clean. But then there's the Russian hacking and Trump's denigration of both the Democratic candidate and, before that, all of his Republican rivals. I also do get about Trump's message of change speaking to the electorate, but can't help but think that his supporters were duped by a master showman and charlatan.

Best regards

Chris

Well. I agree that Trump's a charlatan. Master showman? Eh. It was entertaining. But, it was a pretty bad show, I think. I think he won in spite of himself.

I don't think the "Russian" hacking had much of an affect. I also don't think anyone (save the lowest common denominator types among the electorate) actually voted FOR Trump because of what came out of his mouth. None of that was substantive and some of it was pretty nonsensical. He was viewed - correctly - by many as someone who had spent his adult life outside our fetid political swamp and they reckoned that someone like that was better than Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton.

I also think that the electorate - again correctly - perceived Cruz and Clinton as they are: political animals that would have their own mothers arrested to be elected President of the United States...and then have them publicly executed to be RE-elected. Thus, in the end they were both doomed from the outset of their respective match-ups against Trump.

All he had to do was be what the other candidates were not: PERCEIVED as genuine, unscripted, the polar opposite. If at some point he'd have assimilated, begun acting more "presidential" or started giving more structured, statesman-like speeches during either campaign he'd have likely lost. People WANTED "the other". They wanted the guy that you don't need a political-speak translator to discover what his words actually mean. They wanted a guy who is not going to get along with ANYONE because they want him to tear EVERYTHING down. In my view, that's one thing the electorate got right: Washington is corrupt, ineffective, and will NEVER change...unless a first-rate a-hole with nothing to lose has a chance to breakup as much of it as he can before he gets tossed in four years (which he will).

Of course, do not lose sight of the fact that Hillary Clinton was a horrible candidate, possibly the worst candidate ever to run a general election campaign. Her problem were compounded by the fact that Americans were ready to move on from the Clintons, the Bushes, the political families that never seem to go away. She was a demonstrable liar. But, her main problem was that she was arrogant, and that made her sloppy, which made her lies harder and harder to sell. Americans know politicians are liars and cheats with no allegiance to the PEOPLE they are elected to serve. The Clintons ruined the fantasy. They killed our suspension of disbelief. They showed how the sausage was made. They - Bill and Hillary (and let's face it, they are one and the same) - have lied to our collective faces for decades and reacted with outrage and accusation at the mere suggestion that they are not some breed of altruistic savior sent to deliver our world to a higher plane of existence. The veneer had worn off. The myth was exposed. So we get Trump......and we'll live.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Chris

In my opinion, if, as you say, the actual election voting was clean , then it was a democratic process.

The people aren`t stupid. We all know that 99.9% of politicians are greasy lying bastards. The fact that Trump was elected, with all his faults says a lot, in my opinion.

Of course Trump's election also speaks to Hillary's flaws. There would have been no last minute email enquiry by the FBI if she had not used her own private server and destroyed all those emails.

[Jon Guy]

No, if you recall, it was Trump who was talking about vote rigging, which he would have shouted out even more loudly if he had lost. I don't think there was any actual vote rigging, in other words, I believe that the actual election voting was clean. But then there's the Russian hacking and Trump's denigration of both the Democratic candidate and, before that, all of his Republican rivals. I also do get about Trump's message of change speaking to the electorate, but can't help but think that his supporters were duped by a master showman and charlatan.

Best regards

Chris

Hi Chris

In my opinion, if, as you say, the actual election voting was clean , then it was a democratic process.

The people aren`t stupid. We all know that 99.9% of politicians are greasy lying bastards. The fact that Trump was elected, with all his faults says a lot, in my opinion.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Chris

Unless there was vote rigging, it was a democratic process.

No, if you recall, it was Trump who was talking about vote rigging, which he would have shouted out even more loudly if he had lost. I don't think there was any actual vote rigging, in other words, I believe that the actual election voting was clean. But then there's the Russian hacking and Trump's denigration of both the Democratic candidate and, before that, all of his Republican rivals. I also do get about Trump's message of change speaking to the electorate, but can't help but think that his supporters were duped by a master showman and charlatan.

Best regards

Chris

[Karl]

Well. It had to happen... 15 women accuse Donald Trump of grabbing, kissing, or otherwise sexually assaulting them-- one was a magazine writer interviewing him about his marriage. Respect for women, DT? In a pig's eye...

http://www.vox.com/2016/10/12/132652...sexual-assault

This is part of a phenomenon I don't quite trust... It seems that when a celebrity has been accused by one woman, several more will follow suit. The last case I can think of which was similar to this is Bill Cosby. Of course, there's the adage that where there's smoke there's fire, but I do not take the accusations at face value. However, the rape allegation levelled against Trump by his ex-wife Ivana in the early '90s is pretty common knowledge, and worthy of scrutiny. And although she never chose to press charges, the argument made by Trump's lawyer in an attempt to counter the accusation was perhaps more damning than the accusation itself: He argued that it was legally impossible for a husband to rape his wife. No denial of the events in question, just a statement that one couldn't call it rape - because they were married.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Jon

I'm not sure that Trump's victory was democracy at work either. Not if democracy at work entails running one of the dirtiest name-calling campaigns ever, and getting an unpredictable president who is now going to be inhabiting 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and numerous U.S. and international Trump properties in coming years (and there's no conflict there????). Trump is simply in a category by himself. If you think Trump can't be a worse president than George W. Bush, prepare to be educated.

Best regards

Chris

Hi Chris

Unless there was vote rigging, it was a democratic process.

[Pcdunn]

Well. It had to happen... 15 women accuse Donald Trump of grabbing, kissing, or otherwise sexually assaulting them-- one was a magazine writer interviewing him about his marriage. Respect for women, DT? In a pig's eye...

http://www.vox.com/2016/10/12/13265206/trump-accusations-sexual-assault

[ChrisGeorge]

No, no ... Abby
This thread is hilarious.
Don`t leave
From a British perspective, it`s interesting to see what you guys think of the Donald.

Personally, I think the result (like Brexit) is democracy at work.
Trump can`t be as bad as George Bush jnr, and if it doesn`t work, then no-one will ever be able to do what Trump just did, and the career politicians will resume maintaining the status quo, good or bad.

Hi Jon

I'm not sure that Trump's victory was democracy at work either. Not if democracy at work entails running one of the dirtiest name-calling campaigns ever, and getting an unpredictable president who is now going to be inhabiting 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and numerous U.S. and international Trump properties in coming years (and there's no conflict there????). Trump is simply in a category by himself. If you think Trump can't be a worse president than George W. Bush, prepare to be educated.

Best regards

Chris

[Jon Guy]

Interesting post Jon. However Brexit was not democracy at work those politicians in favour of Brexit told several outright lies that I suggest had not been told and believed by many Brexit wouldn't have happened. As I said in a previous post I am considerably more concerned with Brexit and May's deceitful government than I am Trump. The USA political system is sensibly structured so that although the President is the most powerful person in the World they are generally not able to force through policies that no one else agrees with the same cannot be said for the British Prime Minister who has more room to manoeuvre as regards national politics. If her main Ministers agree with something it is likely it will happen.

Hi John

True, some interesting facts were bandied about. But, were voters really persuaded by some of the so called facts ? These facts were questioned and called out by the opposing side before the actual referendum. We all knew the NHS £350 million a day or whatever it was, was a load of bollocks.
In fact, one could argue that without these exaggerated facts from the leave campaign, the result may have been even more in favour of the leave campaign.