Donald Trump Enters 2016 Presidential Race

[bee]

.

Oh and more on topic - that Trump chap seems to be causing a kerfuffle over the pond -

Like Jeremy Corbyn is over here.....

But I think the comparison probably ends there...

.

[Tiggs]

I don't believe that he is -

But are you saying that none of them are?

No. Just not the one in question.

[Tiggs]

Oh and more on topic - that Trump chap seems to be causing a kerfuffle over the pond -

Like Jeremy Corbyn is over here.....

But I think the comparison probably ends there....

They're polar opposites - both politically and socially.

We've definitely wandered off topic. To help get us back - here are a couple of GOP strategists claiming that The Donald won't end up being the nominee.

[Space Commander Travis]

Who said this? “Tough action is needed to ensure that people in Libya can lead their lives without fear and with access to the basic needs of life. That is what the Security Council requires, that is what we are seeking to deliver.”

That's right. D. Cameron, March 2011. You really couldn't make it up could you.

You really consider that policy to have been a success, Tiggs?

[Tiggs]

Who said this? “Tough action is needed to ensure that people in Libya can lead their lives without fear and with access to the basic needs of life. That is what the Security Council requires, that is what we are seeking to deliver.”

That's right. D. Cameron, March 2011. You really couldn't make it up could you.

You really consider that policy to have been a success, Tiggs?

I don't think I've ever seen a successful Cameron policy.

[bee]

They're polar opposites - both politically and socially.

yeah, I know...

Who said this? “Tough action is needed to ensure that people in Libya can lead their lives without fear and with access to the basic needs of life. That is what the Security Council requires, that is what we are seeking to deliver.”

That's right. D. Cameron, March 2011. You really couldn't make it up could you.

You really consider that policy to have been a success, Tiggs?

No - you really couldn't make it up - it is an utter and total embarrassment and source of shame what Cameron

and Hague et al did to Libya -

Which was a Direct Democracy anyway and not a dictatorship....

Imagine actually being responsible or at the least partly responsible for destroying a country and the lives of more

or less everyone in the country -

And on top of that being partly responsible for the migrant situation coming through Libya from the rest of Africa...

You would have to be very thick skinned to cope with all that......and in denial as well, I suppose....

[Phaeton80]

I must have missed the news report of the Israeli's using snipers from helicopters firing on their own citizens indiscriminately.

No, they used snipers, tanks, missile barrages and phosphor bombs on foreign - occupied - civilians indiscriminately. But these were Palestinians, the people you have been drilled to view as sub human, quintessential terrorists. And they are Israeli's; the people you have been drilled to view as the quintessential victims. Thats the main difference here.

Not that it matters in this specific discussion (because Qadhafi was a criminal no matter what angle you look at it) but regarding the supposed indiscriminate sniper fire on Libian civilians to stifle dissent; the Qadhafi regime was being undermined from all sides at that point, wouldnt be surprised at all if it was (at least partly) fomented externally. Like the coup attempt against Chavez back in the day. In any case, if anyone thinks the socalled Arab Spring was largely initiated from nationals acting on behalf of the local population, you'd probably want to think again.

Lets not forget, Libya was one of if not the most developed and well organised African nations. A stark contrast of what is left of her now; a literal terrorist breedingground for decades to come. We should pat ourselves on the shoulder for a job well done. Military expenditure levels are safe across the board, because the world is all but. The whole region has been destabilized, and the West is the conscious culprit.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Phaeton80

[Space Commander Travis]

Well, returning to the topic of the Thread, from which we've diverged quite impressively, the question that's on everybody's lips is, can anyone trump Trump? Watch this space!

[Space Commander Travis]

* If you look up "Trump" on Google, donaldjtrump.com gets a question mark from Norton and says "untested". I think this is very true. At least it doesn't say "Not Trusted", which is something I suppose,a t least.

[Yamato]

Well, returning to the topic of the Thread, from which we've diverged quite impressively, the question that's on everybody's lips is, can anyone trump Trump? Watch this space!

How is Donald Trump relevant to US foreign policy? Read the title of this thread.

[Tiggs]

But these were Palestinians, the people you have been drilled to view as sub human, quintessential terrorists.

And yet - I'm still Pro-Palestine.

Not that it matters in this specific discussion (because Qadhafi was a criminal no matter what angle you look at it) but regarding the supposed indiscriminate sniper fire on Libian civilians to stifle dissent; the Qadhafi regime was being undermined from all sides at that point, wouldnt be surprised at all if it was (at least partly) fomented externally.

It's not the first time the Libyan government have fired on unarmed protesters.

Back on topic - apparently 57% of Republicans believe that Trump will be the eventual Presidential candidate.

[Phaeton80]

Whats the view you and those around you have concering mr. Trump?

Does anyone have any idea what sort of profile - creed of people - are cheering this guy on? Is there a generic profile, or are people supporting this moron across the board.. Someone enlighten a curious Dutchman.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Phaeton80

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Whats the view you and those around you have concering mr. Trump?

Does anyone have any idea what sort of profile - creed of people - are cheering this guy on? Is there a generic profile, or are people supporting this moron across the board.. Someone enlighten a curious Dutchman.

Firstly, hello and long time no see, mon amis, Phaeton. And hello's to Yamato, Tiggs as well. Now, what people don't understand about Trump is his brilliance and his way of knowing what to say, about who, and when to say it, in order to get free publicity that has propelled him into the lead in the poles. Donald trump could care LESS about McCain and his war exploits and whether or not McCain is a war hero, and Trump could really care less about fat-azz Rosey O'Donnell, PERIOD. BUT, Donald trump used them in a way, so as to maximize his coverage in the media, hence he leads in the poles. Call it exploiting a weakness in the masses, if you will, but Trump played the people like a tuning fork and it payed dividends, as he expected it would. My opinion: Trump is a weapon. Don't underestimate his cleverness.

[travelnjones]

On cnn they are saying Biden may be getting into the race. This election is going from circus to freak show. Both parties having candidates attacking each other, I bet Jon Stewart is kicking himself for leaving.

[Phaeton80]

Firstly, hello and long time no see, mon amis, Phaeton. And hello's to Yamato, Tiggs as well. Now, what people don't understand about Trump is his brilliance and his way of knowing what to say, about who, and when to say it, in order to get free publicity that has propelled him into the lead in the poles. Donald trump could care LESS about McCain and his war exploits and whether or not McCain is a war hero, and Trump could really care less about fat-azz Rosey O'Donnell, PERIOD. BUT, Donald trump used them in a way, so as to maximize his coverage in the media, hence he leads in the poles. Call it exploiting a weakness in the masses, if you will, but Trump played the people like a tuning fork and it payed dividends, as he expected it would. My opinion: Trump is a weapon. Don't underestimate his cleverness.

Bonsoir compte, thas been a while, good to have you weigh in my friend..

Dont you think the level of succes Trump has supposedly achieved (Im not one to adhere to poll results, think they misrepresent per def), is more because of the level of intelligence/awareness of the supporting public than it is his (and those on his payroll)?

I get the distinct impression he is not masterfully manipulating a critical, sharp and politically engaged public - but more like playing the cool stepdad who showers his newly found children with irresponsible amounts of candy and grand promises in an effort to be accepted. What is absolutely clear is that politics is becoming more and more emotionally driven instead of facts / content. Trump is a new high in that sense imo.

[edit: add quote]

Edited August 26, 2015 by Phaeton80

[Yamato]

And yet - I'm still Pro-Palestine.

It's not the first time the Libyan government have fired on unarmed protesters.

Back on topic - apparently 57% of Republicans believe that Trump will be the eventual Presidential candidate.

If the Donald's logic is correct, and "There is no Iraq" and "There are no Iraqis." don't kid yourself that there won't be "There is no Palestine." and "There are no Palestinians." I'm still not sure how being Pro-Palestine manifests itself in your case, but President Donald Trump ain't it.

The world may not have approved of the Kent State Massacre either, that other countries would be excused to come bomb Ohio for it is is laughable. What glues the bombardment of Libya together is bureaucratic whim, not the principle of not shooting unarmed protesters.

Following up on Norbert's claim that this thread went off topic, would you rather have ANOTHER Trump thread on the forum that focuses on foreign policy? That can be arranged. However I think it's much better netiquette and respectful to moderators like you to house all these separate issues in one single thread about Trump which this one should be able to handle. When we're gabbing about immigration on Trump threads, why is that never off topic? Stop cherry picking issues as off or on-topic when the end result is protecting the policy. I'd challenge you to defend Palestinians with me on the ME board anytime, but that's probably off-topic, it will generate an epidemic of butt soreness, the squeaky wheels will get the grease, and it'll never happen.

[Big Jim]

I wouldn't be surprised if Trump wasn't a plant by the Dems. What he's done so far is alienate Hispanics and women. As much as possible he's able to draw some heat from Hillary by stealing headlines. The same goes for the rest of the Republican ticket. They can't get their message out with Trump getting all the air time. The strategy might be to spend 6 months to a year as the bull in the Republican China Shoppe then when they are in total disarray, drop out of the race. Any voters still considering voting Republican will be scattered among the remaining candidates, giving no one a secure lead. Meanwhile all the women and Hispanics and any other groups he manages to offend will vote Democratic, regardless of who the nominee is. If his candidacy is legitimate and not the spy operation mentioned above then he has shown just how much the bar has been lowered for the office of President. The public seems to view the campaign as just another reality show. Watch Running for President, right after Dancing with the Stars on your local channel. Vote for your favorite.

[rivendel]

I think that he's a prime candidate for an assassination attempt.

[Space Commander Travis]

I wouldn't be surprised if Trump wasn't a plant by the Dems.

That's a theory I've been inclining towards.

[Tiggs]

If the Donald's logic is correct, and "There is no Iraq" and "There are no Iraqis." don't kid yourself that there won't be "There is no Palestine." and "There are no Palestinians." I'm still not sure how being Pro-Palestine manifests itself in your case, but President Donald Trump ain't it.

Maybe. Maybe not.

Until Trump announces his policy on Palestine, then at best we're speculating at what it may be.

The world may not have approved of the Kent State Massacre either, that other countries would be excused to come bomb Ohio for it is is laughable.

Again - your claim was "never attacked us", not "provoked us to war". There's a substantive difference between the general character of a country that happily blows up passenger jets whilst supplying arms and explosives to groups labelled as terrorists, and one that doesn't.

What glues the bombardment of Libya together is bureaucratic whim, not the principle of not shooting unarmed protesters.

You're talking about a UN Resolution, that not only has to get a majority approval by it's members, but is also capable of being veto'd by any of it's five permanent members: Russia, China, USA, France and the UK.

With a set of countries that diverse, they don't get passed on a "bureaucratic whim".

Following up on Norbert's claim that this thread went off topic, would you rather have ANOTHER Trump thread on the forum that focuses on foreign policy? That can be arranged. However I think it's much better netiquette and respectful to moderators like you to house all these separate issues in one single thread about Trump which this one should be able to handle. When we're gabbing about immigration on Trump threads, why is that never off topic?

Trump has publicly announced his immigration policy, and thus it's being discussed on a thread specifically about Trump.

When Trump makes public his position on Palestine, then that would be the best time to discuss it on a thread specifically about Trump, given that the two things would then have a definite concrete relationship, AKA: be on-topic.

Stop cherry picking issues as off or on-topic when the end result is protecting the policy. I'd challenge you to defend Palestinians with me on the ME board anytime, but that's probably off-topic, it will generate an epidemic of butt soreness, the squeaky wheels will get the grease, and it'll never happen.

The ME board is definitely the most effective place to discuss it currently, absent any concrete Trump policy position.

I only have so many minutes in the day, but I'll turn up there, eventually.

[Yamato]

The theory that Trump isn't a plant of the Dems? Maybe the double negative was misstated, but Donald Trump proves that just like the media isn't this monolith of control, the political parties aren't either. He's treating his competitors like wannabe Apprentices, and being a D is no refuge. Money is what really matters in this game, for puppets and puppet masters alike.

For the polls to be this strong for Trump and he's not really running for President, he'd have to become perhaps the biggest loser in political history. Does that sound like Trump to you? The Dems would have to be covertly offering him billions after Hillary became President, which would be a lot more of a "criminal problem" than she has now.

[questionmark]

The theory that Trump isn't a plant of the Dems? Maybe the double negative was misstated, but Donald Trump proves that just like the media isn't this monolith of control, the political parties aren't either. He's treating his competitors like wannabe Apprentices, and being a D is no refuge. Money is what really matters in this game, for puppets and puppet masters alike.

For the polls to be this strong for Trump and he's not really running for President, he'd have to become perhaps the biggest loser in political history. Does that sound like Trump to you? The Dems would have to be covertly offering him billions after Hillary became President, which would be a lot more of a "criminal problem" than she has now.

If Trump continues on the track he is the Dems don't have to give him nothing, he will loose all by himself.

[Yamato]

Maybe. Maybe not.

Until Trump announces his policy on Palestine, then at best we're speculating at what it may be.

Again - your claim was "never attacked us", not "provoked us to war". There's a substantive difference between the general character of a country that happily blows up passenger jets whilst supplying arms and explosives to groups labelled as terrorists, and one that doesn't.

You're talking about a UN Resolution, that not only has to get a majority approval by it's members, but is also capable of being veto'd by any of it's five permanent members: Russia, China, USA, France and the UK.

With a set of countries that diverse, they don't get passed on a "bureaucratic whim".

Trump has publicly announced his immigration policy, and thus it's being discussed on a thread specifically about Trump.

When Trump makes public his position on Palestine, then that would be the best time to discuss it on a thread specifically about Trump, given that the two things would then have a definite concrete relationship, AKA: be on-topic.

The ME board is definitely the most effective place to discuss it currently, absent any concrete Trump policy position.

I only have so many minutes in the day, but I'll turn up there, eventually.

He wants to bomb the oil fields, send in the oil companies and take the oil. It's not too difficult to extrapolate from that what his policy on Palestine is. Not that he needs a "policy" at all to determine a position. He can continue to ignore it, how Pro-Palestine would that be?

Again - your claim was "never attacked us", not "provoked us to war". There's a substantive difference between the general character of a country that happily blows up passenger jets whilst supplying arms and explosives to groups labelled as terrorists, and one that doesn't.

I don't know what one that doesn't you're talking about. Sure as hell isn't us, unless that list written up by bureaucrats is what makes the difference. Another bureaucratically dependent argument based on govt labels. Iran is "terrorist"? We're the "Great Satan", how many bombs is that worth? Don't pick your favorite labels and stop thinking critically. Just accepting whatever conclusions the bureaucracy comes up with by default hasn't been helpful to anything resembling a genuinely Pro-Palestine position. I shouldn't even have to say that, if you're half keeping up with your history over there.

As for your other pathway for violent state action, the downed airliner, I didn't see Qaddafi's "happiness", I didn't hear his order, and like the US concerning Iran Air 655, neither did you. I never heard the downed airliner as the stated/official reason for Obama's bombing either so you're being selectively imaginative here even using it as an excuse. If you can fill in the holes with speculation to make one plane full of dead people different than the other, you can draw whatever conclusion you want but it's not well drawn. Both countries accepted responsibility, neither admitted deliberate guilt. We can play motive games back and forth all day long. That doesn't prove guilt, in either case.

FTR, Do you have anything to say about "There is no Iraq. There are no Iraqis." or is that not interesting enough to consider when you determine what you think of Donald Trump? There has been approaching zero concern here for this blatant warmongering, so maybe you can join me now in breaking the ice. And don't even try to spin it that it doesn't matter what Trump says one post after you're duly waiting for his rhetoric on Palestine.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Yamato

[Yamato]

If Trump continues on the track he is the Dems don't have to give him nothing, he will loose all by himself.

Even if you're right, and I should be asking you for an explanation, how does that benefit Donald Trump?

It very well could ensure his name goes down as one of the most colossal idiots in US history. Is that what he wants for himself? Or is he really this benevolent human being who's doing it for the Dems out of the kindness of his heart?

[Yamato]

The more time goes on the more this partisan conspiracy theory is going to be shot full of holes. One would hope.

Yeah, Trump's really this "looser!" <-- Why can't people on the internet spell this word correctly? Because they're all winners?

*hugs*