President Trump

Re: President Trump

Postby Brevet Cable on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 8:41 am

There are three big differences between Trump & every other previous POTUS...
1. Trump has openly stated his opinions & beliefs ( some would say he's revelled in them ), unlike his predecessors who've tried to cover things up or had them covered up.
2. If the internet had been around at the time, would the scandalous, misogynistic, racist, terrorist-supporting, murderous, duplicitous, degenerate behaviour of many of his predecessors have led to the same public outcry ?
3. Trump's character & misdemeanours were well known long before he ran for the Presidency & were made even more well known during the campaign......yet enough people still voted for him to become President.

Can you even conceive of someone with so many law suits against them and with a track record of saying what this odious creep has said in the past, becoming an MP here, let alone PM?

Peter Mandelson, John Stonehouse, Jeffrey Archer....
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: President Trump

Postby john001 on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 10:16 am

CJS wrote:Good points Tommy. Personally I'd want to question the constitutional lawfulness of allowing someone like Trump to even run for office in the first place.

Can you even conceive of someone with so many law suits against them and with a track record of saying what this odious creep has said in the past, becoming an MP here, let alone PM?

It's grotesque. He's grotesque. And before anyone else comes on here to defend him, actually take a look at what he has said about women in the past, look up the video where he mocks a disabled lady, find a list of the acts he's repealed in the last few weeks. I mean actually do that. Then try and say he should be where he is doing what he's doing.



I guess you could as a sort of exercise in understanding which may be good for a teacher try and put yourself in the position of many of the millions that voted for him. Why do you think they did? Could it be that unlike you they have no job, they are not particularly well educated, there is no prospect of manual work, industry has shut, repeated governments and presidents have made promises and failed them but Trump at last spoke to them - he gave them hope. Yes he had and has faults but maybe people where willing to overlook them for the hope of a better life for them and their kids with the simple hope of a job in a community from where they come from. It could be argued that women are prepared to make sacrifices in their lives for their kids to have a better life and the hope of a job for themselves or their partner outweighs his views on women. Maybe we live in a society where we are simply not desperate enough for ourselves or our kids to understand that the only hope we have is to vote for a man like Trump.
john001

Re: President Trump

Postby AlexC on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 11:42 am

After watching Silence Witness last night I've some idea at least as to why the Donald want's to build his 'beautiful waull'.
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP
User avatar
AlexC

Re: President Trump

Postby ericbee123 on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 11:59 am

Chances of this petition getting advertised on the BBC news ?

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844

0% ?
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: President Trump

Postby AlexC on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 12:44 pm

Getting close to 100,000.
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP
User avatar
AlexC

Re: President Trump

Postby Brevet Cable on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 12:51 pm

And the total's increasing fairly quickly.
Brevet.. Meh !!
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: President Trump

Postby john001 on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 1:02 pm

Does Mr Brown really mean appose?

The map's quite interesting though can't say I had noticed it before but then again I have barely ever looked at the petitions
john001

Re: President Trump

Postby Craig on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 3:30 pm

john001 wrote:
CJS wrote:Good points Tommy. Personally I'd want to question the constitutional lawfulness of allowing someone like Trump to even run for office in the first place.

Can you even conceive of someone with so many law suits against them and with a track record of saying what this odious creep has said in the past, becoming an MP here, let alone PM?

It's grotesque. He's grotesque. And before anyone else comes on here to defend him, actually take a look at what he has said about women in the past, look up the video where he mocks a disabled lady, find a list of the acts he's repealed in the last few weeks. I mean actually do that. Then try and say he should be where he is doing what he's doing.



I guess you could as a sort of exercise in understanding which may be good for a teacher try and put yourself in the position of many of the millions that voted for him. Why do you think they did? Could it be that unlike you they have no job, they are not particularly well educated, there is no prospect of manual work, industry has shut, repeated governments and presidents have made promises and failed them but Trump at last spoke to them - he gave them hope. Yes he had and has faults but maybe people where willing to overlook them for the hope of a better life for them and their kids with the simple hope of a job in a community from where they come from. It could be argued that women are prepared to make sacrifices in their lives for their kids to have a better life and the hope of a job for themselves or their partner outweighs his views on women. Maybe we live in a society where we are simply not desperate enough for ourselves or our kids to understand that the only hope we have is to vote for a man like Trump.

I suspect you're absolutely right but the historical parallels to that mindset and thought process are not good.
User avatar
Craig
UKAR Staff

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 3:42 pm

Craig wrote:
john001 wrote:
CJS wrote:Good points Tommy. Personally I'd want to question the constitutional lawfulness of allowing someone like Trump to even run for office in the first place.

Can you even conceive of someone with so many law suits against them and with a track record of saying what this odious creep has said in the past, becoming an MP here, let alone PM?

It's grotesque. He's grotesque. And before anyone else comes on here to defend him, actually take a look at what he has said about women in the past, look up the video where he mocks a disabled lady, find a list of the acts he's repealed in the last few weeks. I mean actually do that. Then try and say he should be where he is doing what he's doing.



I guess you could as a sort of exercise in understanding which may be good for a teacher try and put yourself in the position of many of the millions that voted for him. Why do you think they did? Could it be that unlike you they have no job, they are not particularly well educated, there is no prospect of manual work, industry has shut, repeated governments and presidents have made promises and failed them but Trump at last spoke to them - he gave them hope. Yes he had and has faults but maybe people where willing to overlook them for the hope of a better life for them and their kids with the simple hope of a job in a community from where they come from. It could be argued that women are prepared to make sacrifices in their lives for their kids to have a better life and the hope of a job for themselves or their partner outweighs his views on women. Maybe we live in a society where we are simply not desperate enough for ourselves or our kids to understand that the only hope we have is to vote for a man like Trump.

I suspect you're absolutely right but the historical parallels to that mindset and thought process are not good.


He gave them hope whilst at the same time is quite prepared to treat them like something he trod on - that's assuming you are a woman or gay or poor or not rich or not white or not Christian or from Mexico.

I'm perfectly capable of seeing why people voted for him - I'm also perfectly capable of seeing that they shouldn't have been allowed to in the first place.

Just my opinion of course. I'm sure he's a lovely bloke once you get to know him. :surrender:

:pinkwafer:
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

Re: President Trump

Postby AlexC on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 10:09 am

ericbee123 wrote:Chances of this petition getting advertised on the BBC news?


Seems to be zero, at least I haven't heard it mentioned at all yet. Getting close to 200,000 now.
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP
User avatar
AlexC

Re: President Trump

Postby DerekF on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 10:18 am

AlexC wrote:
ericbee123 wrote:Chances of this petition getting advertised on the BBC news?


Seems to be zero, at least I haven't heard it mentioned at all yet. Getting close to 200,000 now.


It was mentioned on PM on Radio 4 last night.
User avatar
DerekF

Re: President Trump

Postby AlexC on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 10:26 am

DerekF wrote:
It was mentioned on PM on Radio 4 last night.[/quote]

Thanks for the update. :up:
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP
User avatar
AlexC

Re: President Trump

Postby ericbee123 on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 10:48 am

Popular petitions:

Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
3,757 signatures in the last hour

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
2,759 signatures in the last hour
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: President Trump

Postby DerekF on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 11:02 am

ericbee123 wrote:Popular petitions:

Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
3,757 signatures in the last hour

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
2,759 signatures in the last hour


Popular petitions:

Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
201,954 signatures in total

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
1,785,405 signatures in total

I'm not sure what your point is.
User avatar
DerekF

Re: President Trump

Postby ericbee123 on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 11:35 am

DerekF wrote:
ericbee123 wrote:Popular petitions:

Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
3,757 signatures in the last hour

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
2,759 signatures in the last hour


Popular petitions:

Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
201,954 signatures in total

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
1,785,405 signatures in total

I'm not sure what your point is.


I did put "it will still take a long time to catch the 'anti' petition vote" comment at the end, but then deleted it to see who would post what you posted in reply, showing the totals rather than the number of people voting per hour.

It was a 'lies, damn lies and statistics' example -- as well as the first time the hourly figure has been better for the 'please come' petition.

Our survey showed more people wanted Trump to come than not to come *

*based on figures from the last hour.
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: President Trump

Postby Burleysway on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 12:13 pm

A man who set up a petition backing US President Donald Trump's state visit to the UK has said he is "very proud" that the issue will be debated by MPs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38824822
User avatar
Burleysway

Re: President Trump

Postby speedbird2639 on Wed 01 Feb 2017, 12:24 pm

The point which seems to have been lost in the whole of the press storm around these petitions is that the original 'anti Trump' one wasn't suggesting he should be banned from coming to the UK, just that it shouldn't be a full blown state visit with all the gold coaches and guardsmen and meeting the Queen etc. I was watching the BBC news coverage of this and they were reporting it as 'a petition to stop President Trump visiting the UK' which isn't what the petition says and isn't what the person who created the petition intended. He accepts that DT will have to come to the UK to do Presidential business, the petitioner would just like it to be on a slightly more low key basis. But all the anti Trump people have got all frothing at the mouth and seem to think that if they sign an online petition he will be banned from the UK.

I think the main thing that has caught people out in relation to DT is that he is pretty much the first politician to get into office and then start doing exactly what he said he would do if he got into office. Normally within 24hrs the politician is wheeling out the excuses (not the right time, no more money etc) as to why they are now doing the exact diametric opposite of what the people voted for.

On a slightly related note "Yes Minister" is being repeated on the Yesterday channel - if you've never seen it then you should watch it and if you have previously seen it it is certainly worth viewing again, especially in the current climate.
User avatar
speedbird2639

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Thu 02 Feb 2017, 10:23 pm

I hear that J K Rowling has been criticised on Twitter for her anti Trump rhetoric, with one Twit (is that what they're called?) saying she should stay out of politics. What, because she has no idea about it and should stick to what she's good at you mean?

Now, there's a good idea. :-P
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

Re: President Trump

Postby DonaldGrump on Thu 02 Feb 2017, 11:16 pm

Burleysway wrote:A man who set up a petition backing US President Donald Trump's state visit to the UK has said he is "very proud" that the issue will be debated by MPs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38824822



A hearty well done to Mr Brown on giving our esteemed politicians justification in wasting a few hours and expelling much hot air into the atmosphere when their time could be much better spent.
DonaldGrump

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 7:23 am

DonaldGrump wrote:
Burleysway wrote:A man who set up a petition backing US President Donald Trump's state visit to the UK has said he is "very proud" that the issue will be debated by MPs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38824822



A hearty well done to Mr Brown on giving our esteemed politicians justification in wasting a few hours and expelling much hot air into the atmosphere when their time could be much better spent.


And that would be different how?
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 8:38 pm

It's all going swimmingly well still, just in case anyone was wondering. Trump's senior advisors are on the ball as you'e expect. Experts in their field. :clown:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... are_btn_fb
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

Re: President Trump

Postby TKK 140 on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 8:52 pm

CJS wrote:It's all going swimmingly well still, just in case anyone was wondering. Trump's senior advisors are on the ball as you'e expect. Experts in their field. :clown:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... are_btn_fb



That article followed by this clarification:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... travel-ban
TKK 140

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 9:30 pm

TKK 140 wrote:
CJS wrote:It's all going swimmingly well still, just in case anyone was wondering. Trump's senior advisors are on the ball as you'e expect. Experts in their field. :clown:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... are_btn_fb



That article followed by this clarification:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... travel-ban


"...two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized, and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre..."

She didn't 'misspeak', she got it wrong. Or she was badly misinformed. It would have made no sense at all if she had used the word terrorist instead of massacre. Either way, why can't she just admit she screwed up, rather than make up some silliness after she's been found out?

Point is, there has been a steady flow of drivel out of the White House since the new POTUS took office. Anyone who thinks otherwise must also subscribe to the 'alternative facts' argument.
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

Re: President Trump

Postby TKK 140 on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 10:53 pm

CJS wrote:
TKK 140 wrote:
CJS wrote:It's all going swimmingly well still, just in case anyone was wondering. Trump's senior advisors are on the ball as you'e expect. Experts in their field. :clown:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... are_btn_fb



That article followed by this clarification:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... travel-ban


"...two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized, and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre..."

She didn't 'misspeak', she got it wrong. Or she was badly misinformed. It would have made no sense at all if she had used the word terrorist instead of massacre. Either way, why can't she just admit she screwed up, rather than make up some silliness after she's been found out?

Point is, there has been a steady flow of drivel out of the White House since the new POTUS took office. Anyone who thinks otherwise must also subscribe to the 'alternative facts' argument.



The press briefings have been very weird that is for sure.
TKK 140

Re: President Trump

Postby CJS on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 11:10 pm

Weird in a made up kind of way. It's clear there is a team of people around Trump - some of whom are probably excellent at what they do, some of whom quite manifestly are not - who are chasing around after him trying desperately to protect his paper thin ego.

As we've also seen this last week, his way of dealing with anyone in team Trump who challenges him is to sack them.
"Forewarned is forearmed"
User avatar
CJS

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests