Jump to content

U.S. Politics


maqroll

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, blandy said:

The Democrats picked Clinton, just, based on name and time served, despite her being unlikeable and part of the establishment, which both Democrat and republican voters were railing against.

That's a very generous interpretation, imo. The DNC went out of its way to rig the election against Sanders, got caught and some senior Democrat bird then had to resign (don't recall her name).

Had the Dems not alienated so many younger Sanders supporters by doing that then Clinton would probably be President elect.

Mind you I did find the fact the DNC middle men were paying (sometimes mentally handicapped) people to start physical confrontations for media consumption at Trump rallies a bit below the belt too...

...Also quite off that CNN leaked the debate questions to Clinton in advance, effectively proving the assertion by Trump that liberal MSM outlets were acting in collusion with her campaign. That went strangely under the radar in the U.K. media, funnily enough.

I think one positive consequence of Trump will be a similar grassroots insurgency & reinvention of the Democrats over the next few years, much more towards the Bernie type platform. That's bodes well for them in 2020 assuming Trump doesn't make a storming success of the economy in the meantime. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Awol said:

 

I think one positive consequence of Trump will be a similar grassroots insurgency & reinvention of the Democrats over the next few years, much more towards the Bernie type platform. That's bodes well for them in 2020 assuming Trump doesn't make a storming success of the economy in the meantime. 

Trouble is, Bernie will be too old, so they'll need to find a younger version (just as Labour need to find a younger Corbyn). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

Trouble is, Bernie will be too old, so they'll need to find a younger version (just as Labour need to find a younger Corbyn). 

But as Trump has shown that person doesn't have to come from within politics - which broadens the field a lot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

Trouble is, Bernie will be too old, so they'll need to find a younger version (just as Labour need to find a younger Corbyn). 

oh yeah, Jeremy Corbyn.

What's he doing these days?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maqroll said:

Look for Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Tammi Duckworth and Julian Castro to be in the presidential frame for the Democrats.

President Castro has a certain ironic ring to it. 

I thought the US would never elect a black guy whose name sounded like Osama Bin Laden, so who knows? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Xela said:

The fact Trump won still amazes me. No political experience, questionable views and the majority of the western media against him, and he wins. Remarkable.

Doesn't show the Democrats in a very good light though. Clinton was too divisive 

 

 

Having no political experience is a negative? Do I really need to point out what all your experienced politicians have wrought?

Edited by villakram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Davkaus said:

So far the russian government has celebrated Trump's win, a russian diplomat has confirmed that they were in regular contact with members of Trump's campaign team (despite Trump's denials), and today the Kremlin have put out a statement praising Trump's foreign policy approach, saying it's in line with Putin's.

There's also the fact that Russia played no small part in the leak of the Podesta emails via Wikileaks which helped Trump win in the first place. It's going to be an interesting 4 years. Who do you think they'll invade first?

The Russians also stated that they wanted to speak to the Clinton campaign but were rebuffed.

1) Imagine that, a major political power engaging in discussions with the future president of the USA... what a bunch of irresponsible and down terrible bunch those Russian leaders are.

2) There is zero evidence regarding Russian involvement in the Podesta email leak. It's from a bloody gmail account, not exactly fort knox. Of course, we should believe the highly credible statements of the Clinton camapiagn/and "sources" in the totally honest and trustworthy US security establishment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, villakram said:

The Russians also stated that they wanted to speak to the Clinton campaign but were rebuffed.

1) Imagine that, a major political power engaging in discussions with the future president of the USA... what a bunch of irresponsible and down terrible bunch those Russian leaders are.

2) There is zero evidence regarding Russian involvement in the Podesta email leak. It's from a bloody gmail account, not exactly fort knox. Of course, we should believe the highly credible statements of the Clinton camapiagn/and "sources" in the totally honest and trustworthy US security establishment. 

Agree completely on your first point. It should be astonishing that UK Government declined to cover both ends of a binary result by engaging with Trump's campaign post nomination (er, WTF is the Embassy for??) but... Brexit.

That this complacency enabled Farage to become involved in UK's most vital relationship bar none is a political disaster that should see heads roll. 

Unfortunately British politicians of all stripes made partisan pre-election comments (in the HoC and in the media), highlighting their utter strategic immaturity.

On your second point everything I've read points to a brilliantly executed Russian information operation, fitting their pattern of behaviour elsewhere in Europe and beyond over recent years.

There's some seriously joined up thinking, planning and execution coming out of the Kremlin that totally undermines the caracature of Putin as a tactical opportunist. Worryingly they are currently in a different class to their western equivalents, a problem that needs to be smartly addressed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mjmooney said:

Trouble is, Bernie will be too old, so they'll need to find a younger version (just as Labour need to find a younger Corbyn). 

One more point on this, I think both the Corbyn & the Trump phenomenon signal a bit of a shift from the traditional Party to a social movement dressed in a political suit to be worn by an appropriate figurehead. I'd argue Sanders fits that bill as does Farage to a lesser extent (he really created the Party first and then built a movement behind it). 

The party becomes a vehicle for the movement either through entryism (Labour's £3 membership opened the door there) or through a manifest popular support base among the party grassroots (Establishment Republicans eventually fell in behind Trump because politically they had no choice). 

It's not a theory I've thought through but it feels right. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, villakram said:

Of course, we should believe the highly credible statements of the Clinton camapiagn/and "sources" in the totally honest and trustworthy US security establishment. 

And an advisor to Putin that said "maybe we helped a bit with WikiLeaks" when asked if Russia had interfered with the election...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maqroll said:

Farage is a total bottom feeder, isn't he? What a slimy little word removed, flying to NY to kiss the ring. Sad.

I am not a Farage fan but how can you say that? He was the only person who went to meet Trump before elected. Our idiot politicians were all insulting and labeling him a joke. None of them actually thought he would win so barring Farage. I actually think it was a very smart move on his behalf as now the Conservative government might have to use him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

I am not a Farage fan but how can you say that? He was the only person who went to meet Trump before elected. Our idiot politicians were all insulting and labeling him a joke. None of them actually thought he would win so barring Farage. I actually think it was a very smart move on his behalf as now the Conservative government might have to use him. 

He's a bottom feeder because he's gone and supplicated himself at the altar of America's most dangerous demagogue in over 40 years. The shit eating grin doesn't help either. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â