US Politics - Trump cancels summit having to do with North Korea

Cal wrote:For instance:

A quarter of the British public support Donald Trump's plan to ban all Muslim immigration
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 66606.html

The vast majority, 64 per cent, said the policy was “inappropriate,” however

and:

Sky Poll: 30% Support Trump's Muslim Ban Call
http://news.sky.com/story/1607259/sky-p ... m-ban-call

The majority of Britons (51%) would oppose such a move, however, with 43% strongly opposing.

Meep wrote:The funniest thing about about anti-CC crowd is that, even if you don't believe in manmade climate change, why would you oppose efforts to cut global emissions? Do they like being exposed to carcinogens and having a shortened lifespan everytime they walk down the street and breath in fumes? If that isn't worth a financial sacrifice what is? Ending fossil fuels is a win-win scenario.

Moggy wrote:

Cal wrote:For instance:

A quarter of the British public support Donald Trump's plan to ban all Muslim immigration
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 66606.html

The vast majority, 64 per cent, said the policy was “inappropriate,” however

and:

Sky Poll: 30% Support Trump's Muslim Ban Call
http://news.sky.com/story/1607259/sky-p ... m-ban-call

The majority of Britons (51%) would oppose such a move, however, with 43% strongly opposing.

I've added (in bold) the parts of the those stories that you missed out.

I take it then that you are supportive of Trump being President? I didn't think you had confirmed that before.

Cal wrote:

Meep wrote:The funniest thing about about anti-CC crowd is that, even if you don't believe in manmade climate change, why would you oppose efforts to cut global emissions? Do they like being exposed to carcinogens and having a shortened lifespan everytime they walk down the street and breath in fumes? If that isn't worth a financial sacrifice what is? Ending fossil fuels is a win-win scenario.

So much I could rebut here, but sadly I'm not allowed to - as two previous deliberately shut down censored CC topics attest to. CC is not an issue about 'belief' - it's about scientific facts. And, btw, you are confusing environmental pollution with CC (but that's okay, it's a common mistake). Perhaps one day the mods here will let us discuss those things.

Cal wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Cal wrote:For instance:

A quarter of the British public support Donald Trump's plan to ban all Muslim immigration
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 66606.html

The vast majority, 64 per cent, said the policy was “inappropriate,” however

and:

Sky Poll: 30% Support Trump's Muslim Ban Call
http://news.sky.com/story/1607259/sky-p ... m-ban-call

The majority of Britons (51%) would oppose such a move, however, with 43% strongly opposing.

I've added (in bold) the parts of the those stories that you missed out.

I take it then that you are supportive of Trump being President? I didn't think you had confirmed that before.

No idea where you draw that assumption from. I've said a couple of time now that I wouldn't vote for him. I like his stance on Islamic State, sure, but I wouldn't trust him any more than I'd trust Hillary to act responsibly in the White House.

Cal wrote:CC is not an issue about 'belief' - it's about scientific facts. [...] Perhaps one day the mods here will let us discuss those things.

Drumstick wrote:willingly ignorant

Moggy wrote:

Cal wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Cal wrote:For instance:

A quarter of the British public support Donald Trump's plan to ban all Muslim immigration
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 66606.html

The vast majority, 64 per cent, said the policy was “inappropriate,” however

and:

Sky Poll: 30% Support Trump's Muslim Ban Call
http://news.sky.com/story/1607259/sky-p ... m-ban-call

The majority of Britons (51%) would oppose such a move, however, with 43% strongly opposing.

I've added (in bold) the parts of the those stories that you missed out.

I take it then that you are supportive of Trump being President? I didn't think you had confirmed that before.

No idea where you draw that assumption from. I've said a couple of time now that I wouldn't vote for him. I like his stance on Islamic State, sure, but I wouldn't trust him any more than I'd trust Hillary to act responsibly in the White House.

I worded that badly.

You were defensive about people being mean about Trump (you even compared it to you being mean about Obama on Breitbart) and said you like his stance on ISIS. I saw you said you don't personally support him, but I am assuming that you would be supportive of him if he became President?

Cal wrote:. How did the US end up in such a pitiful state? Oh yeah, now I remember.

Moggy wrote:

Cal wrote:. How did the US end up in such a pitiful state? Oh yeah, now I remember.

How did the US end up in such a pitiful state?

Cal wrote:I'd prefer Trump to Hillary, but choosing between two equally megalomaniacal (and possibly even criminal, in Clinton's case) egotists is a pretty poor commentary on US politics, imo. How did the US end up in such a pitiful state? Oh yeah, now I remember.

Is Donald Trump about to do a Farage?

The Donald’s dummy-spit after the Iowa result smacks of the mean-spirited anger of a man who knows that his one trick is wearing thin

Is Donald Trump on the verge of reputational and political meltdown? Famous for his plain-speaking appeal to ordinary voters, is this once-feared man who briefly captured the nation’s undivided attention about to come crashing to earth? Is the politician who wasn’t afraid to go there, and to raise issues of cultural and racial sensitivity – in a manner considered crass by the liberal media establishment – soaring too close to the sun? In short is Trump about to do a Nigel Farage?

The Donald’s epic dummy spit over the result in Iowa, lashing out at Ted Cruz for his underhanded victory, smacks of the mean-spirited anger of a man who knows that his one trick – a brand of crass, bloviating populism – is wearing thin. “Ted Cruz didn't win Iowa, he stole it. That is why all of the polls were so wrong and why he got far more votes than anticipated. Bad!” Trump whinged recently.

It was a cheap claim of fraud, the grumble of the sore loser, reminiscent of Nigel Farage’s hissy fit after UKIP lost the Oldham West by-election late last year, when Farage suggested in an evidence-light intervention that migration was corrupting the voting system: “mass immigration, the change to our demographics in Britain… is fundamentally changing politics. The system is widely open to fraud and there is an ethnic element to British elections which we've never seen before." Trump is now journeying down this well-trodden path: from bombastic crypto-racist to self-pitying victimhood.

It’s true that we have yet to see The Donald posing with a beer at every stump speech, but that is probably just because Trump is teetotal. Despite mocking fat people when observing that he never saw thin people drinking Diet Coke, Trump was recently photographed trying to hide a bottle of Diet Coke himself. It’s hardly the drink to sway the voters with everyman charm.

Still, despite Trump’s sobriety, his behaviour has grown increasingly erratic as the aura of unassailable victor has slipped away. “Based on the fraud committed by Senator Ted Cruz during the Iowa Caucus, either a new election should take place or Cruz results nullified”, Trump has demanded, seeking to diminish the impact of being trounced by Cruz in the only way he knows how: by slinging mud and making bold claims which have no real prospect of success. Ted Cruz may be a Canadian anchor-baby, an electoral fraudster, and in possession of one of the world’s creepiest faces, Mr Trump, but you lost to him.

Having run a divisive campaign designed to appeal to both the working classes and people angry with the state of the modern world, Trump has floundered. The next leaf in the Faragian playbook will be to suspend his campaign and claim to be taking a short holiday. Wander off in a pique of rage, and then come back a couple of days later to pretend that the voters and your campaign staff have begged you to return. This sort of stunt is the requirement of constantly deploying a strategy predicated on rhetorical escalation. Like Farage blaming traffic on migrants and going after HIV sufferers, Trump’s wall gets higher as the Mexicans on the other side become more dangerous. Are Muslims to blame for the state of problems from air quality to the cost of university? Time for Trump to wade in. If he gets a bit too racist, he can always claim that he was just over-tired.

For candidates whose appeal is not based on solid political rationale, but on a heady mix of emotion and patriotism, the shock of discovering that emotions change, and that fans can go as quickly as they come, can be hard to accept. When populists go sour, they blame the system, the media, and sometimes even the voters. Who can forget Farage’s attack on the audience during a general election debate? When candidates build a personality cult around their candidacy, they are susceptible to bitterness when the candidacy falters. When personality politics starts to falter, maybe it just becomes unbearably personal.

Once Trump has launched a campaign song in a cringe worthy, possibly faux-Caribbean style, he must put on an over-hyped party – a carnival if you will – which ends shambolically. Only then can be become an incessant fixture on American political debate shows, forever blaming the voters, the foreigners, and the media for his failure.

Skippy wrote:Of course Cal would support Trump