Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Trump Presidency...

It's a pretty damning indictment of his opponents when they are so bad that the electorate prefers the above.
The electorate didn't, though. He's in power because he won the US's equivalent of a politburo.
 
He might do.

Which will speak to the failure of the Democrats to pick a suitable candidate. Because in many respects it’s an open goal.

Has there been any feedback on US public opinion on his $750 tax bill or the quarter of a million dead from COVID? Or the gerrymandering against black voters? Given the goldfish like nature of electorates it seems like the ‘losers’ farrago has been lost to memory.

Ref the Bold

You see that is the usual race baiting media bollox

Oh dont get me wrong the bulk of people his campaign seeks to deter are black - but thats not the reason
Theyve 54% are ethnic monorities which of course means 46% are white.

The aim of the game is to deter those who wont vote for you whatever from going to the polls -

In trumps case they will be disproportionatly ethnic - iIn the democrats case they will be mostly white rednecks - which means the same people condeming the practice by trump will excuse it for Biden.

Meanwhile this attempt by the left to force everything through a racial prism - is pushing the undecided into Trumps camp.

Were going to get 4 more years of Trump and the only reason I cannot right regrettebly is because Im not convinced Bidens credible and again as with Hilary the campaiign isnt heres what we can do for you its Trumps a dick.

That doesnt inspire me to vote Democrat to the contrary it suggesst - theyve no credible alternatives and so will enact similar policies in which case I vote for the ignorant tossers or i go with the people who call me a privelaged racist by default if i agree with them and a thick racist if i dont.



* Unrelated no excuses or angling for sympathy - If my points a little rambling my apologies Just Recieved some bad news and imbibed alcohol accordingly - so i may be repetative wibbling.
 
Then to go on record saying his administration won’t pack the Supreme Court.
A politician's word is no longer his (her/their/other pronoun as is the flavour of the month) bond.

Was it ever?
 
The electorate didn't, though. He's in power because he won the US's equivalent of a politburo.

Well, if it's a Politburo, so is the UK's system. It's very similar, in that it is possible to have a majority of Electoral College reps (or MPs in the UK), but a smaller popular vote, due to differences in constituency populations and turnout. This happened in the UK in 1951 (Churchill) and 1874 (Disraeli). It also happened in 1910 (twice), 1929 and 1974, although those four did not have an overall majority, just the greatest number of seats.

Ain't this democracy thing a bitch? :)
 

syrup

LE
Your points would be true IF and only IF Trump were a normal President.
He isn't.
Trump is not a politician, not a Conservative, certainly not a Republican.
He is actually a thoroughly corrupt AUTOCRAT, and not even a competent one. A wannabe emperor. He makes no bones about it.
With Trump, l'etat c'est moi.
He IS the State, and that means all his personality flaws are stamped all through his administration like a watermark.
He is corrupt, so that means his administration is corrupt.
He breaks the law, so does his administration.
He is a racist bully, so his administration feels free to do the same.
He is a chaotic coward, and so is his administration.


Are you voting Biden then?
 
A politician's word is no longer his (her/their/other pronoun as is the flavour of the month) bond.

Was it ever?
In this case it is a deadly serious issue. The Court has had 9 Justices since 1869. Packing it will destroy it’s legitimacy, and set some other actions in motion which would be Biden’s Fort Sumter moment. His progressive base is playing with fire.
 
Ref the Bold

You see that is the usual race baiting media bollox

Oh dont get me wrong the bulk of people his campaign seeks to deter are black - but thats not the reason
Theyve 54% are ethnic monorities which of course means 46% are white.

The aim of the game is to deter those who wont vote for you whatever from going to the polls -

In trumps case they will be disproportionatly ethnic - iIn the democrats case they will be mostly white rednecks - which means the same people condeming the practice by trump will excuse it for Biden.

Meanwhile this attempt by the left to force everything through a racial prism - is pushing the undecided into Trumps camp.

Were going to get 4 more years of Trump and the only reason I cannot right regrettebly is because Im not convinced Bidens credible and again as with Hilary the campaiign isnt heres what we can do for you its Trumps a dick.

That doesnt inspire me to vote Democrat to the contrary it suggesst - theyve no credible alternatives and so will enact similar policies in which case I vote for the ignorant tossers or i go with the people who call me a privelaged racist by default if i agree with them and a thick racist if i dont.



* Unrelated no excuses or angling for sympathy - If my points a little rambling my apologies Just Recieved some bad news and imbibed alcohol accordingly - so i may be repetative wibbling.

You are forgiven the wibbling under the circumstances :)
 
The character of the man in question is normally an important factor in whether the policies will ever see the light of day once the voting is over.

In Trump's case, the character flaws have been on public display for far longer than he's been involved in politics, so the nature of his character inevitably looms far larger over his suitability for wielding power.

I would agree with if Trump was an Emperor with absolute power, but he is not.

Trump is only the elected figure head of the Republican party. The party holds the power, not the man.
 
Ain't this democracy thing a bitch?
I wouldn't know, neither the US or UK have ever been one.

In the UK's defence, the popular vote has a far bigger influence on who can form a government than the (historically-unpopular amongst Americans) Electoral Apparatchik system.

Genuinely, in what other system apart from the Soviet Union and its imitators, do political parties get to decide who gets to vote for the supreme leader?
 
Trump is only the elected figure head of the Republican party. The party holds the power, not the man.
The Queen holds the power in the UK, according to the theory. Who actually wields it?
 
I wouldn't know, neither the US or UK have ever been one.

In the UK's defence, the popular vote has a far bigger influence on who can form a government than the (historically-unpopular amongst Americans) Electoral Apparatchik system.

Genuinely, in what other system apart from the Soviet Union and its imitators, do political parties get to decide who gets to vote for the supreme leader?

No idea. I would expect Canada, Australia, India, NZ, Pakistan etc, but don't really know. I've only ever been able to vote in the UK and US, so don't really follow their political systems, but wouldn't be surprised if they are similar systems, based on their historical connections with UK.
 
Three branches of government that are independent from each other with their own checks and balances.
So are the Beijing government, the CCP Standing Committee and the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection. I guess that makes the PRC a democracy?

Hint: it doesn't in any way, shape or form. The structures only matter if they function as effective opponents of each other. If one or more is supine to the third...
 
No idea. I would expect Canada, Australia, India, NZ, Pakistan etc, but don't really know. I've only ever been able to vote in the UK and US, so don't really follow their political systems, but wouldn't be surprised if they are similar systems, based on their historical connections with UK.
In those countries, the political parties can expect to have their leader appointed to run the government by the Head of State, based on a popular voting system where the parties don't control suffrage (albeit ability or willingness to vote is more about power and influence).

In the US, the political parties get to say which people are allowed to cast the only votes which directly appoint the Head of State. That's unique amongst 'democracies' to the best of my knowledge, but not entirely unlike a swathe of undemocratic countries.
 
In those countries, the political parties can expect to have their leader appointed to run the government by the Head of State, based on a popular voting system where the parties don't control suffrage (albeit ability or willingness to vote is more about power and influence).

In the US, the political parties get to say which people are allowed to cast the only votes which directly appoint the Head of State. That's unique amongst 'democracies' to the best of my knowledge, but not entirely unlike a swathe of undemocratic countries.

I see what you're saying, but it's not that common for a "Faithless Elector" to defy their mandate from the election in modern times. It does happen, but very rarely. The whole shooting match of the Constitution would be up for re-write if it was a common occurrence. A majority of states have laws against Faithless Electors, but not all.

 
No and you still don't get it......... The polls had Biden on a 10% lead, which is now dropping to an average of 6-7% points. In actuality the gap has narrowed to 1-2% points and that is possibly enough for Trump to have a chance of winning the electoral college.

I was predicting another 2-3% points and a Trump lead come polling day (you do understand that the last poll is the one that counts).
Its not, actually.
Hillary polled three million more than Trump.

What *really* matters is the Electoral College.

This article may be hyperbole, but uts certainly worrying.

 
But in all honesty GB every tax paying American should be p!ssed off that these loopholes created by the very people elected to look after you exist and seem to get worse after every 'Tax Reform' bill.

To defend their actions and give them a free pass only encourages "I am smarter than you" arrogance which really means "You poorer people deserve to pay tax - suckers."
Don't worry Trump is gonna drain the swamp.
 
In this case it is a deadly serious issue. The Court has had 9 Justices since 1869. Packing it will destroy it’s legitimacy, and set some other actions in motion which would be Biden’s Fort Sumter moment. His progressive base is playing with fire.
You don't seem to realise Trump is packing SCOTUS
 
I think it’s remarkable how little the Democrats seem to have done to try and appeal to anyone outside their core audience, particularly in non-Democrat districts and swing states.

Their entire operation seems to have focused on trusting that everyone will hate Trump enough to run to the polls and vote him out ASAP

It’s possible that they have a ******* excellent ground game to GOTV and have engaged fantastically well with influential local Donors to deliver this - this would fit with the type of small Select audiences we see at Sleepy Joe’s few trips out of the bunker

But Trump is clearly working the ground and actively visiting multiple states and cities to deliver to mass audiences - which even Clinton was doing last time, and seems to be entirely missing from Joe’s campaign.

Democrats still fail to have Offered a compelling positive picture of why people should vote for them, even worse than last time, other than ‘Trump will be a disaster’... and while Trump May be offensive, oafish and a boor, I simply don’t think they can paint that picture with people who live anywhere outside the cities.

It’s the economy, stupid.
The bottom line: is the narrower the result the more likely Trump will win the electoral college and that is accepted by most semi-intelligent people, meaning Biden really does need a 6% lead in the polls to win..... I had tried to show to some blinkered individuals, that Trump was polling 45% back in March and any poll that has him, on less than number, will always appear dubious, as 46.1% of the US voting population couldn't vote Hillary and she was a more credible candidate than sleepy Joe.

The democrats have simply turned up to pick up the prize, with a compromise candidate who has no future, no vision or long term plans and by all accounts will struggle to see out his four years. People will when challenged to make a final choice will determine either the vote is worthless, as neither candidate is credible, or switch to trump as at least he does suggest that he wants to make the county great again.
 

Latest Threads

Top