Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

1…2526283031…332

Comments

  • #812
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    But Trump keeps rising in the polls? Doesn't sound to me like he's "doing a great job of destroying himself."

    Don't even get started with "The Polls," the most dizzying and pointless snake-oil sideshow of politics, because only depending on who you ask and what narrative they want to spin, the polls are either as canon as the bible or they are to be taken with a dump truck of salt.


  • #813
    matthew8
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    Leading a poll on 17% means nothing. 17% won't win anything, and Trump isn't the sort who's going to bring others around to him. People who think Trump has a chance would want to remember the last republican primary. Trump himself and Herman Cain (Mr. anything longer than 3 pages: TL DR) were frontrunners at one point. Rick Perry was another who collapsed upon receiving media attention.


  • #814
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Don't even get started with "The Polls," the most dizzying and pointless snake-oil sideshow of politics, because only depending on who you ask and what narrative they want to spin, the polls are either as canon as the bible or they are to be taken with a dump truck of salt.

    Can we take a poll on that? :)

    Sure, Trump’s poll numbers can simply be a byproduct of his high name recognition. But people like his scorched-earth approach to politics. His message resonates with the American people. The illegal alien problem appeals to many, but it is more his attitude that our leaders (in both parties) fail us miserably and are worthless when it comes to doing what is best for the country and it’s citizens, that has captured many hearts and minds. Trump is very unlikely to win the GOP nomination, but it would behoove politicians to sit up and take notice of what America really wants, as demonstrated in Trump's early success, and not what they believe we should want.


  • #815
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Over to the Democratic side... John Kerry is bound to get the Nobel Peace Prize in the first week of October for the lousy ‘historic” deal he orchestrated with Iran. Kerry still has ambitions on becoming president, and he came pretty close to achieving that goal in 2004. With the lackluster response to Hillary Clinton and all her baggage and possible illegal activities, and with no other real other competition on the Dem’s side, I could see Kerry resigning from the Obama administration in November and making an announcement of another run for president.


  • #816
    lochderg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 118 ✭✭lochderg


    Amerika wrote: »
    Over to the Democratic side... John Kerry is bound to get the Nobel Peace Prize in the first week of October for the lousy ‘historic” deal he orchestrated with Iran. /QUOTE]

    Presumably the Republicans will adopt the 'Obamacare' method and try to bring it down because it has his name on it without offering any other way that doesn't include the word 'bomb'


  • Advertisement
  • #817
    Thargor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,167 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    What did you find "lousy" about the Iran deal Amerika?


  • #818
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    lochderg wrote: »
    Presumably the Republicans will adopt the 'Obamacare' method and try to bring it down because it has his name on it without offering any other way that doesn't include the word 'bomb'
    I doesn’t matter what the GOP does. Obama said he welcomes robust debate on the deal, but that's a lie if any debate deters from the deal, or changes anything he has negotiated. The Senate, as it is comprised now, won’t be able gain the 2/3 votes needed to override Obama’s veto on anything they come up with. So in essence King Obama has stuck us with this monstrosity of a deal for the next 10 years. Iran, the leading sponsor of terrorism in the region, will get a bomb in 10 to 15 years, and the deal makes it possible for them to accomplish it. Other countries know this, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, so you will see them working now with Pakistan to get their own bombs. In addition, Iran will violate major components of the deal (as history has shown us on their “deals”) over the next 10 years, and we and the other countries involved, won’t do a thing about it because no one will be willing to nix such a “historic” deal. Mark my words!

    This is a pretty smart group here. Someone tell us the difference between “24/7 inspections” and “unfettered inspections,” and what it’s consequences are.


  • #819
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »
    I doesn’t matter what the GOP does. Obama said he welcomes robust debate on the deal, but that's a lie if any debate deters from the deal, or changes anything he has negotiated. The Senate, as it is comprised now, won’t be able gain the 2/3 votes needed to override Obama’s veto on anything they come up with. So in essence King Obama has stuck us with this monstrosity of a deal for the next 10 years.

    How exactly does the Republicans not gaining a big enough advantage over the Democrats in the Senate make Obama a 'King'? He's the executive so he's allowed to make foreign policy and just because the opponents of the treaty aren't strong enough in numbers to overturn his policy, doesn't make Obama a tyrant, King or whatever name opponents want to characterise him as.

    The whole principle of a 2/3 majority requirement to override a veto has nothing to do with Obama, and despite what most Republicans believe, he's vetoed less legislation than most past Presidents, including some of the GOP's heroes.


  • #820
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    How exactly does the Republicans not gaining a big enough advantage over the Democrats in the Senate make Obama a 'King'? He's the executive so he's allowed to make foreign policy and just because the opponents of the treaty aren't strong enough in numbers to overturn his policy, doesn't make Obama a tyrant, King or whatever name opponents want to characterise him as.

    The whole principle of a 2/3 majority requirement to override a veto has nothing to do with Obama, and despite what most Republicans believe, he's vetoed less legislation than most past Presidents, including some of the GOP's heroes.
    The majority of Congress doesn’t want this deal. The majority of the US people don’t want this deal. Yet Obama did it anyway, and wrote into the deal provisions designed to hamstring Congress which effectively shredded the foreign-policy playbook that had guided the U.S. for three decades. What would you call someone like that? Perhaps I should have used “Pseudo-King," ya think?

    This deal has now torn apart relations with our longtime allies of Israel and Saudi Arabia. And if Iran cheats, the United States and the European Union will have to take the matter to dispute resolution rather than re-implementing sanctions, contrary to the lies Obama has told us.


  • #821
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »
    The majority of Congress doesn’t want this deal. The majority of the US people don’t want this deal. Yet Obama did it anyway, and wrote into the deal provisions designed to hamstring Congress which effectively shredded the foreign-policy playbook that had guided the U.S. for three decades. What would you call someone like that? Perhaps I should have used “Pseudo-King," ya think?

    This deal has now torn apart relations with our longtime allies of Israel and Saudi Arabia. And if Iran cheats, the United States and the European Union will have to take the matter to dispute resolution rather than re-implementing sanctions, contrary to the lies Obama has told us.

    And oh how mighty successful that playbook has been :rolleyes:
    Like it or (evidently) not, Obama was given a mandate by the people to run the Exec. so even if a majority of people don't like the deal (which I haven't seen any polls conducted on) he's still perfectly within his rights to do this. He hasn't re-written the Constitution or anything which might justify branding him a king; he's merely fulfilling his role as President.

    Are Israel and Saudi Arabia really the best people to be allies with? I know Iran are far from perfect, but I see no problem with Obama changing up America's foreign policy game, as it has spectacularly failed in the past 30 years. Also, allowing Iran to re-enter the banking system and removing sanctions might help get rid of some of the siege mentality Iranians have when dealing with the west. Isolating countries who seem to hate the west hasn't been successful at all throughout history, even North Korea have managed to get their hands on some big missiles despite being shunned from the rest of the world the past 50 years or so.


  • Advertisement
  • #822
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    And oh how mighty successful that playbook has been :rolleyes:
    Like it or (evidently) not, Obama was given a mandate by the people to run the Exec. so even if a majority of people don't like the deal (which I haven't seen any polls conducted on) he's still perfectly within his rights to do this. He hasn't re-written the Constitution or anything which might justify branding him a king; he's merely fulfilling his role as President.

    Are Israel and Saudi Arabia really the best people to be allies with? I know Iran are far from perfect, but I see no problem with Obama changing up America's foreign policy game, as it has spectacularly failed in the past 30 years. Also, allowing Iran to re-enter the banking system and removing sanctions might help get rid of some of the siege mentality Iranians have when dealing with the west. Isolating countries who seem to hate the west hasn't been successful at all throughout history, even North Korea have managed to get their hands on some big missiles despite being shunned from the rest of the world the past 50 years or so.
    You are correct, Obama was given a mandate by the people to run the Executive office. Not to make treaties without the involvement of Congress, not to shred the US Constitution and not to write laws, which he seemingly has utilized every minutia of questionable loopholes with leegaleeze and a DOJ in his pocket to do whatever the hell he wants.

    Good point about North Korea though… especially in regard to those deals made for NK not to acquire nuclear weapons. You’d think we would have learned our lesson from that debacle. Apparently not!

    But I try to look at the bright side to all of this. The world population is currently too high. President Obama’s actions might just be enough to facilitate a region initiated correction of the problem in that area of the world. ;)


  • #823
    eire4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,901 ✭✭✭eire4


    Amerika wrote: »
    Over to the Democratic side... John Kerry is bound to get the Nobel Peace Prize in the first week of October for the lousy ‘historic” deal he orchestrated with Iran. Kerry still has ambitions on becoming president, and he came pretty close to achieving that goal in 2004. With the lackluster response to Hillary Clinton and all her baggage and possible illegal activities, and with no other real other competition on the Dem’s side, I could see Kerry resigning from the Obama administration in November and making an announcement of another run for president.



    The recent polls would suggest Bernie Sanders is a threat to Hillary Clinton at this point. She is still very much the favourite but there is a contest now on the Democratic side.


  • #824
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Thargor wrote: »
    What did you find "lousy" about the Iran deal Amerika?

    No one here really (if the're honest about it IMO) believes the Iranian deal Obama agreed to will keep them from getting a nuclear bomb. No one here trusts (if they're honest about it IMO) Iran to keep its word, as history has shown us on all their important agreements. No one here (if they're honest about it IMO) believes the President should have made a life or death agreement with a government whose leaders are proclaiming “Death to America” as the deal is being negotiated. There is no joy here like we’ve seen in the streets of Tehran - they won and we lost. And when has there ever been a president who signed an agreement with a hostile power (that continues to aid in the deaths of our citizens), knowing absolutely for sure that it will be voted down in the US Congress, and who has promised to use his veto power to protect the ability of a sworn enemy to get nuclear weapons? Need more?

    I don't think he really likes America that much, and feel he would trade our security for his legacy.


  • #825
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    eire4 wrote: »
    The recent polls would suggest Bernie Sanders is a threat to Hillary Clinton at this point. She is still very much the favourite but there is a contest now on the Democratic side.

    Bernie Sanders is the current darling of the media, and has been given a pass on being a Socialist. Sure, they state the fact, but they don't report on what that means and how our country would look like under a socialist regime. He will most likely fail under national scrutiny.


  • #826
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »
    No one here really (if the're honest about it IMO) believes the Iranian deal Obama agreed to will keep them from getting a nuclear bomb. No one here trusts (if they're honest about it IMO) Iran to keep its word, as history has shown us on all their important agreements. No one here (if they're honest about it IMO) believes the President should have made a life or death agreement with a government whose leaders are proclaiming “Death to America” as the deal is being negotiated. There is no joy here like we’ve seen in the streets of Tehran - they won and we lost. And when has there ever been a president who signed an agreement with a hostile power (that continues to aid in the deaths of our citizens), knowing absolutely for sure that it will be voted down in the US Congress, and who has promised to use his veto power to protect the ability of a sworn enemy to get nuclear weapons? Need more?

    I don't think he really likes America that much, and feel he would trade our security for his legacy.

    I don't know about half the stuff you're going on about (and whether it's true or not) but I think America definitely needs a change in foreign policy strategy (particularly in keeping allies in Israel and Saudi Arabia) as their foreign policy has been a disaster in the past 25 years.

    The only time people celebrated a foreign affairs event in the streets in recent times was Bin Laden's death; America hasn't had much joy in their foreign policy in many, many years.
    Amerika wrote: »
    Bernie Sanders is the current darling of the media, and has been given a pass on being a Socialist. Sure, they state the fact, but they don't report on what that means and how our country would look like under a socialist regime. He will most likely fail under national scrutiny.

    Your country would look a lot better than currently imo. He won't win or get the nomination, but hopefully he'll give some competition to Hillary.


  • #827
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    The only time people celebrated a foreign affairs event in the streets in recent times was Bin Laden's death; America hasn't had much joy in their foreign policy in many, many years.

    The streets of Tehran.



    You'd think with how wonderful President Obama was making this deal out to be, you'd see the same on the streets of NYC. Dang reality!
    Your country would look a lot better than currently imo. He won't win or get the nomination, but hopefully he'll give some competition to Hillary.
    The same can be said for Donald Trump on the GOP side.


  • #828
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »

    You'd think with how wonderful President Obama was making this deal out to be, you'd see the same on the streets of NYC. Dang reality!


    The same can be said for Donald Trump on the GOP side.

    Most people in Iran were celebrating the fact that their country re-entrered the banking system and their country could now function better than before. Not everyone in Iran is hellbent on destroying America, the same way not every American is conservative, loves guns etc.

    Ehhh no. Donald Trump would make the US an even bigger laughing stock whereas Sanders would make the US look a little more like a European country.


  • #829
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    I don't think he really likes America that much, and feel he would trade our security for his legacy.

    Darn: we already traded so many of our freedoms to get that security, too.


  • #830
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    Most people in Iran were celebrating the fact that their country re-entrered the banking system and their country could now function better than before. Not everyone in Iran is hellbent on destroying America, the same way not every American is conservative, loves guns etc.
    And that is because of this lousy deal, who only benefits Iran and greedy European countries who put a greater value on gold over security IMO. And you are correct not every American is conservative, loves guns etc. But we do tend to stand together when it comes to security. And not many like this Iranian deal.
    Ehhh no. Donald Trump would make the US an even bigger laughing stock whereas Sanders would make the US look a little more like a European country.
    I disagree about Trump. And the majority of the US has no interest in looking a little more like a European country IMO.

    I can't take credit for the following, but it rings true for many Americans, and what is helping his popularity with Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Reasons why Trump would make a good president...
    • Trump believes in American exceptionalism.
    • Trump is tough, unafraid to flex America’s muscles, and has the backbone America needs to take on the evil growing around the world.
    • Trump is an experienced and tough dealmaker.
    • Trump is not politically correct; he’s not afraid to say what he believes and has ignited an honest debate.
    • Trump demands high performance and will fire anyone that doesn’t meet his high standards.
    • Trump is committed to education.
    • Trump “built that business” and many more and will run America like a business.
    • Trump will not balance his job as President with golf and other social events.
    • Trump’s loyalty will be only to America and Americans—not any political party, special interest group or foreign entity.
    • Trump will support American laws, the Constitution, and the nation’s borders.

    Trump gets it. The other candidates who have a greater chance of winning, better get it also.


  • #831
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Darn: we already traded so many of our freedoms to get that security, too.

    I'm curious... exactly what freedoms have we traded, since there seems to be so many of them.


  • Advertisement
  • #832
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »
    And that is because of this lousy deal, who only benefits Iran and greedy European countries who put a greater value on gold over security IMO. And you are correct not every American is conservative, loves guns etc. But we do tend to stand together when it comes to security. And not many like this Iranian deal.


    I disagree about Trump. And the majority of the US has no interest in looking a little more like a European country IMO.

    Which is why Sanders won't win, unfortunately.

    I can't take credit for the following, but it rings true for many Americans, and what is helping his popularity with Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Reasons why Trump would make a good president...



    Trump gets it. The other candidates who have a greater chance of winning, better get it also.

    The fact you believe that Trump would make a good president means there is little point in arguing about him at all. The man is an entertainer, a clown if you will; he has no interest in becoming president and is merely running to get himself in the headlines for any old reason. The things he has said and done are perfect examples to illustrate my point.

    I'm sorry but when he says nonsense like 'Mexico is sending rapists to America' or 'We should force Mexico to pay for a wall along the border' then I think it's time to stop listening to him. Even Fox News think he's crazy; that says enough.


  • #833
    KingBrian2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    Trump is the next Ronald Reagan. If he does win he had better not become another George Bush who bankrupted his Nation and lost all credibility among the international community. At least with Trump you know what he stands for from the beginning. Clinton has been playing politics with too many issues. As a liberal she does not own up to the glaring holes in US policy. Namely bombing Muslim countries will not bring peace to the region. The idea that Mecca and Jerusalem is reconcilable with one another is unrealistic.


  • #834
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    The fact you believe that Trump would make a good president means there is little point in arguing about him at all. The man is an entertainer, a clown if you will; he has no interest in becoming president and is merely running to get himself in the headlines for any old reason. The things he has said and done are perfect examples to illustrate my point.

    I'm sorry but when he says nonsense like 'Mexico is sending rapists to America' or 'We should force Mexico to pay for a wall along the border' then I think it's time to stop listening to him. Even Fox News think he's crazy; that says enough.

    I didn't say he would make a good president, but he has the potential to be one. There are about a half dozen other GOP candidates I'd vote for before him at this point.

    I laugh at all the hysteria over Trump being regarded as an clown, buffoon, lunatic etc. One doesn’t get to be worth over $10 Billion with hard work, being a clown, buffoon or lunatic, now does one?


  • #835
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amerika wrote: »
    I laugh at all the hysteria over Trump being regarded as an clown, buffoon, lunatic etc. One doesn’t get to be worth over $10 Billion with hard work, being a clown, buffoon or lunatic, now does one?

    A lot of it was down to 'daddy's money' to be fair.

    Do you agree with what he has to say about Mexico and the 'rapists' they're sending?


  • #836
    nokia69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,050 ✭✭✭nokia69


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    A lot of it was down to 'daddy's money' to be fair.

    Do you agree with what he has to say about Mexico and the 'rapists' they're sending?

    did you take the time to listen to all of what he says about Mexico and its people


  • #837
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    nokia69 wrote: »
    did you take the time to listen to all of what he says about Mexico and its people

    I watched the interview with O'Reilly yeah. Even 'ol Bill thought he was talking crap, which says everything really.


  • #838
    nokia69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,050 ✭✭✭nokia69


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    I watched the interview with O'Reilly yeah. Even 'ol Bill thought he was talking crap, which says everything really.

    O'Reilly said he would never get the wall built, he never said if it was a good or a bad idea

    millions of Americans agree with what Trump says about Mexico and since he's the only one pointing out the down side to massive illegal immigration he has a real chance of getting the nomination


  • #839
    lochderg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 118 ✭✭lochderg


    Amerika wrote: »
    I doesn’t matter what the GOP does. Obama said he welcomes robust debate on the deal, but that's a lie if any debate deters from the deal, or changes anything he has negotiated. The Senate, as it is comprised now, won’t be able gain the 2/3 votes needed to override Obama’s veto on anything they come up with. So in essence King Obama has stuck us with this monstrosity of a deal for the next 10 years. Iran, the leading sponsor of terrorism in the region, will get a bomb in 10 to 15 years, and the deal makes it possible for them to accomplish it. Other countries know this, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, so you will see them working now with Pakistan to get their own bombs. In addition, Iran will violate major components of the deal (as history has shown us on their “deals”) over the next 10 years, and we and the other countries involved, won’t do a thing about it because no one will be willing to nix such a “historic” deal. Mark my words!

    This is a pretty smart group here. Someone tell us the difference between “24/7 inspections” and “unfettered inspections,” and what it’s consequences are.
    but didn't the west make a deal with Russia not to move eastwards with Nato ?-I'm sure the peoples in the east would say that the US are the biggest sponsors of terrorism over the last 50 years


  • #840
    Thinkingaboutit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,250 ✭✭✭Thinkingaboutit


    Obama is setting a mess for his successor with the Agreement. Iran will now have the opportunity and means to commit the necessary resources to wreaking havoc in Syria and Yemen. Neighbours like Saudi Arabia or perhaps Turkey, who will not wish that to happen, will push against that. That means a heated up Sunni-Shia civil war. Hillary Clinton was a singularly unimpressive Secretary of State. She will be at sea in that situation as President. I frankly don't know how a GOP President might cope, but the record recently, hasn't been entirely fantastic.


  • Advertisement
  • #841
    lochderg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 118 ✭✭lochderg


    [QUOTE=Amerika Reasons why Trump would make a good president...



    Trump gets it. The other candidates who have a greater chance of winning, better get it also.[/QUOTE]

    Yes Trump gets it-he knows how to appeal to those grotesque Americans who talk about 'taking life by the horns' & 'winners & losers' and who who would step over a sick kid to enlarge their wallets-they can't wait for a man's man like Trump to get in there with those ragheads-Kaboom


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement