trump chump or not

Because I'm not believing my ears, I'm curios on what others think of the Donald stepping even closer to the White House. Am I missing something? or are the Yanks just really that stupid & willing to vote for the combover because he just might be the answer they're looking for......

From what I've read, the Republican Party hierarchy are soiling themselves at the thought of a well-organised, professional Democrat campaign dismantling Trump when it comes to the Presidential race proper.

Or is that a double bluff and in fact they want nothing more than a preposterous, racist imbecile in the White House?

As I heard someone comment the other day , "Sure, he's nuts, but what if he's right?"

I wonder if anti-Trump propaganda like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPRI9AmyVvY

is pushing people towards rather than away from him, with it being so ridiculously overdone.

To me, the real story here is that a fairly large number of people feel so completely disconnected from mainstream politics that they'd support a guy who clearly couldn't be trusted to run a bath never mind a country, just because he professes to share their feelings on 1 or 2 issues.

The problem is that the mainstream political and media classes have zero concern for the interests of a substantial number of the population. That the US (and the West in general) has declined into such a position is more worrying than the fact that Trump would be considered a solution for the decline.

Seems to me that Trump and our forthcoming EU referendum are symptoms of the same problem. If some genuine concerns had been addressed along the way rather than ignored or silenced via PC bullying there would be no Trump or Farage and we'd be better off for it.

I still think Hillary will win though.

UKIP were the only solution to sorting this country out and Trump would be a breath of fresh air for America too. Not really the forum for politics but I can't sit here and read such tripe. Had the UK addressed immigration years ago, not privatised all our industries and sold us down the river to fat cat bankers, we wouldn't be in such a state of disrepair.

I hope Trump gets elected and I hope we opt out of the EU too.

On that note, I won't respond to any more posts on this thread as politics have no place on a car forum.

After the realisation a few months ago that he wasn't (or at least doesn't consider himself to be) a joke protest vote in the manner of Lord Sutch, Nigel Farage etc there has been a significant part of me wanting Trump to get the nomination. This was in the confidence that it would be better for the democrats if he got the nod.

The doubting bit of me, that sometimes thinks, yeah but what if he got the nomination then actually won, is very very scared for the future of humanity. Even if he doesn't win but gets more than 1 vote that concern would still apply.

Aye right...

I know, I'll say something controversial without justifying my reasons and then I'll refuse to comment further. Great contribution.

It seems inevitable now that Drumpf (thank you, John Oliver) will get the Republican nomination. But I echo Jim's comments that I think (and hope) he gets torn apart by the Democrats in the lead up to November.

What specifically has he said or done that's racist? I often see this slur aimed at Trump and Farage but have never heard anything actually racist from either of them.

Or is it just that anyone who opposes no borders globalism = Hitler?

My justification is the state of our country, Europe and the rest of the western world.......I rest my case

Fibber, I knew you would post again......

It's hard not too lol but two ways to fall out with people are politics and religion, something I didn't join the forum for. Everyone has an opinion and that's what makes us human. Nobody is right and nobody is wrong. One things us humans are very good at is messing everything up.

Anyway, I'm heading back to the car section now so enjoy your debate guys

Graham - I agree with a lot of what you say; exagerrated - or plain false - media reporting on all the candidates serves neither the candidate it purports to support, nor the credibility of the presidential electoral process in general.

With regard to evidence of Trump's racism (I lazily include bigotry of other kinds), his infamous statement concerning Mexicans is a good example: "When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best....They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

(I love the last bit, as though that makes it ok!)

His well-publicised call for a ban on Muslims entering the US is discriminatory on religious grounds - by definition bigotry.

He has also tweeted fake crime statistics that purport to show exaggerated rates of violent crime by black people.

He does a decent line in sexism/misogyny too.

In my view, as the Americans say: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

He is unrivalled at stirring up fury and indignation among people who perceive that their interests have been ignored and to do this he plays on stereotype and fear. It's not a new tactic (I can think of at least one example from the 1930s) and there is undoubtedly a place for criticism of the establishment for ignoring "poor white resentment" in many countries. But Trump's ever-bolder steps down the path to some illusory kind of isolationist, white USA is a danger to everyone.
Rather like the unspeakable Jean-Marie Le Pen in France in 2002: the real possibility that he might actually become president galvanised voters and gave the marginally-less-disgusting Chirac a landslide victory.

I wonder what anti-Clinton "revelations" the likes of Fox News will come up with to try and ensure a Trump presidency...

Trump tuned in at an early stage to the fact that a frightening proportion of Americans will be drawn to anyone exhibiting the sort of narcissistic, bigoted stupidity they recognise in themselves.

I suspect the best weapon the democrats have is the knowledge that Trump doesn't have any policies. Not real, grown-up ones. If they can steer the voters' attention in that direction they should be fine.

If that's what the people are and that's what they want, then isn't this democracy working as intended?

The way the Western world is going at the moment, it's going to mean the political parties will start doing what the people want, or they will be forcibly removed. It's all kicking off in Europe despite the crap the mainstream media keeps spewing divert your attention.

As to the EU. Look up Coudenhove Kalergi. OUT. All European countries OUT of the EU and then lets have a Europe without Israeli influence. Send all the immigrants back the countries they came from and re-divert all the guilt money that is sent to Israel, to the middle eastern countries that we (the western world) have destroyed. Let them rebuild the nations that were beautiful places before the bogeyman 'terrorist' organizations were created and used to divide and conquer, and leave them the alone. They can then sort out Israel themselves.

We need to stop beating around the bush on all of this. Look up Ken O'Keefe everyone. Look up the WorldCitizen.Solutions project and what they're trying to achieve.

Truth, Justice, Peace.

Yes, I think so. Depressing, isn't it.

You also failed to mention thats the dems have endorsed blacklivesmatter . Now that is an organisation that is racist towards white people and use violence .Trump may not have any policies but Clinton sure has alot of baggage and is under FBI investagation . I think Bernie was told to stay in just in case shes arrested .Alot of people who know trump say hes not a racist Very interesting read http://www.npr.org/2016/03/08/469723180/...ump-endorsement .

Well, it's very slightly interesting; "brother of black civil rights activist (not the man himself) supports seemingly unlikely cause". See also: Jeremy Clarkson on Europe.

And, far from saying that Trump isn't a racist, Evers says that there's a bit of racist in all of us. Possibly true, but that actually doesn't make it ok to base policy on it.

Clinton (as I believe I mentioned in an earlier post on this subject) does have a fair bit of baggage; however, it is quite sad to see her opponents try to make it seem as though she has been drinking the blood of (white, naturally) virgins.
Although some Americans will be drawn to Bernie Sanders as a reaction to Trump and the perceived populist out-of-control lurch of the Republican Party to the loony right (don't hear that term so much. Yet), Clinton is undoubtedly the steadier pair of hands and - I suspect - will garner a lot of reluctant votes from traditional Republicans, on the basis of Anyone But Trump.

The Republicans must be baffled at how they are getting all the headlines, yet unusually after 2 terms of a Democratic Presidency, they may be facing another 4 years in opposition.

Its way too early to say republicans that are not happy with Trump will vote for Hillary . They may get behind Trump in the end if hes the GOP canidate for president and tones it down a fair bit . Just like the Dems will do when Bernie drops out . Some americans are drawn to Sanders because they dont like Hillary i.e most young people . Hillary has older voters .

I usually keep my opinions to myself and the ballot box. However I am getting increasingly irritated and frustrated that anyone who takes a stance on immigration is labeled as racist.

It is possible to believe that immigration should be limited (or encouraged) in accordance with availability of money,housing,infrastructure etc without being racist.

It's time the media and politico's and public at large made the distinction.Until they do we will never have a proper debate on the subject. I haven't read an unbiased take on Trumps views to take a stance one way or the other.

It depends on what that stance is; if it discriminates based on race, then it is, by definition, racist.

I agree that there are many possible twists and turns before the outcome is decided; I was putting forward a scenario, where traditional (older, better off) Republican voters view Clinton as more in line with their interests and culture than the brash and unsophisticated Trump.

Whether or not Trump is capable of "toning it down" enough (he currently doesn't seem to have any ability in that direction) to placate the Republican establishment, remains to be seen.

As I said above, millions of left-leaning French voters helped give the loathsome and corrupt Chirac a massive mandate rather than the unthinkable alternative of Le Pen.

I don't see anything racist there. Nationalist? Sure. Crass? Sure. But racist? I'm not seeing it.

Whereas in this video:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/...-be-poor-video/

Bernie Sanders clearly makes a racist statement. Yet I haven't seen one cry of "Racist!" aimed at Sanders in the mainstream media. Seems they're happy to highlight imagined racism by the right wing candidate on an almost daily basis while quietly sweeping actual racism by the left wing candidate under the carpet.

Is Sanders actually racist? Very unlikely. But I don't think Trump is either. It's that blatant hypocrisy of how the media treat each side while whining about all manner of "inequality" at every opportunity, that's part of the reason for the rise of Trump (and Farage) as anti-establishment "heroes". And so we just might get exactly what we deserve.



It would be a little tricky to get a statement from the man himself as he was murdered by a white racist in 1963. His brother is also a black civil rights activist and was the first ever African-American mayor elected in Mississippi in 1969, so I'd say his endorsement of Trump is more than "slightly interesting".

If you were a Bob Dylan fan you might know of Medgar Evers.

http://bobdylan.com/songs/only-pawn-their-game/



Still depressingly relevant today.

Good points all, especially about the "anti-establishment heroes" appearing in many countries, though I maintain that Trump's statements about Mexicans are racist. In his defence, he has broadened his comments out to declare that all immigrants are rapists and murderers, not just Mexicans.

The reason I think that Medger Evers' endorsement of Trump is not hugely significant is that it is never difficult to find isolated examples of people who go against the unexpected views imposed on them (i.e. my Clarkson reference). It's mildly interesting, but not indicative of a major movement (or maybe it is...?!). Given Evers' life experiences, I'd go as far as to say he might be more likely to think differently than an "average" person.

Missed the Dylan reference - not a big fan of his music, regardless of its significance!

UKIP ARE the fat cat bankers and privatisers, the reason they want out of Europe is to allow them to strip away all the employment protection introduced by EU law and now taken so much for granted by Brits - you know, those pesky Human Rights in practice. That will allow them to force us all to work every hour for a pittance and then sack us without redress.

Trump is a conman, pure and simple. As I said to a friend who lives in the US

So you want a President who will
1 Make America strong and support the military? Vote for the coward who dodged the draft.
2 Keep out immigrants? Vote for the man whose grandfather was an illegal immigrant gangster ( and who imports successive immigrant wives , by the way)
3 Support business and create jobs? Vote for the man who has been bankrupt 4 times
4 Keep out muslims? Vote for the man who is owned body and soul by muslim princes who paid off his debts ( See 3)
5 Protect your 2nd Amendment Rights? Vote for the man committed to destroying the 1st Amendment ( See 4)
6 Fix the economy? Vote for the man who inherited a stolen fortune from his gangster grandfather and made less money from “business” than if he’d deposited it in a savings account.

I think most intelligent people can distinguish between people who are moderately minded but have genuine concerns about immigration and those that are just narrow minded.

The trouble is, there are many people who use 'genuine concerns' as a mask for deep rooted bigotry.

Because of this, there are people who are quick to label as racist anyone who raises concerns about immigration.

However, none of this is relevant when talking about The Donald. He is *clearly* racist and I'm not going to lose any sleep about incorrectly labelling him.

He has said and done more than enough to convince me.

Few facts
1 Bill Clinton also dodged the draft .
2 Keep out illegal immigrants out . As most countries do .
3Lincoln one of the founding fathers of the USA also went bankrupt . I think 7 in total other presidents also went bankrupt . Google it .
4 He wanted a tempory hold on muslims entering the country until they could figure out out to stop the terrorists .This is immposible because they would have to change one of the amendments (i am sure he knows this ) .
5 JFK father was a gangster and booth legger .

Hoepfully come June BREXIT will happen thanks to UKIP and Cameron will be out of a job .How did europe ever get by without the ECHR ?

Trump dodged the draft repeatedly with false claims of illness and injury BUT pretends to be the strong man and military supporter. He's talking about ALL immigrants, whipping up hate and xenophobia DESPITE being an immigrant married to immigrants himself. He has been repeatedly bankrupt, yet sells the utterly false story of knowing what he is doing financially. He has declared that he will unilaterally ban ALL people of a particular religious persuasion from entering the US, no time bar. Trump's grandfather was an illegal immigrant gangster slum landlord who was deported from the US and illegally came back in, yet he wants to build walls - aye, right. He is burning so many bridges that this has to be an all or nothing game for him. What is waiting for him that is so bad he thinks only becoming President will protect him and it's worth destroying everything he currently has? ( and is barely holding on to) His "businesses" are just a giant Ponzi scheme. he uses his ridiculous celebrity to attract idiot investors to new flashy projects like the laughable golf course at Balmedie, builds them on the ultra cheap, never to the promised extent and uses the excess cash to try and pay off his losses on his other failing crap.

And how did Europe ever get by without the ECHR? It didn't, millions of people died. History, try it.

You have said that already and hes talking about illegal immigrants . I posted comparisions or does it only work from now . JFK father was a bootlegger,loan shark and various other shady criminals . I am not Trumps PR guru just pointing out other politicians that came before him had shady pasts . Bill clinton had whitewater google it .


I dont know why you have a problem with the wall . Dont you want to stop illegal immigrants crossing the border or are you one of those people who believe in no borders . The wall is not a new thing . It was passed in congress 8 years ago and nobody got around to putting it into a plan of action .Can you give me a link to his " giant Ponzi scheme" as i have not heard of this one .

ECHR pre 1998 how did the UK survive without this . You changed it to say Europe ?I was only talking about the uk . Like alot of things it get abused in this country when you cant deport terrorists that hide behind it . We have had quite a few high profile cases in the last few years . Its like a gravy train for some solicitors . Cherie Balir has made a great living of the EHCR .

Seriously, robcoupe20vt, there won't be a wall. Regardless of what he may say, Trump knows this. From physically not being able to build it along certain stretches, to the preposterous idea that somehow Mexico will be persuaded or bullied into paying for it, visiting the ludicrous, unaffordable cost along the way.
This is one of many examples of Trump latching on to a populist idea and yelling from the rooftops how he'll do it, then quietly forgetting about it or using distraction tactics.

No wall. Google it.

"Cherie Balir has made a great living of the EHCR"

And History is Bnuk, according to Henry Frod.

Jim_Clennellhappysmile . For the wall to be built Trump would have to win his nomination and then become president .Certain stretches are mountains and dont need a wall . You fail to understand that this wall was approved in congress 8 years ago but has yet to be put into a plan .You all take this too seriously . I dont live in the usa and i cant vote . I could careless if the wall is built or not .

So Cherie Blair has not made money out of the ECHR ?

Depending on your definition of failure, I suppose I might have missed something; although I've (admittedly vaguely) followed the "progress" of the wall for some time. Nonetheless, it has always been a showboating policy (hence its appeal to Trump), which will never be meaningfully implemented - at least not unless something more pressing than illegal immigration enters the frame (zombies, possibly?).

Apologies to the OP for the digression, but here goes...

Given that Cherie Blair is (or was) a practising human rights' lawyer, wouldn't it be a bit strange if she hadn't used the legislation in force as part of her job? And, being that lawyers get pretty well paid, she probably did earn quite a bit...
Wait! Are you suggesting that the Blairs cooked up an audacious scheme to get the ECHR adopted in the UK, purely so that Mrs Blair could make shedloads of cash from protecting dodgy terrorists?
Of course! It all makes sense! How could we have been so blind?!

Or do you have something against Ms Booth that you'd like to share?

Jim did not know your were a fan of the Blairs Great Her husband is part of an illegal war on terror and invades many countries .She on the other hand defends terrorists hiding behind the ECHR . Thumbs up They got both ends covered .

I'm no fan, I just wasn't sure whether you had a genuine reason for singling out Cherie Blair or whether it was just an odd way to bring the ERHC EHCR ECHR into this thread.

Again, apologies for going OT - perhaps we could enjoy your thoughts on the Blairs in another thread, Rob?

A lot of cherry picking going on here, Cliches aplenty, history lessons & what some are throwing up makes for speculative reading matter. I agree with Jim when he says that, anyone for a thirst for this kind of thing can dig up all sorts of stories, right, wrong, half right, half wrong. The Donald seems to be ducking all that's thrown at him, in fact the non Trumps seem to be lambasted more than ever.

Normally I rarely post up topics like this, these days, but I honestly can't believe how well Trump seems to be doing. Perhaps I'm a bit negative towards him when he started all his nonsense bully boy tactics in Aberdeen. Waving greenbacks in the air promising millions. Certain Aberdeen business men & counselors fell for his spiel. They even sacked a councilor Martin Ford for voting against Trump.

Honestly you couldn't make this up. Wee Eck got involved at the time when he was first Minster. Then everything went pear shaped & a lot of handwashing ensued. "You've been Trumped" the film is well worth a watch.

Yes Jim no problem .Its all fun

Much of the problem I think comes form the media trained politicians all looking and sounding the same.

I mean is there any real difference in the Torys and Labour now? They all fight over the same middle ground and bow to big business. It's almost a fashion thing in politics now. We re arguably more prosperous, and safe than at any time in history. But that is now boring and so the time is ripe for someone to come and shake the snowglobe In the US that is Trump, here the closest is Boris.

They get support because they stand out from the magnolia of party politics these days. The public like their passion, almost regardless of what they are passionate about.

Personally I don't understand all the fuss about migrants coming here and taking our jobs. In my industry the Board have seen the future and evidently it's in India and Poland, and when they price themselves out of IT work it will move to the next cheapest IT sweatshop, Africa would be my guess. Happy times.

No, you were not. If you don't know what you yourself are saying , how do you expect other people to keep up?

Thank you for the correction but the brexit is the UK leaving the EU . The Eu cant leave the EU so i meant the UK leaving EU i dont care about the rest of europe . Still waiting on the link for "Trumps ponzi scheme" . Will check back later ?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0316-mcmanus-trump-rubio-florida-20160316-column.html

I've already explained it but I guess that if you don't read your own posts there's no point in holding my breath for you to read mine.

No provide a link to " Trumps ponzi scheme" simple . I dont what your personal opinion or made up stories i want good hard facts if indeed he is running a ponzi scheme .If his businesses are that it must be out there somewhere .Convince me that all i ask

Fact :A fact is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is, whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience.

Link :An internal link is a type of hyperlink on a webpage to another page or resource, such as an image or document, on the same website or domain. Hyperlinks are considered either "external" or "internal" depending on their target or destination. Generally, a link to a page outside the same domain or website is considered external, whereas one that points at another section of the same webpage or to another page of the same website or domain is considered internal.

Rob, don't go getting all giddy about definitions of facts... Just sayin'

If I'm honest, I'm probably not too surprised how for some, the comments are almost personal & some are taking things just a tad too seriously, whether or not for instance if we were discussing this over a wee drink would it be any different. You see with me, you see what you get & I'd back anything I've tapped on here. I'm more than just guessing that things would be a bit different, but, that's the way with forums.Funny places at times.

As I've said the reason I've posted this up is the fact that I honestly can't believe how Trump is going from strength to strength. Obviously the spinning machine is in full operation, but it would seem, & taking into consideration the media & other over the top comments thrown in, it's still a big deal for Trump.

Guys not a problem . I asked Azzura for a link if he decides to send a link to one or not up to him .No big deal i will leave it at that .

She's not the worlds prettiest woman and has really crap taste in men?

No judge will send you down for that, but is it a crime?

A sense of humor is always welcome, but at times it does mask underlying feelings & I'm not singling anyone in particular out. Aye it's only too easy just to gloss over a remark or two. On certain subjects things do tend to go round & round a bit, then again I suppose that's human nature. However there are times on the forum I'm a bit surprised at other things, for instance when there is an absence from the table.

Just my observations

I don't think he's a chump, he's playing the game very well. Look at all the people who fail to get even half the support he has. He's created a mystique around his value and his business dealings. Fair play to the guy.
On him as a person, I don't know him and the press exaggerate and twist things, take things out of context on a regular basis for their own gain.
Breath of fresh air for politics, probably a very dangerous person to have in charge of America, maybe they should give him somewhere with a small population to practice on first, the antarctic perhaps??

Final thought - how does he compare to other current leaders? Cameron is useless, can't negotiate his way out of a paper bag, Putin is nuts and I'll leave Kim out of it.....