The Next President Of The United States Of America

[BubberMiley]

Hillary.

[betsy]

Here's today's speech of Trump, outlining his foreign policy:

Trump starts at timer: 34:15. Watch the intro by the moderator from 28:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW8RqLN3Qao

He makes perfect sense. He'll be the next President.

Edited April 27, 2016 by betsy

[GostHacked]

Count Cruz out as the talk is he tapped Fioriana to be his running mate .. A very stupid move.

[Topaz]

I think Cruz picked her because he thinks he can pick up more votes in next states, with her supporters. Cruz is being backed by the Bush family and Trump doesn't care for them and many Americans don't either.

[Guest]

Here's today's speech of Trump, outlining his foreign policy:

Trump starts at timer: 34:15. Watch the intro by the moderator from 28:00.

He makes perfect sense. He'll be the next President.

The speech was Palin-like in that it was an incoherent word salad, full of simplistic, vacuous slogans and misstatements. He hopes to regain the trust of US allies by blackmailing them? Great foreign policy! He stated he would work with Muslims to fight terrorism but has already announced he would bar them from entering the US. What a fool. Even his foreign policy slogan of "America First" was the name of a group of Nazi sympathizers. I get that Trump is not an intelligent or well spoken man, apparently nor are his advisers, but ignorance and bluster aren't qualities we should admire in our political leaders.

I understand that many people like to belittle education and intelligence, but I still can't believe the simple crowd would expect ignorant people to competently lead a nation.

Edited April 28, 2016 by Guest

[bush_cheney2004]

Trump merely repeated the same thing that President Obama told the U.K....meet the NATO 2% defense spending levels agreed to in 2006 or expect far less American military support. Does that mean Obama is not an intelligent or well spoken man ?

Why do so many other nations depend so much on the simple Americans' military to begin with ?

[Big Guy]

... Even his foreign policy slogan of "America First" was the name of a group of Nazi sympathizers. I get that Trump is not an intelligent or well spoken man, apparently nor are his advisers, but ignorance and bluster aren't qualities we should admire in our political leaders.

...

"The American Freedom Party is for America First!"

http://american3rdposition.com/?page_id=9184

If it looks like a duck ...

[eyeball]

Why do so many other nations depend so much on the simple Americans' military to begin with ?

They have a choice?

[Derek 2.0]

Even his foreign policy slogan of "America First" was the name of a group of Nazi sympathizers.

Ahh no, America First was a group of depression era anti-war isolationists, comprised namely of socialists and Quakers.......though disjointed, many of Trump's foreign policy stances would be right at home with a Ron/Rand Paul or even a Bernie Sanders (combined with Trump's economic protectionism).

[Derek 2.0]

Trump merely repeated the same thing that President Obama told the U.K....meet the NATO 2% defense spending levels agreed to in 2006 or expect far less American military support. Does that mean Obama is not an intelligent or well spoken man ?

I hadn't heard that Obama had put so much pressure on the United Kingdom to boost their defense spending.....A truly bipartisan issue among both parties......defense freeloaders like Canada should be put on notice in the advent of a Clinton or Trump administration.

[bush_cheney2004]

They have a choice?

Yes...they make the same choice each year.

[bush_cheney2004]

I hadn't heard that Obama had put so much pressure on the United Kingdom to boost their defense spending.....A truly bipartisan issue among both parties......defense freeloaders like Canada should be put on notice in the advent of a Clinton or Trump administration.

The context was even worse than that, as Obama raged about Libya, as reported below:

**** WARNING: this Daily Mail page contains photos of scantily clad females. ****

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3485830/Barack-Obama-warned-David-Cameron-destroy-special-relationship-did-not-boost-defence-spending-free-riders-aggravate-me.html

[Derek 2.0]

The context was even worse than that, as Obama raged about Libya, as reported below:

Without a doubt, not surprised the least that the American people are coming to the realization that its time for the rest of the World to pull up its collective socks............much like the America of the 1930s.

[Guest]

Ahh no, America First was a group of depression era anti-war isolationists, comprised namely of socialists and Quakers.......though disjointed, many of Trump's foreign policy stances would be right at home with a Ron/Rand Paul or even a Bernie Sanders (combined with Trump's economic protectionism).

Fair enough, it was more the prominent member Charles Lindebergh who expressed admiration for some Nazi ideals, spoke negatively of the Jews and was sympathetic of the Nazi cause.

[bush_cheney2004]

Without a doubt, not surprised the least that the American people are coming to the realization that its time for the rest of the World to pull up its collective socks............much like the America of the 1930s.

Trump doesn't look so "stupid" now.....

In a remarkable insight into the US President's critical view of Mr Cameron's foreign policy, it was revealed today that Mr Obama believed Britain and France were too happy to rely on the US to deal with conflicts on Europe's doorstep.

He wanted the two countries to break their habit of 'pushing us to act but then showing an unwillingness to put any skin in the game'.

He even went as far as describing the likes of Britain and France as 'free riders,' adding later that he had told Mr Cameron that 'free riders aggravate me' when he had told the PM: 'You have to pay your fair share'.

[Derek 2.0]

Fair enough, it was more the prominent member Charles Lindebergh who expressed admiration for some Nazi ideals, spoke negatively of the Jews and was sympathetic of the Nazi cause.

I don't know the extent of admiration held by Lindbergh (or the Kennedy family) for the Nazis........but in the context of the 1930s, National Socialism brought Germany Goosestepping out of the depression with public (infrastructure) spending.....that doesn't make FDR or Trudeau Nazis though....

In the context of the US General Election, Clinton/Trump/Sanders/Cruz/Kasich all seek to put America First.......the differences are found within the presentation and mouth noises.......as I said (to you?) before, on the surface of foreign and economic policy, Sanders and Trump have more in common with their populist mantra than a Clinton/Cruz/Kasich.

[Derek 2.0]

Trump doesn't look so "stupid" now.....

I don't know that I ever said Trump was stupid..........more a gifted showman and grifter like a modern P.T. Barnum............

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't know that I ever said Trump was stupid..........more a gifted showman and grifter like a modern P.T. Barnum............

No, but others have certainly suggested as much. Trump is a lot of things, but certainly not stupid.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't know the extent of admiration held by Lindbergh (or the Kennedy family) for the Nazis........but in the context of the 1930s, National Socialism brought Germany Goosestepping out of the depression with public (infrastructure) spending.....that doesn't make FDR or Trudeau Nazis though....

Agreed...the similarities are greater than the differences. FDR's New Deal was widely criticized as socialism and "un-American".

Edited April 28, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

Trump is a lot of things, but certainly not stupid.

so he claims!

I went to the Wharton School of Business. I’m, like, a really smart person.

.

[jacee]

/jimmy-carter-the-u-s-is-completely-subverted-by-oligarchs/

HARTMANN: Our Supreme Court has now said, unlimited money in politics. It seems like a violation of principles of democracy. Your thoughts on that?

CARTER: It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now its just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. And the same thing applies to governors and U.S. senators and congress members. So now weve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the elections over. The incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebodys whos already in Congress has a lot more to sell to an avid contributor than somebody whos just a challenger.

More background:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

Seems to me ... that the problems is not citizens, unions or corporations putting money into electing politicians.

The problem comes when those groups expect/demand payoffs for doing so.

That's bribery.

That's groups offering bribes.

That's politicians accepting bribes.

That is the problem.

That's what has to be curtailed.

.

[Hal 9000]

/jimmy-carter-the-u-s-is-completely-subverted-by-oligarchs/

HARTMANN: Our Supreme Court has now said, unlimited money in politics. It seems like a violation of principles of democracy. Your thoughts on that?

CARTER: It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now its just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. And the same thing applies to governors and U.S. senators and congress members. So now weve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the elections over. The incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebodys whos already in Congress has a lot more to sell to an avid contributor than somebody whos just a challenger.

More background:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

Seems to me ... that the problems is not citizens, unions or corporations putting money into electing politicians.

The problem comes when those groups expect/demand payoffs for doing so.

That's bribery.

That's groups offering bribes.

That's politicians accepting bribes.

That is the problem.

That's what has to be curtailed.

.

So, If what you say is true - and I believe it could be, then people or corporations that donate money to a candidate actually expect political favours in return?

Are you the only one who knows about this? Does Hilary know about this?

[jacee]

So, If what you say is true -

Jimmy Carter said it.

and I believe it could be, then people or corporations that donate money to a candidate actually expect political favours in return?

Are you the only one who knows about this? Does Hilary know about this?

Being facetious I assume?

Are you assuming I'm a Hillary fan? ?

Yes it's the entrenched corruption issue in both major parties, and both countries.

The whole thing needs a shaking up.

Proportional representation will do that here.

.

[SpankyMcFarland]

Like our FPTP system, the US presidential set-up is best in a two party race. I suspect we will see more complex races in future and maybe the third party candidate will get a decent vote this time as well. In a situation where nobody gets more than 50% of the popular vote, a run-off between the two top candidates would be preferable.

[cannuck]

You seem to want to lump education with intellect - and that is in no way true. Best example: we have elected people who are by most standards "well educated" to run Canada - but you can see that their intellectual prowess is pretty much completely lacking. Give me a simpleton with the common sense to avoid doing incredibly stupid things that they have been educated to do - any time.

I understand that many people like to belittle education and intelligence, but I still can't believe the simple crowd would expect ignorant people to competently lead a nation.