| Trump, What do we all think so far? 16:28 - Jan 31 with 49200 views | easthertsr |
I'm bored with the transfer window, so what does the board think about what he has done so far? I think his political base will be delighted, the rest of us all have our fingers crossed!We are in deep doo-doo if we have to deal with that moron! |  | | |  |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:25 - Feb 7 with 3308 views | hopphoops |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:19 - Feb 7 by TacticalR |
A strange episode. Scott Adams started off trying to analyse Trump as a master manipulator (that Washington Post article is from March 2016) and ended up getting sucked in by Trump (said he would vote for him in September 2016). |
I didn't know about the ending! |  |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:51 - Feb 7 with 3283 views | londonscottish |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:19 - Feb 7 by TacticalR |
A strange episode. Scott Adams started off trying to analyse Trump as a master manipulator (that Washington Post article is from March 2016) and ended up getting sucked in by Trump (said he would vote for him in September 2016). |
Fc*k me.
The writer of Dilbert ended up supporting Trump (!)
My head is straining to comprehend what's going on in the world.
LOL |  |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:54 - Feb 7 with 3275 views | hopphoops |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:51 - Feb 7 by londonscottish |
Fc*k me.
The writer of Dilbert ended up supporting Trump (!)
My head is straining to comprehend what's going on in the world.
LOL |
Deep down Dilbert always wanted to be the pointy haired boss. | |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:58 - Feb 7 with 3270 views | FDC |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 14:47 - Feb 7 by Antti_Heinola |
Bannon said quite recently he saw war with China as inevitable.
good luck with that! |
Bannon is on record as believing that religious global war is imminent, and that it should be embraced etc etc. He's on a crusade.
Edit: and has a terrible taste in books
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/steve-bannon-books-reading-list-2 [Post edited 7 Feb 2017 22:00]
|  | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 21:17 - Feb 7 with 3186 views | FloridaR |
This is for Brighton
 |  |
| Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink: Happy I'm the 'chosen one' |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 08:46 - Feb 8 with 3077 views | Discodroids |
My Mind isn't the tesseract of defunct data that it once was But i seem to recall that the cock caged Bercow was a member of , or spoke at , a far right faction a few years ago ?. some dark recess tells me it was the Monday club or something similar. Someone on here will know. Am I on the right path or is it the windmills of my mind playing cruel tricks on me, like the time i knocked out a gram of baby bio rooting powder to Marc Bannerman from Eastenders for £80 ?.
Anyway , Bercows got more brass neck than lou ferrigno lifting 350lb free weights with his head on the gravitational g forces of Uranus. |  |
| The Duke Of New York. A-Number One.
|
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 15:36 - Feb 9 with 2909 views | TacticalR |
I see Discodroids knows where the bodies are buried:
In his Monday Club days Bercow was an ardent Powellite:
'In 1981 he produced a personal manifesto which stated that: "The strengthening of our national identity demands a programme of assisted repatriation."
Although Mr Bercow, then a politics student at Essex University, did not win the nomination, he did become the secretary of the Club's immigration and repatriation committee, which called for "an end to New Commonwealth and Pakistan immigration, a properly financed system of voluntary repatriation, the repeal of the Race Relations Act and the abolition of the Commission for Racial Equality".'
'Former students at Essex University recalled him making speeches attacking gays and feminists.'
Speaker John Bercow called for 'assisted repatriation' of immigrants
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/5651054/Speaker-John-Berco
'John was also chairman of the Federation of Conservative Students...even Norman Tebbit, as Tory Party chairman, was sufficiently troubled by John’s views and the antics of its committee that he used his powers to close it down.'
Derek Laud: I liked Speaker Bercow until I realised I was one of the 'immigrants' about whom he was then so disparaging
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2002637/John-Bercow-I-liked-I-realised |  |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 15:55 - Feb 9 with 2886 views | robith |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 08:46 - Feb 8 by Discodroids |
My Mind isn't the tesseract of defunct data that it once was But i seem to recall that the cock caged Bercow was a member of , or spoke at , a far right faction a few years ago ?. some dark recess tells me it was the Monday club or something similar. Someone on here will know. Am I on the right path or is it the windmills of my mind playing cruel tricks on me, like the time i knocked out a gram of baby bio rooting powder to Marc Bannerman from Eastenders for £80 ?.
Anyway , Bercows got more brass neck than lou ferrigno lifting 350lb free weights with his head on the gravitational g forces of Uranus. |
You're correct disco, Bercow was pretty far to the right and has gradually been on a journey to the centre of the fence. Distinct lack of gravy opportunities on the political extremeties |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 17:23 - Feb 9 with 2803 views | TacticalR |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 15:55 - Feb 9 by robith |
You're correct disco, Bercow was pretty far to the right and has gradually been on a journey to the centre of the fence. Distinct lack of gravy opportunities on the political extremeties |
Some attribute his conversion to his wife:
'Ms Bercow is a complicated woman who campaigned for her husband at the 1997 elections while simultaneously undergoing a conversion to New Labour and abandoning the Tories, despite having twice previously addressed Conservative conferences.
She is said to be on a Labour party list of approved parliamentary candidates, which might have meant that she was in line to become the first serving MP to humiliate themselves on Big Brother.'
Sally Bercow in legal hot water again after she breaches court order by naming schoolgirl in a child abduction case
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sally-bercow-in-legal-hot-water-a | |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 00:46 - Feb 10 with 2663 views | FloridaR |
So the US government loses in court... | |
| Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink: Happy I'm the 'chosen one' |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:31 - Feb 10 with 2578 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Four judges have now declared Trump's Muslim Ban to be unconstitutional. His response is yet again to deride the judges in public questioning the process that allows them to countermand his orders.
As to their impartiality, the first judge who deemed the Ban unconstitutional was a Republican appointment and two out of the four in total are. Even if all four were his questioning of judges is somewhere between childishly petulant and grossly offensive. it undermines democracy, their positions and his office in one foul swoop.
As to questioning the process, the three-branched checks and balances system with in-built checks and balances is at the very heart of the U.S. Constitution. Either Trump's ignorance is on an epic scale, which I find hard to believe or he's playing to the masses who he believes are that ignorant.
Either way, dangerous precedents are being set when a Country's President attacks the Legal branch of Government. |  |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:41 - Feb 10 with 2556 views | robith |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 00:46 - Feb 10 by FloridaR |
So the US government loses in court... |
I mean this is just unprecedented
1. We have a US president and advisers who don't actually know how the government works (or more terrifyingly they do and they're trying to engineer and assault on the judicial system)
2. That they didn't even take basic legal advice before issuing EOs shows again how unfit he is for this office
Added in to that he and his advisers have spent the last day and half using their position to tout his daughter's fashion line. Full blown kleptocracy | | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:48 - Feb 10 with 2543 views | robith |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:31 - Feb 10 by BrianMcCarthy |
Four judges have now declared Trump's Muslim Ban to be unconstitutional. His response is yet again to deride the judges in public questioning the process that allows them to countermand his orders.
As to their impartiality, the first judge who deemed the Ban unconstitutional was a Republican appointment and two out of the four in total are. Even if all four were his questioning of judges is somewhere between childishly petulant and grossly offensive. it undermines democracy, their positions and his office in one foul swoop.
As to questioning the process, the three-branched checks and balances system with in-built checks and balances is at the very heart of the U.S. Constitution. Either Trump's ignorance is on an epic scale, which I find hard to believe or he's playing to the masses who he believes are that ignorant.
Either way, dangerous precedents are being set when a Country's President attacks the Legal branch of Government. |
Brian have you ever read Lincoln's Lyceum address? It's terrifyingly on point for what's occurring at the moment:
"This field of glory is harvested, and the crop is already appropriated. But new reapers will arise, and they, too, will seek a field. It is to deny, what the history of the world tells us is true, to suppose that men of ambition and talents will not continue to spring up amongst us. And, when they do, they will as naturally seek the gratification of their ruling passion, as others have so done before them. The question then, is, can that gratification be found in supporting and maintaining an edifice that has been erected by others? Most certainly it cannot. Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would inspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, a gubernatorial or a presidential chair; but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle. What! think you these places would satisfy an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon?--Never! Towering genius distains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored.--It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of fame, erected to the memory of others. It denies that it is glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and burns for distinction; and, if possible, it will have it, whether at the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it unreasonable then to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to push it to its utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us? And when such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, and generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs."
"At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?-- Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!--All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." | | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:49 - Feb 10 with 2535 views | stevec |
The one thing coming out of all this is the realisation of how little power the President of the United States actually has.
You may understandably say amen to that, but worryingly it reveals as I've said before, pretty much all the power in First World countries is wielded by unelected bodies behind the scenes.
Perhaps you see that as a good thing but the only thing it guarantees for the rest of society is more of the same and you wonder how much longer society will put up with that. |  | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:01 - Feb 10 with 2529 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:49 - Feb 10 by stevec |
The one thing coming out of all this is the realisation of how little power the President of the United States actually has.
You may understandably say amen to that, but worryingly it reveals as I've said before, pretty much all the power in First World countries is wielded by unelected bodies behind the scenes.
Perhaps you see that as a good thing but the only thing it guarantees for the rest of society is more of the same and you wonder how much longer society will put up with that. |
Well, the U.S. has put with it since 1788 and it's served them immensely well to the point where the U.S.'s democracy is seen as the bellweather for all emerging democracies.
I think that the U.S. President has immense power but he/she has to first pass Acts through two elected Houses of Parliament and Executive Orders through Courts appointed by past Presidents and ratifies by both those elected Houses.
The only way to give the U.S. President more power is to make him/her the U.S. Dictator. | |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:05 - Feb 10 with 2517 views | qprphil |
I don't think any of us quite know how this will pan out. Obviously the majority of American people voted for him, and what he wants for his country, so lets wait and see. If you own a business, you will deal with that person, if you don't, someone else will. It's not a question of, I don't like him, trade is trade, which if it happens, benefits all that live and work here. From a personal point of view, I'm not keen on him, but lets give him a chance. After all there was never all this fuss when Obama was made president. | | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:08 - Feb 10 with 2508 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:48 - Feb 10 by robith |
Brian have you ever read Lincoln's Lyceum address? It's terrifyingly on point for what's occurring at the moment:
"This field of glory is harvested, and the crop is already appropriated. But new reapers will arise, and they, too, will seek a field. It is to deny, what the history of the world tells us is true, to suppose that men of ambition and talents will not continue to spring up amongst us. And, when they do, they will as naturally seek the gratification of their ruling passion, as others have so done before them. The question then, is, can that gratification be found in supporting and maintaining an edifice that has been erected by others? Most certainly it cannot. Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would inspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, a gubernatorial or a presidential chair; but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle. What! think you these places would satisfy an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon?--Never! Towering genius distains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored.--It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of fame, erected to the memory of others. It denies that it is glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and burns for distinction; and, if possible, it will have it, whether at the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it unreasonable then to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to push it to its utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us? And when such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, and generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs."
"At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?-- Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!--All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." |
Superb speech! And prescient, as you say.
I read a great, an incredible, biography of Lincoln a few years back but can't find it and can't even remember who wrote it.
Must look it up and re-post the author...
Edit: Found it. Highly recommended. Definitely my favourite Republican ever!
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743270754/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&crea [Post edited 10 Feb 2017 10:11]
| |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:21 - Feb 10 with 2482 views | robith |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 09:49 - Feb 10 by stevec |
The one thing coming out of all this is the realisation of how little power the President of the United States actually has.
You may understandably say amen to that, but worryingly it reveals as I've said before, pretty much all the power in First World countries is wielded by unelected bodies behind the scenes.
Perhaps you see that as a good thing but the only thing it guarantees for the rest of society is more of the same and you wonder how much longer society will put up with that. |
I'm a tad confused as to how you've come to that conclusion? Winning a vote doesn't make you a temporary dictator who can do literally anything that they want.
- Presidents have near free reign on foreign policy (though Congress tried to limit Obama much more tightly) and can issue executive orders enacting anything they want as long as it is compliant with the constitution
- Judges are either elected, or appointed by an elected Governor and then subject to retention elections
- To make laws , which is the most robust way, Trump could have submitted it to Congress and asked for an constitutional amendment. It would then be voted on by senators and congressmen. Prior to the 20th century, the president was a bit more of a ceremonial role - Lincoln rubber stamped many laws he didn't like because he didn't see it as his job to interfere in the day to day of Congress.
Instead Trump issued an ill thought out and unchecked EO, and the system which is elected all the way through to prevent unconstitutional orders, worked properly and prevented it. I'm really confused as to what shadowy bodies intervened here? | | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:29 - Feb 10 with 2466 views | SimonJames |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:05 - Feb 10 by qprphil |
I don't think any of us quite know how this will pan out. Obviously the majority of American people voted for him, and what he wants for his country, so lets wait and see. If you own a business, you will deal with that person, if you don't, someone else will. It's not a question of, I don't like him, trade is trade, which if it happens, benefits all that live and work here. From a personal point of view, I'm not keen on him, but lets give him a chance. After all there was never all this fuss when Obama was made president. |
Actually only about 27% of eligible voters (63 million out of 231 million) voted for Trump. Over 92 million people (40% of eligible voters) didn't bother to vote.
Clinton actually got nearly 3 million more votes than Trump.
Once again, just like Brexit, it's the non-voters that made the difference - (and none of them should feel they have the right to complain about the consequences of their inaction). |  |
| 100% of people who drink water will die. |
| |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 11:34 - Feb 10 with 2404 views | stevec |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 10:21 - Feb 10 by robith |
I'm a tad confused as to how you've come to that conclusion? Winning a vote doesn't make you a temporary dictator who can do literally anything that they want.
- Presidents have near free reign on foreign policy (though Congress tried to limit Obama much more tightly) and can issue executive orders enacting anything they want as long as it is compliant with the constitution
- Judges are either elected, or appointed by an elected Governor and then subject to retention elections
- To make laws , which is the most robust way, Trump could have submitted it to Congress and asked for an constitutional amendment. It would then be voted on by senators and congressmen. Prior to the 20th century, the president was a bit more of a ceremonial role - Lincoln rubber stamped many laws he didn't like because he didn't see it as his job to interfere in the day to day of Congress.
Instead Trump issued an ill thought out and unchecked EO, and the system which is elected all the way through to prevent unconstitutional orders, worked properly and prevented it. I'm really confused as to what shadowy bodies intervened here? |
I understand and what you say (and Hopphoops) is perfectly correct.
The problem I have is the President, above all, was elected by the people and now their President is rendered impotent and, by association, so are all those who democratically elected him.
As admirable as all the balances are checks are, how does this undoubted fairness actually solve the problem of IS ? I would argue that in a relatively short space of time Trump talking the talk and Putin walking the walk has done more to quell the threat of IS than 8 years of Obama pussy footing.
Sure, it would be appalling that citizens of those 6 countries are not able to escape to the US for a better life. But at the same time, the biggest threat to IS will come from those who stay in their own lands who will turn their anger from the US over time into a hatred of the cause that brought about their predicament ie Islamic State.
Whilst we continuously pat ourselves on the back reveling in our own humanity those countries will remain in a state of perpetual misery. | | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 11:49 - Feb 10 with 4584 views | Phildo |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 11:34 - Feb 10 by stevec |
I understand and what you say (and Hopphoops) is perfectly correct.
The problem I have is the President, above all, was elected by the people and now their President is rendered impotent and, by association, so are all those who democratically elected him.
As admirable as all the balances are checks are, how does this undoubted fairness actually solve the problem of IS ? I would argue that in a relatively short space of time Trump talking the talk and Putin walking the walk has done more to quell the threat of IS than 8 years of Obama pussy footing.
Sure, it would be appalling that citizens of those 6 countries are not able to escape to the US for a better life. But at the same time, the biggest threat to IS will come from those who stay in their own lands who will turn their anger from the US over time into a hatred of the cause that brought about their predicament ie Islamic State.
Whilst we continuously pat ourselves on the back reveling in our own humanity those countries will remain in a state of perpetual misery. |
Or alternatively you might argue that western nations tend to have stable government as well developed constitutional laws keep potential despots at bay.
Even England was once ruled by a despotic psychopath and it was not pleasant. His name was Henry VIII. A later civil war and the gradual extension of parliamentary and judicial powers sorted it but it was not much comfort if you lost your head in the meantime.
A favourite quote from the play 'A man for all seasons':
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake! |  | | |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 11:58 - Feb 10 with 4573 views | robith |
| Trump, What do we all think so far? on 11:34 - Feb 10 by stevec |
I understand and what you say (and Hopphoops) is perfectly correct.
The problem I have is the President, above all, was elected by the people and now their President is rendered impotent and, by association, so are all those who democratically elected him.
As admirable as all the balances are checks are, how does this undoubted fairness actually solve the problem of IS ? I would argue that in a relatively short space of time Trump talking the talk and Putin walking the walk has done more to quell the threat of IS than 8 years of Obama pussy footing.
Sure, it would be appalling that citizens of those 6 countries are not able to escape to the US for a better life. But at the same time, the biggest threat to IS will come from those who stay in their own lands who will turn their anger from the US over time into a hatred of the cause that brought about their predicament ie Islamic State.
Whilst we continuously pat ourselves on the back reveling in our own humanity those countries will remain in a state of perpetual misery. |
The President can do as he likes as long as he complies with the constitution - the guiding principles which are the foundations of democracy. He can even change it if he's prepared to put the work in. "Those who sacrifice a little liberty for a little safety" etc etc
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to ask for some statistical proof that in the 3/4 weeks Trump has been in office that his rhetoric has quelled the threat of IS?
I've noticed you also often big up Putin for his actions in the ME. Putting aside domestic politics (Putin's regime assassinates journalists, encourages violence against the gay community and just legalised domestic abuse), Russia talks a lot about tackling IS, but really their actions in Syria has mostly been against the Syrian rebels, causing huge civilian casualties and propping up their ally Assad. Assad who has killed far more people than IS, has opened mass hanging compounds where 30 people at a time are executed after a 2 minute trial, so I'm not really sure I really buy that. The people of Syria are stuck between a death cult and a tyrant, I'm not sure what leaving them to their fate is meant to accomplish?
Also Obama's "pussyfooting" includes spending a lot of time and resource with the Iraqi army who have had tough but solid and consistent success in repelling IS, so I'm not sure that really stacks up either. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
. 
