Donald Trump for President of the USA

Lard Lad wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:

Lard Lad wrote:Anyone seen Hillary yet?

I refuse to engage with a man who needs both hands to wipe his arse.

That sounds interesting.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

xmiles wrote:Surely you mean no proof exists that there is a God.

There's no proof either way, which is my point.

gloswhite wrote:Like us with Brexit, the States needed a change, especially after the desperate years of the Obama reign, in which he ended up with more debt for the country than all the other presidents put together, (don't bother asking where I've seen it 74. I just have). Clinton would have followed on in the same vein.
America will now be run by a businessman, rather than self-serving politicians, and business is what they are best at. I also think the UK will be in a better position than were were with Obama/Clinton.

bwfc1874 wrote:

The notion that running a business is the same as running a country is moronic. An economy doesn't work like a P&L account this gross over simplification is in part responsible for the likes of Osborne and Cameron duping a nation into believing shrinking the state was a necessity. 

You are seriously clutching at straws if you think that Trump having run successful business in the past means he's qualified to be President, it's akin to electing Alan Sugar next Prime Minister.

Exactly how are we in a better place with Trump at the helm? He's heavily isolationist spoken of leaving Nato, ending free trade and reversing policies aimed at reducing climate change - which is a Chinese hoax apparently. Those are destructive policies.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

The notion that running a business is the same as running a country is moronic. An economy doesn't work like a P&L account this gross over simplification is in part responsible for the likes of Osborne and Cameron duping a nation into believing shrinking the state was a necessity. 

You are seriously clutching at straws if you think that Trump having run successful business in the past means he's qualified to be President, it's akin to electing Alan Sugar next Prime Minister.

Exactly how are we in a better place with Trump at the helm? He's heavily isolationist spoken of leaving Nato, ending free trade and reversing policies aimed at reducing climate change - which is a Chinese hoax apparently. Those are destructive policies.

Simple question for you: are you a millionaire? Have you a long history of leading a major company?

boltonbonce wrote:

Lard Lad wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:

Lard Lad wrote:Anyone seen Hillary yet?

I refuse to engage with a man who needs both hands to wipe his arse.

That sounds interesting.

And more than a little disturbing.

Bread2.0 wrote:I've said it before but I honestly believe that we're going backwards as a civilisation.

What sort of a society do we live in where a bloke who openly states that if you're a celebrity you can grab women by the you-know-what and it's fine because they love it, can be elected president only 3 months after his bizarre beliefs become public?

This isn't a vote for democracy, it's (another) vote for abandoning whatever progress we've made over the last 100 years and stepping back to a time when you could beat your wife and throw rocks at foreigners.

Bread2.0 wrote:I sort of get the reasoning that the "poor and disenfranchised" want change but how is voting for an unstable, borderline psychotic, 6 times bankrupt (by the way - Some businessman, eh?), angry misogynist, racist man child with no previous political experience to way to achieve it?

And that's even ignoring the fact that he's one of the one-percenters that they're supposedly tired of being trampled on by.

Bread2.0 wrote:This isn't a vote for democracy, it's (another) vote for abandoning whatever progress we've made over the last 100 years and stepping back to a time when you could beat your wife and throw rocks at foreigners.

Reebok Trotter wrote:

Bread2.0 wrote:This isn't a vote for democracy, it's (another) vote for abandoning whatever progress we've made over the last 100 years and stepping back to a time when you could beat your wife and throw rocks at foreigners.

Isn't that how they behave in the middle east?

y2j 3.0 wrote: