Donald Trump for President of the USA

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:
When I start my Natasha forum you will be banned before you join.

Delusional on so many levels.

Still, I suppose that's one way to  maintain the denial.

To be honest I think you are the one in denial Lusty.

In general terms the young of the two respective country's voted for 'Remain' and 'Clinton' yet as we know they both lost.

So an awful lot of people who have experienced many previous elections - and broken electoral promises - voted against.

I certainly don't think vast numbers of them actually really believed all (or even most) of what either side said during the elections - they didn't vote for Brexit because they were racist, nor voted for Trump because they really believed he would build a wall - they voted for them because they wanted a change from the way they have been going for the last twenty or thirty years.

For them, they have seen their 'world's' get worse, their prospects (and those of their children) decline and can't see anyway by going the way they have, that things will ever improve.

I think both France and Germany current political leaderships will both face a similar wave of discontent from the electorate the next time they go to the country - not because they are doing a bad job or are going in the wrong direction - but because many, many normal folk have seen things get gradually worse for them and their children and don't want to go down that road anymore.

You can rationalise Brexit and Trump any way you want but the bottom line to most people is that the EU and Washington wasn't benefiting them in their day to day perception and a change - any change - was better for them than carrying on the way they were.

In football terms the Cameron's, Clinton's and many other current traditional western leaders - seem to have lost the dressing room.

It's interesting that people who vote for Leave/Trump consistently imply that anyone who is genuinely concerned about what the future holds as a result of those decisions is a bad loser.
The world didn't end when we voted to leave the EU and neither did we lose the right to comment on politics or the economy. We commented on them before the referendum and will continue to do so if we wish.
I suppose calling someone a bad loser is a cheap shot to deflect attention away from the debate.

Ironically, it's the people who voted for change who are the most scared of change and the least accepting of the new reality - it's like they don't want to know what they've actually voted for. Lord forfend that they may have actually made a mistake as my neighbour suggested he might have when May told the CBI this morning that her great plan for economic recovery was to back Science and Innovation - which as we all know was Tony Blair's great plan too. The f***** was apopleptic when he realised that would involve opening Britain's doors to attract even more immigrants! Oh how we laughed.

Where do I say or imply that you are a bad loser?

Or are you yet again seeing things that simply are not there!

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

boltonbonce wrote:

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

According to this poll "One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” It was the main reason apart from "taking back control" for people voting brexit.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjerJD4g7rQAhWeOsAKHdpnDtkQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fhow-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why%2F&usg=AFQjCNG0We5CZeCFGr_mfl8reRw_ZJ26wQ&sig2=PhwF4Gu17ZJJCWI51e9iOw

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

According to this poll "One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” It was the main reason apart from "taking back control" for people voting brexit.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjerJD4g7rQAhWeOsAKHdpnDtkQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fhow-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why%2F&usg=AFQjCNG0We5CZeCFGr_mfl8reRw_ZJ26wQ&sig2=PhwF4Gu17ZJJCWI51e9iOw

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:
When I start my Natasha forum you will be banned before you join.

Delusional on so many levels.

Still, I suppose that's one way to  maintain the denial.

To be honest I think you are the one in denial Lusty.

In general terms the young of the two respective country's voted for 'Remain' and 'Clinton' yet as we know they both lost.

So an awful lot of people who have experienced many previous elections - and broken electoral promises - voted against.

I certainly don't think vast numbers of them actually really believed all (or even most) of what either side said during the elections - they didn't vote for Brexit because they were racist, nor voted for Trump because they really believed he would build a wall - they voted for them because they wanted a change from the way they have been going for the last twenty or thirty years.

For them, they have seen their 'world's' get worse, their prospects (and those of their children) decline and can't see anyway by going the way they have, that things will ever improve.

I think both France and Germany current political leaderships will both face a similar wave of discontent from the electorate the next time they go to the country - not because they are doing a bad job or are going in the wrong direction - but because many, many normal folk have seen things get gradually worse for them and their children and don't want to go down that road anymore.

You can rationalise Brexit and Trump any way you want but the bottom line to most people is that the EU and Washington wasn't benefiting them in their day to day perception and a change - any change - was better for them than carrying on the way they were.

In football terms the Cameron's, Clinton's and many other current traditional western leaders - seem to have lost the dressing room.

It's interesting that people who vote for Leave/Trump consistently imply that anyone who is genuinely concerned about what the future holds as a result of those decisions is a bad loser.
The world didn't end when we voted to leave the EU and neither did we lose the right to comment on politics or the economy. We commented on them before the referendum and will continue to do so if we wish.
I suppose calling someone a bad loser is a cheap shot to deflect attention away from the debate.

Ironically, it's the people who voted for change who are the most scared of change and the least accepting of the new reality - it's like they don't want to know what they've actually voted for. Lord forfend that they may have actually made a mistake as my neighbour suggested he might have when May told the CBI this morning that her great plan for economic recovery was to back Science and Innovation - which as we all know was Tony Blair's great plan too. The f***** was apopleptic when he realised that would involve opening Britain's doors to attract even more immigrants! Oh how we laughed.

Where do I say or imply that you are a bad loser?

Or are you yet again seeing things that simply are not there!

Sorry Sluffy -  hadn't realised that you are "people who voted for Leave/Trump". 
I should have written "Sluffy consistently implies" to avoid any confusion - or seeing things that simply aren't there.

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

According to this poll "One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” It was the main reason apart from "taking back control" for people voting brexit.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjerJD4g7rQAhWeOsAKHdpnDtkQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fhow-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why%2F&usg=AFQjCNG0We5CZeCFGr_mfl8reRw_ZJ26wQ&sig2=PhwF4Gu17ZJJCWI51e9iOw

This is from the same company who told us that nearly two-thirds of voters would vote Remain!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/26/two-thirds-voters-think-uk-will-remain-in-eu-ashcroft-poll

Hardly on the ball were they - or any other pollster come to that!

Recent polling predictions -

General Election - no party having overall majority - Wrong.

Britain will vote Remain - Wrong.

Clinton will beat Trump - Wrong.

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

According to this poll "One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” It was the main reason apart from "taking back control" for people voting brexit.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjerJD4g7rQAhWeOsAKHdpnDtkQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fhow-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why%2F&usg=AFQjCNG0We5CZeCFGr_mfl8reRw_ZJ26wQ&sig2=PhwF4Gu17ZJJCWI51e9iOw

This is from the same company who told us that nearly two-thirds of voters would vote Remain!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/26/two-thirds-voters-think-uk-will-remain-in-eu-ashcroft-poll

Hardly on the ball were they - or any other pollster come to that!

Recent polling predictions -

General Election - no party having overall majority - Wrong.

Britain will vote Remain - Wrong.

Clinton will beat Trump - Wrong.

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:
I can't agree with your analysis sluffy and yes I did look at the link (nice graphics). The paradox is that dislike and fear of immigrants is not linked to the numbers of immigrants living in a location. So areas with very few immigrants can still be rabidly anti immigrant and areas with large immigrant populations like London can generally be very tolerant.

So affluent areas of the country populated with well educated electorates decided to forgo the certainty and financial benefits of remaining in the EU to vote against immigration - which does not largely effect them anyway because very few immigrants (or many of the rest of us for that matter) can afford to live in such areas in the first place!

I think not.

According to this poll "One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” It was the main reason apart from "taking back control" for people voting brexit.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjerJD4g7rQAhWeOsAKHdpnDtkQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2F2016%2F06%2Fhow-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why%2F&usg=AFQjCNG0We5CZeCFGr_mfl8reRw_ZJ26wQ&sig2=PhwF4Gu17ZJJCWI51e9iOw

This is from the same company who told us that nearly two-thirds of voters would vote Remain!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/26/two-thirds-voters-think-uk-will-remain-in-eu-ashcroft-poll

Hardly on the ball were they - or any other pollster come to that!

Recent polling predictions -

General Election - no party having overall majority - Wrong.

Britain will vote Remain - Wrong.

Clinton will beat Trump - Wrong.

There is a big difference between asking "12,369 people after they had voted ... who voted for which outcome, and what lay behind their decision" and asking 5000 people to guess the outcome of a referendum in a month's time. The poll you quote was not asking people how they would vote but what they thought the result would be, so there is no evidence whatsoever that that poll was inaccurate!

There is plenty of evidence that anti immigrant sentiment was a big factor in the brexit vote.

Bread2.0 wrote:Diplomacy should be done in locked rooms, not over the fucking internet with a 140 character limit.

Bread2.0 wrote:He could have posted his entire manifesto in one tweet:

"Build That Wall! Smash ISIS! Lock Her Up! Make America Great Again!"

Yup, a mere 66 characters which changed the world.

Lard Lad wrote:The worst thing about all this is that Kate McKinnon is a Lesbian.