American Election Discussion

1…78101213…33

Comments

  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    I'm concerned by the whole damn lot, tbh.

    Trump antagonising China. Ranting about it on twitter.

    His senior aide briefing journalists, saying Trump's 'not really a talking points kind of guy' - implying that he is making stuff up as he goes along and won't (or can't) take briefings.

    Making statements of fact that are totally evidence-free, and that being justified by his team on the grounds that he's just 'speaking his mind'. ;doh

    Here's my opinion: he's unfit for the job.
  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    MrsGrey regarding the last sentence, you could be describing TM (change pronoun of course) ;biggrin
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    NE, I don't like her (think she's a liar, for a start) but she is at least qualified. Unlike Trump. He's a loose cannon.
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    He is right about China in the South China Sea though....and considering Chinese treatment of Taiwan and Hong Kong and the amount of condemnation that goes on for the US and UK involvement in world affairs, he does have a point to a degree.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited December 2016
    yeold, I don't disagree that China's not great.

    But they are a super-power. And for the president (elect) of one superpower to show a total disregard for existing policy, diplomacy, the global balance of power, complex international alliances and not least demonstrate a contradictory approach to 'interfering' in other country's internal affairs...
    ... and rant about it on Twitter. ;doh
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    its not tactful granted, but at least its not cloak and dagger that seems to be going on with international affairs to date. (include Russia in this to). He is at least fronting up to China and calling them out on their transgressions something no other country seems to want to because as you say they are a "super-power."
  • alderzalderz
    If any part of me believed he was doing it because he wants to stand up for the rights of Taiwain, Hong Kong, etc, and had any kind of plan or reason to what he's doing, I would agree with it.

    As it is, he seems to just be saying words, and in a very tactless and potentially dangerous way. How nobody has taken his twitter account off him is beyond belief.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Trump seems as eager to antagonise China as he is to appease Putin.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    Being brash in public doesn't mean they won't continue the cloak and dagger stuff behind the scenes.
  • chicagohammerchicagohammer
    edited December 2016
    I think it clear, at least to me, that he does not have the qualifications nor temperament to be president of the United States.

    I get that he has touched a nerve in the population and would understand how he would be able to attract a noteworthy number of voters.

    However, what I do not understand is how he was able to attract tens of millions of them.

    Oh, and to answer Grey,s question at the top of the page, yes I am concerned, very concerned.

    Ho hum
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    Outcast

    I'd be comforted if I thought it was a good politician/bad politician ploy, but I really don't think it is.

    I don't think Trump has the experience, temperament or intellectual ability to see beyond himself and his own reactions/ideas, and there seems little evidence so far that anyone in his administration is going to be able to ameliorate this.

  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    Grey, ameliorate, lovely word. Not often you'll find it on a football forum ;biggrin ;ok.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    Grey, my point is I don't really buy the idea that because he's so bullish in public that he won't be doing anything bad behind the scenes. It'll be the same as before behind the scenes and worse in public.
  • chicagohammerchicagohammer
    One of my concerns is that, amongst other equally worrying personality traits, he appears to be totally self focused and extremely thin skinned.

    In my opinion, neither of these charactoristics are desirable in someone tasked with conducting very sensitive, and wide ranging, negotiations on the world stage.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    Also very receptive to compliments. Anyone can buy him by praising his hair cut.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    Is that what it is?

    I was wondering....
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    So that's NOT his long-haired hamster, then? ;hmm
  • simoncsimonc
    Mock all you want he was the only world leader to have Castro pegged - and someone needs to stand up to China, i dont see anyone else doing it.
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    simonc

    He has never been a world leader. He has never been an elected official, nor a member of the armed services.

    His record of public service prior to his campaign is zero.

    You aren't concerned by General Flynn's Twitter comment mentioned earlier?
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    I thought you were up for a bit of mocking, simon. Or did you not post the video at the end of the previous page?
  • simoncsimonc
    Grey however you define him he did not say that Castro was a "Champion of Social Justice" or "hero for many" the European left is delusional
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    simon

    You can make disparaging comments all you like.

    That doesn't make Trump a good man, a good politician, or a good President Elect.

    Any opinion on General Flynn as US Security Adviser?
  • simoncsimonc
    I like how you keep trying to deflect the conversation the labor leader thinks that killing or imprisoning your opponents makes you a champion of social justice does that make him fit to lead the UK?
  • KuchinghammerKuchinghammer
    Delusional Europeans to the left of me, Trump to the right
    Here I am, stuck in the middle with you ;whistle
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    edited December 2016
    I'm not deflecting anything.

    That was the conversation I was having.

    I'll assume you don't want to discuss General Flynn and won't ask you again.

    Saying 'your team is rubbish' doesn't make your team any good.

    From what I've heard from him, Trump is all in favour of:
    killing or imprisoning your opponents
  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    edited December 2016
    simonc
    Have you ever been to Cuba, by the way? My wife and I went there in February and met some of the friendliest people ever. Walking in the street at night, felt not a trace of fear even though the poverty is obvious. Still that'll all change when/if visas for US citizens are easier to get and big business eg. casinos etc. moves in.
  • simoncsimonc
    NEoldiron said:

    simonc
    Have you ever been to Cuba, by the way? My wife and I went there in February and met some of the friendliest people ever. Walking in the street at night, felt not a trace of fear even though the poverty is obvious. Still that'll all change when/if visas for US citizens are easier to get and big business eg. casinos etc. moves in.

    Ok so i get it, Dictatorships are fine as long as you get a cheap holiday
  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    Simonc, I think you missed my point which I can't be bothered to explain as I'm about to turn in, and it definitely was not a cheap holiday.
  • simoncsimonc
    NE I think i get your point but i certainly don't agree with it...
    CUBA
    1/ Keep people from leaving
    2/ Keep them in poverty by restricting their ability to make money for themselves
    3/ Ban Protests - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/03/20/cuba-dissidents-protesters-arrested-president-obama-visit/82048950/
    4/ Imprison anyone that rebels
    5/ Take in foreign currency from tourists
    6/ Live in luxury yourself

    Sounds great I am sure ALL the Cubans are very happy



  • AdMeus_CaputFiliusAdMeus_CaputFilius
    NE - another area we have in common. I too have been to Cuba but it was back in 1999, as with you we never felt threatened in any way at any time and the people were friendly. As to not allowed to make money - we used to go to go eat in peoples houses as they were allowed to open their doors and you paid like you did in any other restaurant, the difference was you were eating in their front rooms and the food was basic but still delicious - Empanadas and Pastelitos, Arroz con pollo, Boniato con mojo and Huevos habaneros (which I still have for breakfast at least one a month but without the Cumin). Granted you had to pay in CUC's, but they have a higher value than the CUP (but tipped in US Dollars).

    People forget that when the revolution first happened it a nationalist revolution, not a communist one, that only occurred once the US had applied trade sanctions and Castro was forced to turn to the Soviet block to survive. A lot of the other things that Simonic refers to )particularly 1, 3 and 4) were due to the US's continued interference in trying to encourage a popular rising to overthrow Castro and his government

    The Trade Sanctions also made it difficult for the people of Cuba to work earn money for themselves. I remember being asked to tip in US dollars as they could then go to the 'Dollar Shops' which were meant for the tourists to buy what we would class as 'essentials' like cooking oil etc. and there was actually quite a lot of it going on - tipping in US Dollars that is.

    Before we went we looked into things and took basic items like pens (biro's), pencils and other everyday products because the US sanction meant they could not buy them locally as essentially the US said that any country/business that did business with them could not do business with Cuba, if they did they would face US trade sanctions themselves. Having said that, there was evidence of a lot of Spain and other Central and South American countries - Central and South American countries would take Cuban Doctors and other medical personnel and cover all their living costs, and pay in trade goods. So when we were out and about we took them with us and gave them out to the kids rather than money/sweets as most were doing.

    Also a lot of the Hotels were part owned by the Gov't and most of the profit put into the running of the country. It must have galled the US into apoplexy when after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba did not follow, due to the strategy followed by Castro and the Gov't they actually increased state spending in most areas.

    So all of the points that Simonic makes have to be tempered a little bit, particularly 2 and 5 as these were allowed but restricted but trade sanctions, any info the US puts out on Cuba has to be viewed keeping in mind their agenda. I mean it's not like the US or any other countries around the world do any of those thing that are listed or worse do they........ ;wink

    I am not condoning anything Castro did anymore than I condone the US and what went on in the US Cuban outpost (Guantanamo Bay) or some of the other policies they pursue around the world in the name of protecting themselves and the 'free' world, just adding some balance and understanding as to why some of these things occurred.
Sign In or Register to comment.