I think Trump deserves his own thread ....

MntnMan62

Über Member
Location
Northern NJ
Hammersmith Odeon February (I think) 1978 and again June 1982. The weekend of the 1982 gig was eventful, I took a Uher tape recorder to bootleg that one and was nearly caught out by a stage hand looking over the audience from the stage, we were two rows from the front. I was not the only one with a recorder though.
We traveled down from Manchester on motorcycles loaded with camping gear as we were going to the Stonehenge free festival after the gig.
We left the bikes at a friends dads flat in the Barbican Centre and crammed into his car and went to the gig, we saw the traffic at Earls Court was a nightmare on the way to his so we crossed the river at Blackfriars to go through Lambeth and cross again to get to the Odeon, my friend pointed down as we crossed Blackfriars and said that the police had removed a hanging body that morning, it was Roberto Calvi.
Left the gig, arrived in Wiltshire about 1am and immediately binged on various narcotics, this continued for three days. English Heritage did not then exist with battalions of police to assist them in protecting the stones so on the Monday morning I found myself taking photos of the revelers from the top of one of the sarsen stones, different times.
There was some trouble and members of one of the few remaining Hells Angels chapters set a van on fire over some minor altercation, there was a fair bit of brawling on the Saturday and again on Sunday. I don't even remember most of the bands who attended, I recorded the Hawkwind set and got the levels wrong, it was a terrible set anyway.
I went to one other gig at the Birmingham NEC in 1988 I think, his son was on drums, it was pretty sterile, its just a big shed and music in big sheds is not good for setting levels.
My memories of a misspent early manhood by Randy aged 60.
Edit, wrong date:rolleyes:
Frankly, no pun intended, I happen to think that early manhood is supposed to be misspent.
 

raleighnut

Legendary Member
Location
On 3 Wheels
1614398617234.png
 

dutchguylivingintheuk

Senior Member
Well, then you and I see Trump and his administration very differently. Gee, I guess because he announced that he started a program and put a name to it means he actually created something? BS. Big crock of sxxt.
It's a policy again you can agree with it or not but it's not nothing.
And as for his rallies, Trump isn't as stupid as you would like to think. After all, he not only got himself elected but even after losing the election he has GOP members flying to Mar A Lago to meet with him.
When i said Trump was stupid i mean that in terms of compared to really evil creeps like Hitler was. Sure Trump can do something he's been playing the i'm an succelfull bussinessman lie all his life so this is a slight tweak to that.
However it is nothing compared to Hitler and the scary thing was he had it all planned, that's why i say trump is stupid compared to Hitler i get why poeple compare the two but there really not in the same league, thankfully i must add.
He's still got a pretty large following. In order to have accomplished just that makes him at least crafty and certainly far from stupid. And his evil comes from his motivation. All he cares about is how he looks to the world. He doesn't care about this country. And that's what makes him dangerous. And I'm curious. Please tell me what he did that was good. I'd really like to know.
Did he? Sure you have that maga mobs that for example stormed the capital but in total numbers that's not really much, it just looks like it because it's an large country. In numbers about 54% of biden voters said they did so because ''it's not Trump'' (source: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/11/20/voters-reflections-on-the-campaign/) and now i say maga what was that again? oh yeah a smartly designed slogan which worked perfectly the first time around, but second time not so much. Not so strange because if we make promises you don't keep, people are not going to trust you again.
For example his foreign policy was a welcome break from either funding terrorist fractions to overthrow a unwanted government or hoping you can achieve ''regime change by bombing campaigns (Syria and Libya for example.) He managed to communicate with North Korea and managed to get Isreal recognised by more countries in the middle East etc. also his economic policy was'nt that bad before covid.

But the point is also refering to the 54% who voted Biden because it was not Trump is that neither Biden or Trump is candidate people where looking for, Biden has not without reason the Nickname ''sleepy Joe'' and Trump well we have a whole topic going in debt about what wrong with him.
Still that a person like trump got elected in the first place in 2016 is one a testament of the Democrats arrogance and two a clear sign to american are ready to embrace real change, just the politics are not. That why they spend 4 years bashing and impeaching Trump instead of improving their own party the the extent that you now have Democrats, republicans and the little fractions within their parties, democrats failed to condem the far left, repulicans fail to condem the far right, both groups are heavily armed and increasing in power, what could possibly go wrong?
(few examples capital storming burning cities this summer etc.)

No, it was Bush who was overlooking the fact that there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction. I was vehemently against going into Iraq because of this reason. And I was correct. I was however in favor of going after Bin Laden in Afghanistan. That effort had to be undertaken. I think your argument has taken on a tone of silliness now. How about we both agree to disagree?
When the false narrative worked at least on you then, there where no new weapons of mass destruction found, there was loads of Sarin gas for example, which Obama subsectuanly left there so Isis had something to throw at the kurds etc.
The thing with the Iraq war is, back in the 90'' we said Saddam is all talk leave him alone and don't feed attention. Then the us was forced to intervene when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Clinton later bombed Iraq too, so while i agree the Iraq war was started under the wrong reasons or with at the very least flimsy evidence, i don feel there was a ground to take action, whether a full blown invasion was the best one is a other question. (and yeah sure us and other western countries involvement is not all good-samatrian it;s about the oil surely)
But partly we can sure agree to disagree, i agree with you that the war based oin flimsy evidence was wrong, i don't agree that the war was pointless in general, because bombing what Clinton did only archieves so much

I said at the time that Hilary was totally the wrong person to run as the potential first woman POTUS
too much baggage and - and from what I have seen - there are a lot of sexist people in the USA - and a lot of them are women - the old "she can't keep her man under control - she's no good" attitude and all that
and, of course, all the history that could be twisted into problems - especially with a bully like trump involved

she might have been a great president - or maybe not - but she was the wrong person at the wrong time
I feel that the first female president will have to be squeaky clean - or have time to prove herself as VP first - preferably both - which brings one person to mind - maybe
I think Oprah for example would have made a good change, but Hillary was herself damaged, for example because of that interview where she histeruasly laughed about killing Kadaffi. and off course the way Trump plays politics with nicknames and such, the democrats simply really had no answer to that in 2016.. but the real problem is that there is a growing group that does not want democrats or repulicans, but no other party has the budget or resources to compete with either democrats or republicans.
Don;t worry- the GOP have got it figured out
Loads of States are trying to enact legislation so that the State legislature can decide the electors (for the Electoral College) themselves regardless of the vote of the electorate -"if required"
i.e. if the People vote e.g. Democrat but the State legislature think this is a bad move - they can appoint Electors that will vote Republican in the Electoral college rather than appointing electors based on the vote of the People of the state

and they think it is a Democratic country!!!!
Yeah that's what many republicans said during the Trump toddlers ''I WON' tatrum, however when it came to vote no state actually ignored the vote to push for a other outcome.
But yeah legally it does have some loopholes. The same thing as that the us presidential race is sponsored by all kinds of interest.. How would we respond to that here? Keir starmer presidental campaign sponsered by British gas, Or boris Johnson brought to you by Transport for London...
 

MntnMan62

Über Member
Location
Northern NJ
It's a policy again you can agree with it or not but it's not nothing.

When i said Trump was stupid i mean that in terms of compared to really evil creeps like Hitler was. Sure Trump can do something he's been playing the i'm an succelfull bussinessman lie all his life so this is a slight tweak to that.
However it is nothing compared to Hitler and the scary thing was he had it all planned, that's why i say trump is stupid compared to Hitler i get why poeple compare the two but there really not in the same league, thankfully i must add.

Did he? Sure you have that maga mobs that for example stormed the capital but in total numbers that's not really much, it just looks like it because it's an large country. In numbers about 54% of biden voters said they did so because ''it's not Trump'' (source: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/11/20/voters-reflections-on-the-campaign/) and now i say maga what was that again? oh yeah a smartly designed slogan which worked perfectly the first time around, but second time not so much. Not so strange because if we make promises you don't keep, people are not going to trust you again.
For example his foreign policy was a welcome break from either funding terrorist fractions to overthrow a unwanted government or hoping you can achieve ''regime change by bombing campaigns (Syria and Libya for example.) He managed to communicate with North Korea and managed to get Isreal recognised by more countries in the middle East etc. also his economic policy was'nt that bad before covid.

But the point is also refering to the 54% who voted Biden because it was not Trump is that neither Biden or Trump is candidate people where looking for, Biden has not without reason the Nickname ''sleepy Joe'' and Trump well we have a whole topic going in debt about what wrong with him.
Still that a person like trump got elected in the first place in 2016 is one a testament of the Democrats arrogance and two a clear sign to american are ready to embrace real change, just the politics are not. That why they spend 4 years bashing and impeaching Trump instead of improving their own party the the extent that you now have Democrats, republicans and the little fractions within their parties, democrats failed to condem the far left, repulicans fail to condem the far right, both groups are heavily armed and increasing in power, what could possibly go wrong?
(few examples capital storming burning cities this summer etc.)


When the false narrative worked at least on you then, there where no new weapons of mass destruction found, there was loads of Sarin gas for example, which Obama subsectuanly left there so Isis had something to throw at the kurds etc.
The thing with the Iraq war is, back in the 90'' we said Saddam is all talk leave him alone and don't feed attention. Then the us was forced to intervene when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Clinton later bombed Iraq too, so while i agree the Iraq war was started under the wrong reasons or with at the very least flimsy evidence, i don feel there was a ground to take action, whether a full blown invasion was the best one is a other question. (and yeah sure us and other western countries involvement is not all good-samatrian it;s about the oil surely)
But partly we can sure agree to disagree, i agree with you that the war based oin flimsy evidence was wrong, i don't agree that the war was pointless in general, because bombing what Clinton did only archieves so much


I think Oprah for example would have made a good change, but Hillary was herself damaged, for example because of that interview where she histeruasly laughed about killing Kadaffi. and off course the way Trump plays politics with nicknames and such, the democrats simply really had no answer to that in 2016.. but the real problem is that there is a growing group that does not want democrats or repulicans, but no other party has the budget or resources to compete with either democrats or republicans.

Yeah that's what many republicans said during the Trump toddlers ''I WON' tatrum, however when it came to vote no state actually ignored the vote to push for a other outcome.
But yeah legally it does have some loopholes. The same thing as that the us presidential race is sponsored by all kinds of interest.. How would we respond to that here? Keir starmer presidental campaign sponsered by British gas, Or boris Johnson brought to you by Transport for London...
Way too many words for me today. I was drinking heavily last night and now have no patience to go through your novel. I'll probably look it over and respond when I'm properly recovered. But I'll leave you with this. You say that all Trump has is a small band of followers who stormed the Capital? Nope. He was able to get 74 million people to vote for him in the last election.
 

MntnMan62

Über Member
Location
Northern NJ
It's a policy again you can agree with it or not but it's not nothing.

It may be a policy and one which it is difficult not to support. However, like everything else Trump has touched, it hasn't produced the results that he touted at its outset. Fail.

When i said Trump was stupid i mean that in terms of compared to really evil creeps like Hitler was. Sure Trump can do something he's been playing the i'm an succelfull bussinessman lie all his life so this is a slight tweak to that.
However it is nothing compared to Hitler and the scary thing was he had it all planned, that's why i say trump is stupid compared to Hitler i get why poeple compare the two but there really not in the same league, thankfully i must add.

He may be out of the White House but I don't think we've seen or heard the last from him. Only after he is truly gone can we truly understand the level of Trump's pre-conceived notions of everything he's done while in office and after. I surely hope you are right that Trump is stupid in comparison to Hitler. But sadly I think they may have more in common than any of us actually thinks.

Did he? Sure you have that maga mobs that for example stormed the capital but in total numbers that's not really much, it just looks like it because it's an large country. In numbers about 54% of biden voters said they did so because ''it's not Trump'' (source: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/11/20/voters-reflections-on-the-campaign/) and now i say maga what was that again? oh yeah a smartly designed slogan which worked perfectly the first time around, but second time not so much. Not so strange because if we make promises you don't keep, people are not going to trust you again.
For example his foreign policy was a welcome break from either funding terrorist fractions to overthrow a unwanted government or hoping you can achieve ''regime change by bombing campaigns (Syria and Libya for example.) He managed to communicate with North Korea and managed to get Isreal recognised by more countries in the middle East etc. also his economic policy was'nt that bad before covid.

I already commented on this one. He does have the numbers. Namely 74 million voters in the 2020 election. End of discussion.

But the point is also refering to the 54% who voted Biden because it was not Trump is that neither Biden or Trump is candidate people where looking for, Biden has not without reason the Nickname ''sleepy Joe'' and Trump well we have a whole topic going in debt about what wrong with him.
Still that a person like trump got elected in the first place in 2016 is one a testament of the Democrats arrogance and two a clear sign to american are ready to embrace real change, just the politics are not. That why they spend 4 years bashing and impeaching Trump instead of improving their own party the the extent that you now have Democrats, republicans and the little fractions within their parties, democrats failed to condem the far left, repulicans fail to condem the far right, both groups are heavily armed and increasing in power, what could possibly go wrong?
(few examples capital storming burning cities this summer etc.)

I think Trump winning has less to do with people being ready for change and Democrat's arrogance. I think it has more to do with a level of stupidity that has become prevalent in this country that I believe finds its souce in compacency, which itself is brought on by a highly successful economy that has created vast amounts of wealth in this country. That wealth is what has led to complacency and therefore, mass stupidity. In order for there to be real change from the status quo, namely draining the swamp we call Washington, the person claiming to bring that change must be capable of making it happen. I for one am all in favor of a change to the status quo in Washington. But I won't vote for someone based on a desire for change unless I have confidence that that candidate has the capacity to effect the necessary change. I spent my career in the real estate industry in NYC. I have known of Trump and his projects for decades and have dealt with his firm and family on a few occassions. And that experience and his history told me all I needed to know about his lack of knowledge and expertise. It really doesn't take a whole lot of math to figure out that based on what he inherited from his billionaire father shows exactly how spectacularly bad at real estate he truly is. Facts.


When the false narrative worked at least on you then, there where no new weapons of mass destruction found, there was loads of Sarin gas for example, which Obama subsectuanly left there so Isis had something to throw at the kurds etc.
The thing with the Iraq war is, back in the 90'' we said Saddam is all talk leave him alone and don't feed attention. Then the us was forced to intervene when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Clinton later bombed Iraq too, so while i agree the Iraq war was started under the wrong reasons or with at the very least flimsy evidence, i don feel there was a ground to take action, whether a full blown invasion was the best one is a other question. (and yeah sure us and other western countries involvement is not all good-samatrian it;s about the oil surely)
But partly we can sure agree to disagree, i agree with you that the war based oin flimsy evidence was wrong, i don't agree that the war was pointless in general, because bombing what Clinton did only archieves so much

It wasn't a false narrative. There are TWO narratives. First of all, we already knew of his past weapons programs. That was a given. And we knew he was developing chemical weapons like sarin. Yet we didn't invade his country over it when it was being developed. The second narrative of NEW weapons of mass destruction is the more relevant point. There weren't any. End result. There was no reason for us to invade the country. Big fail.


I think Oprah for example would have made a good change, but Hillary was herself damaged, for example because of that interview where she histeruasly laughed about killing Kadaffi. and off course the way Trump plays politics with nicknames and such, the democrats simply really had no answer to that in 2016.. but the real problem is that there is a growing group that does not want democrats or repulicans, but no other party has the budget or resources to compete with either democrats or republicans.

Really? Oprah? Another TV personality? C'mon. And I agree Hillary was "damaged". But because of all the points I made earlier on about Trump, it was a no brainer for me to vote against Trump and cast my ballot for Hillary. Obviously a majority of Americans agreed with me. Unfortunately we have the Electoral College to deal with. Hillary was entirely unlikeable. I couldn't stand her. But given the choice between those two, no brainer. This isn't an issue of funding. She was the better option and we have four years now behind us that proves that point.

Yeah that's what many republicans said during the Trump toddlers ''I WON' tatrum, however when it came to vote no state actually ignored the vote to push for a other outcome.
But yeah legally it does have some loopholes. The same thing as that the us presidential race is sponsored by all kinds of interest.. How would we respond to that here? Keir starmer presidental campaign sponsered by British gas, Or boris Johnson brought to you by Transport for London...
So, there you have it. My response to your novel. Responses in bold. I'll admit that many people from outside the US, especially in Europe, have a better understanding of US politics than many Americans themselves. But when you are debating US politics with someone who actually understands some of what goes on here, your points fall far short. That's my opinion. Like it or don't like it. It really doens't matter.
 
Last edited:

ebikeerwidnes

Über Member
Dunno what the reasons is

but I would think money is part of it - and probably some 'influence' that trump has over the leadership of the right wing factions of the country - wonder what that is all about????
 

raleighnut

Legendary Member
Location
On 3 Wheels
Dunno what the reasons is

but I would think money is part of it - and probably some 'influence' that trump has over the leadership of the right wing factions of the country - wonder what that is all about????
I think it's down to a few factors, his TV show, the fact he lives on Burgers and Coke and possibly that he is as racist and bigotted as they are.
What they fail to grasp is that he despises them as low class, witness his comments about theose 'supporters' who did his bidding at the Capitol building. Let's face it America ended up with the playground bully in charge.
 

ebikeerwidnes

Über Member
I agree - but we are talking about different people

the people who turn up to his rallies are impressed by the show, the recoric - and he is good at finding what they want to hear and shouting it at them - especially if he can find a slogan - "Lock her up" and all that

But I was thinking about the clever people at the top - the ones that make the decisions - the ones that are weighing up whether to go with trump - and keep 'his base' - and hence have to put up with his shouty bulling and eratic decision making and total inability to understand the basics of running anything more complex than a hammer
Or whether to drop him and find a new leader for the party and start moving the GOP in a new direction - probably back to where it was years ago. Which risks loosing trump's base - but if trump looses his platform at rallies that they run - he will - hopefully - end just yelling into the Void listened to by an every decreasing group of fanatics

Those people - and we may not know who they are - are the ones making decisions - and I wonder why they seem to be letting trump move forwards????
 

AuroraSaab

Über Member
Way too many words for me today. I was drinking heavily last night and now have no patience to go through your novel. I'll probably look it over and respond when I'm properly recovered. But I'll leave you with this. You say that all Trump has is a small band of followers who stormed the Capital? Nope. He was able to get 74 million people to vote for him in the last election.
That was an unnecessarily snarky reply, MM. That's not like you, so I'll put it down to the hangover. I think you are unfair in your estimation of the US electorate though. Yes, Trump did get 74 million votes but, as with every election, it's always a case of picking between whoever is on offer. There were certainly vociferous right wingers on the Trump side but I think many voters were ordinary people taken in by the MAGA rhetoric and the fact that another Clinton was the alternative. If they could have foreseen the next 5 years they might have voted differently.

The same applies to Biden. I'm not seeing any great love of him personally, or a huge groundswell of support for his policies, but if it's him or 5 more years of Trump then he will get the votes.

I think politically Trump is done though. Like Corbyn he's very quickly becoming yesterday's man. I don't know why he would even want another crack at it. He didn't seem to enjoy it and it was obviously way more work than he was prepared for. Not sure who the Republicans have in the pipeline to replace him though. It's a shame that American politics hinges on personality not policies.
 

raleighnut

Legendary Member
Location
On 3 Wheels
I agree - but we are talking about different people

the people who turn up to his rallies are impressed by the show, the recoric - and he is good at finding what they want to hear and shouting it at them - especially if he can find a slogan - "Lock her up" and all that

But I was thinking about the clever people at the top - the ones that make the decisions - the ones that are weighing up whether to go with trump - and keep 'his base' - and hence have to put up with his shouty bulling and eratic decision making and total inability to understand the basics of running anything more complex than a hammer
Or whether to drop him and find a new leader for the party and start moving the GOP in a new direction - probably back to where it was years ago. Which risks loosing trump's base - but if trump looses his platform at rallies that they run - he will - hopefully - end just yelling into the Void listened to by an every decreasing group of fanatics

Those people - and we may not know who they are - are the ones making decisions - and I wonder why they seem to be letting trump move forwards????
1614684284098.png
 

dutchguylivingintheuk

Senior Member
It may be a policy and one which it is difficult not to support. However, like everything else Trump has touched, it hasn't produced the results that he touted at its outset. Fail.
The only or one of the few things he did let's say reasonabley is lose the border back in Januari for China and later for almost all travel. (where he was critized for but less that six months one most countries have some kind of travel ban.

He may be out of the White House but I don't think we've seen or heard the last from him. Only after he is truly gone can we truly understand the level of Trump's pre-conceived notions of everything he's done while in office and after. I surely hope you are right that Trump is stupid in comparison to Hitler. But sadly I think they may have more in common than any of us actually thinks.
He is old and has a very unhealthy diet, but yes if his body does'nt shut him down, the changes are likely that he will try and run again.

I already commented on this one. He does have the numbers. Namely 74 million voters in the 2020 election. End of discussion.
Agree to disagree on that one because i think in a country where two options are the only real choice that does matter. if it where to be two choices out of a race of for example 48 different political parties i would agree with you but that isn't the case.

I think Trump winning has less to do with people being ready for change and Democrat's arrogance. I think it has more to do with a level of stupidity that has become prevalent in this country that I believe finds its souce in compacency, which itself is brought on by a highly successful economy that has created vast amounts of wealth in this country. That wealth is what has led to complacency and therefore, mass stupidity. In order for there to be real change from the status quo, namely draining the swamp we call Washington, the person claiming to bring that change must be capable of making it happen. I for one am all in favor of a change to the status quo in Washington. But I won't vote for someone based on a desire for change unless I have confidence that that candidate has the capacity to effect the necessary change.
For me it looks like poeple in America are looking for change, the odds for Obama against Mccain for example where on paper not so great yet he won and he won big. But the bigger picture is regardless of who gets to talk to the microphone both republicans and democrats poeple behind publc view stay where they are, the sponsors, bussinessman etc. This led to the fact that a monster like Epstein could continue for so long.
Well that draining the swamp is a nicely fabricated marketing story together with the maga slogan. Made by someone who really likes that swamp. so i agree with you Trump was never going to achieve that, i also believe he never intended to.

But with the republicans too, because in the now around 12 years before Trump the us voted Obama instead of Mccain. What always surprises me about the us that you have so much tv programmes/projects/etc. where as a community you try to make someone's life better, and surely for the other side of the pond and can look bigger than it is but still, for the looks of it lots of those kind initiatives, yet when americans get seriously ill the seem to prefer to let the individual to go bankrupt instead of a healthcare system that takes care off all like we have in Europe. I think a healthcare system like europe has would improve wealth on the longer term, for example because money you save on medication get right back in the economy on other things.
I spent my career in the real estate industry in NYC. I have known of Trump and his projects for decades and have dealt with his firm and family on a few occassions. And that experience and his history told me all I needed to know about his lack of knowledge and expertise. It really doesn't take a whole lot of math to figure out that based on what he inherited from his billionaire father shows exactly how spectacularly bad at real estate he truly is. Facts.
Not gonna argue with that, it also a bit of the mentalty of those hedgefunds guys who got bitten with the gamestop thing, because before the hotel casino thing that was blown up lately went bankrupt he sold it off and then charged the new owners for the use of his name.. always trying to make some money out of something even of you know your bankrupting the party you get money from in the process.
It wasn't a false narrative. There are TWO narratives. First of all, we already knew of his past weapons programs. That was a given. And we knew he was developing chemical weapons like sarin. Yet we didn't invade his country over it when it was being developed. The second narrative of NEW weapons of mass destruction is the more relevant point. There weren't any. End result. There was no reason for us to invade the country. Big fail.
He was forced to give up all those mod after the first golf war, so either they lied and did'nt take the efforts to take that away or he got new weapons despite all the sanctions etc. That's is probably why these already existing weapons of mass destruction where so under-reported and apperently ready for isis to grab and use.

Really? Oprah? Another TV personality? C'mon. And I agree Hillary was "damaged". But because of all the points I made earlier on about Trump, it was a no brainer for me to vote against Trump and cast my ballot for Hillary. Obviously a majority of Americans agreed with me. Unfortunately we have the Electoral College to deal with. Hillary was entirely unlikeable. I couldn't stand her. But given the choice between those two, no brainer. This isn't an issue of funding. She was the better option and we have four years now behind us that proves that point.
I think Oprah running against Trump would work very well, in terms of Trumps usual rhetoric wouldn't work it's the same as his attack on Obama this election didn't work.
I agree on Clinton as was clear i think lol, anyway with the funding i mean the amount of support a candidate has to collect to be able to run for president, that usually involves a lot of money right? be it in the form of a huge donation to the party or rich sponsors who do the same?
 

MntnMan62

Über Member
Location
Northern NJ
That was an unnecessarily snarky reply, MM. That's not like you, so I'll put it down to the hangover. I think you are unfair in your estimation of the US electorate though. Yes, Trump did get 74 million votes but, as with every election, it's always a case of picking between whoever is on offer. There were certainly vociferous right wingers on the Trump side but I think many voters were ordinary people taken in by the MAGA rhetoric and the fact that another Clinton was the alternative. If they could have foreseen the next 5 years they might have voted differently.

The same applies to Biden. I'm not seeing any great love of him personally, or a huge groundswell of support for his policies, but if it's him or 5 more years of Trump then he will get the votes.

I think politically Trump is done though. Like Corbyn he's very quickly becoming yesterday's man. I don't know why he would even want another crack at it. He didn't seem to enjoy it and it was obviously way more work than he was prepared for. Not sure who the Republicans have in the pipeline to replace him though. It's a shame that American politics hinges on personality not policies.
Sorry for the snarkiness in my reply. Yep. The hangover was to blame. I don't think I am being unfair to the US electorate. The guy got 74 million votes AFTER the last four years of insanity. In all seriousness, I believe that anyone who voted for Trump in 2020 is a mindless imbecile. All the "excuses" people used for voting for him in 2016 I am willing to accept. Namely, we want change, Hillary is this or Hillary is that. But the second time around there is no excuse. Anyone taken in by his MAGA rhetoric in 2020 is just an imbecile. None of my comments are attributable to 2016. That's ancient history. As for Biden, you are correct. I don't love him. I'm not even sure I like him. But I've jokingly said that I would vote for a paper bag before I vote for Trump. But, I wasn't joking. And I don't think Trump is done politically. The forces that put him in power are easily stirred up. He may not have his Twitter account but he's got legislators meeting him in Florida. They are all still running scared of his followers. That's not the sign of someone who has lost his political teeth. Let's face it. The sheer fact that this guy who filed bankruptcy 6 times, who inherited his money rather than earned it, yet was able to lie about pretty much everything he's ever done, was able to get elected president at all should tell you a great deal about the intelligence level of the American electorate. I agree that it is a shame that our politics hinges on personaltiy rather than policies but that also is an indication of the low level of intelligence of the US population.
 
Top Bottom