• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

United States Presidential Election 2016

Who would you vote for in the US presidential elections?

  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 27 48.2%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 9 16.1%
  • Jill Stein

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Gary Johnson

    Votes: 4 7.1%
  • Another independent candidate

    Votes: 1 1.8%
  • I wouldn't vote for any of 'em

    Votes: 13 23.2%

  • Total voters
    56
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
Closeness to the business community is not viewed as a particularly bad thing in America, especially within the Republican side of politics.

That all depends what you mean by "business community".

Legislation which benefits "Big Business" -Clinton's corporate paymasters- often comes at the expense of local small- and medium-sized businesses. What's good for Wal-Mart is more often than not terrible for the local Mom and Pop store.

After the huge damage caused to the global economy by the Bush administration in 2008, it's important that we never again have a neocon (and Clinton is most assuredly a neoconservative) as US President. Hillary Clinton must be kept out of the White House at all costs, and if that means having Trump in charge that's a price I'd gladly pay.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
I don't personally think a Trump term is going to be as disastrous as people are fearing. He is first and foremost a businessman, and he is not daft enough to want to do anything that hurts his business interests, including a messy world (unless he has a weapons business I am not aware of).

What imo is going to cause more uncertainty is the potential weakening of America's influence on the world stage should we see a gob****e of an American president, with little or no tactical nous. One can do a lot of damage in four years. Whether that is a good thing or not, who knows?

With Clinton, we know what we are getting, a regular American politician that has all the shortcomings of all the ones before. She comes into power, we simply maintain the status quo with minor adjustments.

Neither will be the end of the world. Both have their own flaws. Clinton just a smidgen ahead in my preference due to her more liberal views.

All the arguments about climate change, etc, pale into insignificance. If climate change measures were gonna cost US businesses money, a president of any colour would be slow to adopt them, if at all. Colour makes no difference.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
I don't personally think a Trump term is going to be as disastrous as people are fearing. He is first and foremost a businessman, and he is not daft enough to want to do anything that hurts his business interests, including a messy world (unless he has a weapons business I am not aware of).

Trump's business credentials and his ability to act in his companies' best interests are significantly overstated, as his many failed ventures and company bankruptcies testify.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Trump's business credentials and his ability to act in his companies' best interests are significantly overstated, as his many failed ventures and company bankruptcies testify.

That will all be down to opinion and interpretation though.

Many successful businessmen have had numerous failures, some pretty spectacular.

But to have such a big empire, there has to be something about him, good or bad depending on one's perspective, that made him this successful.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
That said I do agree a Trump presidency won't be the end of the world. That's not because Trump will be a capable president (he won't be) but because the US president actually has quite limited power and is heavily constrained by Congress who should be able to keep him in check. The main concern is what his candidacy is doing to US politics. The tone of the campaign is horrific, even by US standards and its fuelling ever increasing mistrust in the US political system.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
That will all be down to opinion and interpretation though.

Many successful businessmen have had numerous failures, some pretty spectacular.

But to have such a big empire, there has to be something about him, good or bad depending on one's perspective, that made him this successful.
Trump isn't like Richard Branson or Alan sugar. He didn't start from nothing and it wasn't his entrepreneurial spirit ot business acumen which propelled him to business success. It's a family business and his grandmother and father (and importantly their capital) laid much of the corporate foundation for his success. The Donald's contribution to that has been the brand and to simply keep the real estate business going while he explores other ventures (many unsuccessful). Although yes, he's done well to keep it going!
 

TheNewNo2

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
1,008
Location
Canary Wharf
I think the likelihood of an electoral college defying the popular vote in their state is incredibly slim. Indeed in some states it is explicitly outlawed.

But the unequal distribution of electoral college votes across states and the fact that electoral college votes are taken on a 'winner take all' basis in all but two states does mean one candidate can win the US-wide popular vote, but not win on electoral college votes as it did in 2000 (just in the UK a party may win the popular vote, but not secure a parliamentary majority - although in the US this arguably reinforces the federal nature of their political system). It also means a draw is entirely possible and it's left up to the House of Representatives in Congress.

Actually it's worse than that - an electoral college majority is needed to win the presidency outright, otherwise it goes to the House. That very effectively solidifies the two party system, and it's certainly not inconceivable that someone with significantly less votes could be handed the presidency.


I don't personally think a Trump term is going to be as disastrous as people are fearing. He is first and foremost a businessman, and he is not daft enough to want to do anything that hurts his business interests, including a messy world (unless he has a weapons business I am not aware of).

He is that daft frankly. His business empire is based solely on the illusion of success - splashing his name on things. He wasn't even one of the top New York property developers, he may well not even be a billionaire, and many of his businesses have shady practices or were outright cons.
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
Actually it's worse than that - an electoral college majority is needed to win the presidency outright, otherwise it goes to the House. That very effectively solidifies the two party system, and it's certainly not inconceivable that someone with significantly less votes could be handed the presidency.
Indeed. It's happened four times before. It will happen again. But it's important to remember the US is a federal state and the fact that states have limited veto powers enhances that federal structure and ensures state interests are taken seriously. It's quite hard for someone used to the British political system to get their head around, but the fact the electoral college system can mean the presidency can be awarded to someone who didn't secure the popular vote is a deliberate design, not an unintended consequence.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
He is that daft frankly. His business empire is based solely on the illusion of success - splashing his name on things. He wasn't even one of the top New York property developers, he may well not even be a billionaire, and many of his businesses have shady practices or were outright cons.

I bow to yours and crehld's superior knowledge. :D
 

meridian2

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2013
Messages
1,186
Donald Trump is the product of American society fed up with liberal, socialist dogma that has led to endless gun crime and an intransigent NRA. Clinton's so far up their backside, voting her in would be seen, to me at least, as endorsing the liberal mantra on gun control.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
Tweedledee and Tweedledum are due to meet. Euhghghhhh....




Outgoing UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to address supporters of Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Mississippi later.
He will appear before 15,000 activists in Jackson, although it is unclear whether he will share the stage with the Republican presidential nominee.
Mr Farage told local radio in the state that the similarities between Brexit and the US election were "uncanny".
Mr Trump, who is trailing his rival Hillary Clinton in the opinion polls, backed the UK's exit from the EU.

_90903791_mediaitem90903790.jpg


In a tweet last week, Mr Trump said: "They will soon be calling me Mr Brexit."

Mr Farage, who attended the Republican convention in Cleveland last month, said he would not "fall into the trap" of personally endorsing Mr Trump in his quest to reach the White House, but added that he would not vote for Mrs Clinton "even if you paid me".

For Donald Trump, the British Brexit vote is a harbinger of a political revolution that will soon crash on to American shores.

The Republican nominee said as much as he stood on his Scottish golf course the day after the UK voted to leave the EU.

"People are angry all over the world," he said. "This will not be the last."
So, although the venue - deeply conservative Mississippi - is a bit unusual during the heat of a presidential campaign, Mr Trump possibly sharing the same stage with the man who spearheaded the Brexit vote should not be too surprising.

Mr Trump, in having Mr Farage recount his "Brexit story" to thousands of supporters on Wednesday night, probably hopes the tale of an upstart victory, despite seemingly long odds, will make his side forget about the opinion polls showing him trailing both nationally and in key battleground states.

During a radio interview on Wednesday, Mr Farage said he would tell Mr Trump's audience that the similarities between Brexit and the US election were "uncanny".

"They all said it couldn't happen," he said. "We were wasting our time. With a well-aimed stone, we hit that big Goliath and knocked it over."
Speaking on Super Talk Radio in the US state, Mr Farage said he had been part of a "political revolution" in the UK and there were the makings of a similar movement in the US.

'Fight for change'

He compared the federal government in Washington DC to the European Commission, saying many people felt it had become "its own country", and claimed the Democrat nominee epitomised the status quo.
"I'm going to say to people in this country that the circumstances, the similarities, the parallels, between the people that voted Brexit and the people that could beat Clinton in a few weeks' time here in America are uncanny.

"And if they want things to change, they've got to get up out of their chairs, go out, and fight for it. It can happen."

He suggested it did not matter that the political establishment, including many top Republicans, were shunning Mr Trump's campaign.
"Because there are millions of people out there who never voted for the Bushes, who never voted for the Clintons, who haven't voted for anybody, but who may, if they think in this presidential election they can actually change their lives and their communities, and that's the audience that matters."

Mr Farage, who is credited with securing the referendum on the UK's membership of the EU and helping to pull off the surprise Leave victory, is standing down next month as the party's figurehead after fulfilling his lifelong political ambition, but will remain as a member of the European Parliament.

UKIP donor and strategist Arron Banks, who is travelling with Mr Farage, suggested on social media that he would be having dinner with Mr Trump and was looking forward to the rally.

But Mr Farage's association with Mr Trump has not gone down well with some senior members of UKIP, including its sole MP Douglas Carswell, who tweeted "it's all going a bit South Thanet for the US Republicans" - a reference to Mr Farage's failed attempt to win a seat in the Kent constituency last year.

And Suzanne Evans, the former UKIP policy chief currently suspended by the party, suggested Mr Farage was trending on Twitter "for all the wrong reasons".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37177938
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Jesus Christ!

He can stay there and don't bother coming back.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
Didn't know that HE had suddenly entered the race for the Presidency.

Mind you, he can count on the votes of the millions of Evangelical Christians...:D

I wouldn't be too sure, a lot of them would be opposed to having a Jewish president!
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Paul, you have just replied to my same post twice. :D
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
I note Farage states you cannot pay him to vote for Clinton. Such a policy is clearly in line with his current practice where he is paid over £70,000 by the tax payer per annum to vote on important decisions in the European Parliament, but rarely bothers
 

TheNewNo2

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
1,008
Location
Canary Wharf
I note Farage states you cannot pay him to vote for Clinton. Such a policy is clearly in line with his current practice where he is paid over £70,000 by the tax payer per annum to vote on important decisions in the European Parliament, but rarely bothers

Well he is technically correct, as he is not eligible to vote in this year's election!
 

crehld

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2014
Messages
1,994
Location
Norfolk
Well he is technically correct, as he is not eligible to vote in this year's election!

True. And even if he were I suspect accepting payment to vote a particular way would fall foul of a range of legislation designed to prevent voter fraud.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,078
True. And even if he were I suspect accepting payment to vote a particular way would fall foul of a range of legislation designed to prevent voter fraud.

I would guess it depends who is offering the payment, and if that person could be construed as having anything to do with any candidate or the election process. If, for instance, Mrs Farage (I've no idea of her first name, Brunhilde perhaps) were to offer him a pony to vote for Trump, I don't see how that would be illegal.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
I would guess it depends who is offering the payment, and if that person could be construed as having anything to do with any candidate or the election process. If, for instance, Mrs Farage (I've no idea of her first name, Brunhilde perhaps) were to offer him a pony to vote for Trump, I don't see how that would be illegal.

From the United States Code, Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I - CRIMES, CHAPTER 29 - ELECTIONS AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES

Section 597. Expenditures to influence voting said:
Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and

Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

They tend not to like Arabs who wear robes and preach positive messages.

Jesus wasn't an Arab, but I doubt most Americans could tell the difference.
 
Last edited:

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,078
From the United States Code, Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I - CRIMES, CHAPTER 29 - ELECTIONS AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES





Jesus wasn't an Arab, but I doubt most Americans could tell the difference.

Can't be sure these days, but I'd have thought the writ of US law might not yet extend to an offer made in the UK by a UK citizen to another UK citizen (I'm assuming that both the people I referred to are such). On the other hand, it might be an extraditable offence carrying a 622 year prison sentence without chance of parole - oh, sorry, they're not black, so no chance of that.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
Prove it. <D

How could Jesus be an Arab when he didn't really exist? :lol:

BORING ANSWER: Most people accept that Jesus was from the Levant, which geography fans will note is not part of Arabia.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,104
Location
SE London
Jesus wasn't an Arab, but I doubt most Americans could tell the difference.

That's rather unfair to a lot of Americans, as well as being the kind of stereotype that I suspect you'd rightfully find offensive if something comparable was said about - say Scottish people, or Africans.

FWIW I have a number of American friends - all of whom are just as shocked at what has been happening with Trump and the apparent anti-muslim racism as many of us are.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
That's rather unfair to a lot of Americans, as well as being the kind of stereotype that I suspect you'd rightfully find offensive if something comparable was said about - say Scottish people, or Africans.

Is "not an expert on the ethnography of the Middle East" an offensive stereotype now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top