The next Vice President will be...

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed May 04, 2016 12:31 pm

Bruv;1495388 wrote: American politics kind of makes Boris and Farage look normal.American politics kind of makes Boris and Natasha look normal.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed May 04, 2016 12:35 pm

gmc;1495389 wrote: OK maybe not in the exact words go aheade and riot but You're splitting hairs even saying tio his supporters please don't riot is tantamount to suggesting they should just as telling supporters he will pay for the defence for anyone charged with assaulting a heckler is as good as saying you shouldn';t but go ahead anyway.Not in exact words because they're two different things. If a news source stated it as you did, which you seemed to imply, then it is not a reliable publication.

It you just put your own "spin" on it, then you are spinning misleadingly.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed May 04, 2016 12:45 pm

It will be interesting to see if Trump follows the tradition of previous election campaigns and now tries to backtrack on some of his more outrageous statements to appear more "moderate", or if he can't help himself.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Wed May 04, 2016 1:02 pm

Trump's Veep? Kim Kardashian?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed May 04, 2016 10:47 pm

Mark Aspam;1495394 wrote: Not in exact words because they're two different things. If a news source stated it as you did, which you seemed to imply, then it is not a reliable publication.

It you just put your own "spin" on it, then you are spinning misleadingly.

I watched on one of his cinferences where he stated he would pay for the defence of anyone arrested for assault at the very least it's tacit approval of violence.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Thu May 05, 2016 6:51 am

gmc;1495421 wrote: I watched on one of his cinferences where he stated he would pay for the defence of anyone arrested for assault at the very least it's tacit approval of violence.So he's a jerk. We agree on that.

What does that have to do with your false accusation that he encouraged his followers to riot (he actually encouraged them not to) if he were denied the nomination at the forthcoming convention?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu May 05, 2016 7:45 am

He didn't encourage his followers not to riot, Mark, Trump stated it would happen if he were not treated 'fairly.'

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Thu May 05, 2016 8:29 am

AnneBoleyn;1495427 wrote: He didn't encourage his followers not to riot, Mark, Trump stated it would happen if he were not treated 'fairly.'I posted previously to this thread:

He said that there would be riots if his nomination were BLOCKED by the convention, that is, if he were somehow ruled ineligible and that he would not "call for", but rather discourage his followers from so doing.

Discouraging is not encouraging as far as I know. My comment was based on reliable news sources, I asked the other poster for his source that Trump had "called for" his followers to riot and he was unable to do so.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu May 05, 2016 9:04 am

"I asked the other poster for his source that Trump had "called for" his followers to riot and he was unable to do so."

Of course, Mark, as you pointed out, Trump didn't, hideous man that he is, IMO.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Thu May 05, 2016 9:20 am

AnneBoleyn;1495430 wrote: "I asked the other poster for his source that Trump had "called for" his followers to riot and he was unable to do so."

Of course, Mark, as you pointed out, Trump didn't, hideous man that he is, IMO.Hideous is an understatement. Here is the situation as I see it, and I'm no political expert, just an elderly voter who's seen lots of elections and lots of presidents come and go, all the way back to FDR:

1. Trump is unelectable, and his antics will virtually destroy the Republican party as we know it.

2. The Billery years were the best in modern history. A Billery victory will hopefully return us to those years of prosperity.

3. Bernie as VP will seal the deal.

That's my scenario and I'm stickin' to it.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu May 05, 2016 11:39 am

Good one, Mark.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 05, 2016 12:11 pm

Mark Aspam;1495432 wrote: Hideous is an understatement. Here is the situation as I see it, and I'm no political expert, just an elderly voter who's seen lots of elections and lots of presidents come and go, all the way back to FDR:

1. Trump is unelectable, and his antics will virtually destroy the Republican party as we know it.

2. The Billery years were the best in modern history. A Billery victory will hopefully return us to those years of prosperity.

3. Bernie as VP will seal the deal.

That's my scenario and I'm stickin' to it.

Trump is only unelectable if plenty of people who don't wish to see him elected show up at the polls on election day.

You can count on the Stormtrumpers showing up in force. (and they are in agreement on who they would rather see in the office. )

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Thu May 05, 2016 12:36 pm

LarsMac;1495450 wrote: You can count on the Stormtrumpers showing up in force. Only the ones who are (a) registered and (b) intelligent enough to find their way to the polling station.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu May 05, 2016 12:52 pm

Mark Aspam;1495453 wrote: Only the ones who are (a) registered and (b) intelligent enough to find their way to the polling station.

Like the Nazi knuckle draggers ?

Post by **spot** » Fri May 13, 2016 11:32 am

The name cropping up a lot this week as the next Vice President is a chap called Newt, apparently.

To what extent do we admire Newt, and why? I speak as an uninformed outsider here.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 13, 2016 12:00 pm

There is nothing to admire about Newt.

Post by **spot** » Fri May 13, 2016 12:12 pm

I had assumed he was a learned scholarly well-spoken type, to provide a contrast with the rabble-rousing demagogue leading the charge to the White House.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Fri May 13, 2016 12:53 pm

spot;1495803 wrote: The name cropping up a lot this week as the next Vice President is a chap called Newt, apparently.

To what extent do we admire Newt, and why? I speak as an uninformed outsider here.You may be referring to Newt Gingrich, a Republican senator.

But since Trump is unelectable, it's hard to see how Gingrich could become veep, nor have I heard his name mentioned in that capacity. What is your source? Maybe I'm missing something.

Post by **spot** » Fri May 13, 2016 1:00 pm

It's the leed story at Time today?

I may, of course, be wrong about Hillary Clinton's unelectability, but time will tell.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Fri May 13, 2016 1:11 pm

AnneBoleyn;1495806 wrote: There is nothing to admire about Newt.

Gingrich was the Ted Cruz of his day, best known for shutting down the government when he didn't get his way. He was also called "the Gingrich that stole Christmas" for shutting down all of the National Parks during the Christmas vacation season.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 13, 2016 1:30 pm

spot;1495814 wrote: It's the leed story at Time today?

I may, of course, be wrong about Hillary Clinton's unelectability, but time will tell.

Why do you think that?

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Fri May 13, 2016 1:32 pm

spot;1495814 wrote: It's the leed story at Time todayIf you're referring to the US news magazine Time, I will check it out, but it's unlikely that Time referred to him as "the next vice-president", since Time has always been left of center, though usually quite accurate.

The evening TV news is coming up in two hours, I'll see if there's anything about Gingrich mentioned.

Trump has LOTS and LOTS of dirty laundry, which will be revealed piecemeal between now and the convention.

ADDED LATER: Just watched the NBC Nightly News. No mention of Newt Gingrich. They played a phone interview of several years ago with Trump, who was passing himself off as someone else.

It's QUITE possible, maybe even likely, that Trump will be serving a prison sentence due to his "Trump University" scam before the convention takes place. UNLIKELY that he will be nominated under those conditions.

Post by **spot** » Fri May 13, 2016 2:01 pm

AnneBoleyn;1495816 wrote: Why do you think that?

I reckon Mr Trump has momentum, that the majority of people who turn out to vote will be bloody-minded about being told not to elect him, and that the one-time Secretary of State quite simply embarrassed your country too much. Time will tell.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 13, 2016 2:07 pm

She didn't embarrass the country. Besides, the country is an ass.

Post by **spot** » Fri May 13, 2016 2:22 pm

"We came, we saw, he died."

That is irredeemably, unforgivably, crass. It is a comment which will define the USA for the rest of the century.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 13, 2016 2:47 pm

spot;1495830 wrote: "We came, we saw, he died."

That is irredeemably, unforgivably, crass. It is a comment which will define the USA for the rest of the century.

You know, I had never heard that before, I had to google it. Yes, I agree with crass. She said something crass this week, about that crass guy, Trump. When asked how she would deal with his insults, she said (approximately): "I have experience dealing with these guys who go off the reservation." I found that so dumb, I was, well, speechless. It is such an old, insulting thing to say & of course, refers to our native Americans leaving the reservation (where they were inhumanely forced to be) to go "on the warpath" or, at the least, get drunk. Quite stupid. Never thought that way before, but quite stupid, & what you just shared with me was quite stupid, too.

eta---This whole Trump thing, can you imagine how horrible this is to me? Show me some mercy, man, I'm dying here.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sat May 14, 2016 7:45 am

I understand Newt has a bit of a reputation for drinking.