Trump

[Duffers]

It’s also insane that convicted felons can’t vote in America, yet there’s nothing stopping one from running the place.

[Borin' Baggie]

It’s also insane that convicted felons can’t vote in America, yet there’s nothing stopping one from running the place.

They can vote in 41 of the 50 states. I believe Trump voted in Florida which has a rule that defers based on where the felony was committed, and New York is one of the states convicted felons can vote so long as they aren't currently in prison.

[Derek Hardballs]

The good news is he can only stand one more term… unless he decides to change that of course… oh

[tHEgLASSdOORS]

Gotta be a decent chance he karks it some time during this term

[Protheroe]

I'm genuinely confused by this. We have a range of opinions from Proth "get real and understand what the people care about, economy and immigration" to the lunatic fringe "this is the people kicking back against lefty woke-ism". I don't care about the WUMs we've had on here for weeks, but I'd like Proth or one of the other right-leaning sensible folks to explain where this all leads, what the end game is.

The democracies of the West grew up each in their own way at their own time, with various revolutions or evolutions that gave ordinary people human and legal rights, ensured a certain fairness in employment, provided a safety net in terms of health and welfare, and allowed aspiration through universal education. People still want this, but it has to be paid for. The right wing economic model (generalising there I know) seeks to reduce state intervention in lives, reduce taxation etc to create opportunity and wealth. But do all these voters "kicking back against woke" realise that this means they can't have the education, health care and infrastructure they want, because there isn't any money to pay for it?

Of course immigration is a huge issue. The perception (or actuality - - discuss) of immigrants taking a share of the welfare and benefits pie is a big driver of discontent. But this enormous safety net which saves people from the consequences of bad luck, illness, poor educational achievement, lack of effort or just sheer uselessness needs people to do menial and not very well-paid jobs, and also a lot more people to do highly skilled jobs. And with the indigenous population too well-ensconced in its safety net existence, can they really be forced into work they can't be bothered to do so we don't need the immigrants? Can we make kids stop vaping and pay attention in class? What used to happen was that if you didn't find a job you could do and work hard at it, you might starve. But I don't think the "woke-kickers" have signed up for that either.

Blaming the immigrants is text-book behaviour. Look how many times in history the Jews have been hounded from their homes and worse because someone needed a scapegoat. It's richly ironic that we now give Israel a free hand to behave just as badly - but that's a different subject.

The champions of this new-wave, anti-woke right wing are all transparently privileged people who don't give a shit about anyone who has to get up with an alarm clock and get on a bus or join a traffic jam. Boris, a truly idle and dishonest man, Farage (fuck's sake, who can't see that he's a total cunt?), Rishi married to a billionaire, Kemi Badenoch who was born in the UK just for the passport then whisked away to Nigeria and the USA up to the age of 16. Do these people represent us? Will they give us what we want and need in a way that (for instance) Keir Starmer won't? Doubtful, I'd say. More likely to keep slanting the playing field towards business profitability on the backs of "ordinary working people". OK, that's what governments have to do but it's a choice as to how hard you crush the working man.

At least no-one in this fred has tried to pretend that Trump has any decent human qualities or appropriate talents for the job of President. That would be too ridiculous. I like to think that he is too obviously bad and incompetent to get elected in the UK, but let's face it a lot of people voted for Boris Johnson. 

I'd like someone to paint a picture for me, explain how the USA will benefit from Trump rather than Harris, tell me how the perfect democracy could work. Persuade me that this popular lurch to the right could be a good thing that doesn't completely break the fabric of welfare and democracy that everyone on this board has grown up with.

I listen to the markets, and the markets tell you two things:

1) Stock Futures soared before the markets opened and then took off further. With Trump having control of the Trifecta there is a near certainty of corporate tax cuts, combined with a zeal for deregulation that presents a sugar rush for corporate America. If you follow Buffet or Ackman like I do then today has been a very good day in that respect.

2) Treasury yields ticked higher on the prospect of lower tax receipts and the prospect of the US deficit swelling from 6% (Very High) to as much as 12% (Outlandish). The cost of borrowing for every country just got a bit harder because Trump is expected to run a big deficit.

The bad news doesn't stop there as beyond fiscal frailty Trump is seeking to impose tariffs as high as 500% on cars from Mexico, 60% on all goods from China, 10-20% on virtually everything else from everywhere else. Trade Wars are bad for everyone - particularly consumers, is Trump that deranged? I don't know. If he is then at least the US is better insulated than any other country from the consequences. It's just the rest of us that are fucked.

It's estimated that "fixing the border" or booting out 8m illegals would reduce US GDP by about 7%. So that won't happen beyond a few token deportations. What's much more likely is much tougher border restrictions.

All of these actions positively scream INFLATION when he's been elected on a platform to reduce prices. For the US and the rest of us it means higher interest rates for longer, and in all likelihood shockwaves in the government debt market.

People may get bored about me banging on about debt, but the more precarious our own position the more we're exposed to this.

That's all I've really thought about for now tbh.

[GunsOfNavarone]

It’s also insane that convicted felons can’t vote in America, yet there’s nothing stopping one from running the place.

They can vote in 41 of the 50 states. I believe Trump voted in Florida which has a rule that defers based on where the felony was committed, and New York is one of the states convicted felons can vote so long as they aren't currently in prison.

Useful link for any American felons reading this forum.....

https://campaignlegal.org/restoreyourvote

[albion_pigeon]

It’s also insane that convicted felons can’t vote in America, yet there’s nothing stopping one from running the place.

Absolutely mental. 

In a country as huge as the US, with the amount voting on each side it just proves how many people lack a moral compass. 

I heard a bloke in the pub the other night when the Albion game was on going on about "only Nigel could sort this mess out".

I think unfortunately, both sides of the pond are fucked.

[Cheshire East Baggie]

Thanks, Proth. I wasn't expecting good news 

[TartanRug]

I'm genuinely confused by this. We have a range of opinions from Proth "get real and understand what the people care about, economy and immigration" to the lunatic fringe "this is the people kicking back against lefty woke-ism". I don't care about the WUMs we've had on here for weeks, but I'd like Proth or one of the other right-leaning sensible folks to explain where this all leads, what the end game is.

The democracies of the West grew up each in their own way at their own time, with various revolutions or evolutions that gave ordinary people human and legal rights, ensured a certain fairness in employment, provided a safety net in terms of health and welfare, and allowed aspiration through universal education. People still want this, but it has to be paid for. The right wing economic model (generalising there I know) seeks to reduce state intervention in lives, reduce taxation etc to create opportunity and wealth. But do all these voters "kicking back against woke" realise that this means they can't have the education, health care and infrastructure they want, because there isn't any money to pay for it?

Of course immigration is a huge issue. The perception (or actuality - - discuss) of immigrants taking a share of the welfare and benefits pie is a big driver of discontent. But this enormous safety net which saves people from the consequences of bad luck, illness, poor educational achievement, lack of effort or just sheer uselessness needs people to do menial and not very well-paid jobs, and also a lot more people to do highly skilled jobs. And with the indigenous population too well-ensconced in its safety net existence, can they really be forced into work they can't be bothered to do so we don't need the immigrants? Can we make kids stop vaping and pay attention in class? What used to happen was that if you didn't find a job you could do and work hard at it, you might starve. But I don't think the "woke-kickers" have signed up for that either.

Blaming the immigrants is text-book behaviour. Look how many times in history the Jews have been hounded from their homes and worse because someone needed a scapegoat. It's richly ironic that we now give Israel a free hand to behave just as badly - but that's a different subject.

The champions of this new-wave, anti-woke right wing are all transparently privileged people who don't give a shit about anyone who has to get up with an alarm clock and get on a bus or join a traffic jam. Boris, a truly idle and dishonest man, Farage (fuck's sake, who can't see that he's a total cunt?), Rishi married to a billionaire, Kemi Badenoch who was born in the UK just for the passport then whisked away to Nigeria and the USA up to the age of 16. Do these people represent us? Will they give us what we want and need in a way that (for instance) Keir Starmer won't? Doubtful, I'd say. More likely to keep slanting the playing field towards business profitability on the backs of "ordinary working people". OK, that's what governments have to do but it's a choice as to how hard you crush the working man.

At least no-one in this fred has tried to pretend that Trump has any decent human qualities or appropriate talents for the job of President. That would be too ridiculous. I like to think that he is too obviously bad and incompetent to get elected in the UK, but let's face it a lot of people voted for Boris Johnson. 

I'd like someone to paint a picture for me, explain how the USA will benefit from Trump rather than Harris, tell me how the perfect democracy could work. Persuade me that this popular lurch to the right could be a good thing that doesn't completely break the fabric of welfare and democracy that everyone on this board has grown up with.

I listen to the markets, and the markets tell you two things:

1) Stock Futures soared before the markets opened and then took off further. With Trump having control of the Trifecta there is a near certainty of corporate tax cuts, combined with a zeal for deregulation that presents a sugar rush for corporate America. If you follow Buffet or Ackman like I do then today has been a very good day in that respect.

2) Treasury yields ticked higher on the prospect of lower tax receipts and the prospect of the US deficit swelling from 6% (Very High) to as much as 12% (Outlandish). The cost of borrowing for every country just got a bit harder because Trump is expected to run a big deficit.

The bad news doesn't stop there as beyond fiscal frailty Trump is seeking to impose tariffs as high as 500% on cars from Mexico, 60% on all goods from China, 10-20% on virtually everything else from everywhere else. Trade Wars are bad for everyone - particularly consumers, is Trump that deranged? I don't know. If he is then at least the US is better insulated than any other country from the consequences. It's just the rest of us that are fucked.

It's estimated that "fixing the border" or booting out 8m illegals would reduce US GDP by about 7%. So that won't happen beyond a few token deportations. What's much more likely is much tougher border restrictions.

All of these actions positively scream INFLATION when he's been elected on a platform to reduce prices. For the US and the rest of us it means higher interest rates for longer, and in all likelihood shockwaves in the government debt market.

People may get bored about me banging on about debt, but the more precarious our own position the more we're exposed to this.

That's all I've really thought about for now tbh.

So in short it will be pretty disastrous for the economy if he does what he says he'll do, despite the fact that he was voted in largely because people think he'll improve the economy?

[albion_pigeon]

I'm genuinely confused by this. We have a range of opinions from Proth "get real and understand what the people care about, economy and immigration" to the lunatic fringe "this is the people kicking back against lefty woke-ism". I don't care about the WUMs we've had on here for weeks, but I'd like Proth or one of the other right-leaning sensible folks to explain where this all leads, what the end game is.

The democracies of the West grew up each in their own way at their own time, with various revolutions or evolutions that gave ordinary people human and legal rights, ensured a certain fairness in employment, provided a safety net in terms of health and welfare, and allowed aspiration through universal education. People still want this, but it has to be paid for. The right wing economic model (generalising there I know) seeks to reduce state intervention in lives, reduce taxation etc to create opportunity and wealth. But do all these voters "kicking back against woke" realise that this means they can't have the education, health care and infrastructure they want, because there isn't any money to pay for it?

Of course immigration is a huge issue. The perception (or actuality - - discuss) of immigrants taking a share of the welfare and benefits pie is a big driver of discontent. But this enormous safety net which saves people from the consequences of bad luck, illness, poor educational achievement, lack of effort or just sheer uselessness needs people to do menial and not very well-paid jobs, and also a lot more people to do highly skilled jobs. And with the indigenous population too well-ensconced in its safety net existence, can they really be forced into work they can't be bothered to do so we don't need the immigrants? Can we make kids stop vaping and pay attention in class? What used to happen was that if you didn't find a job you could do and work hard at it, you might starve. But I don't think the "woke-kickers" have signed up for that either.

Blaming the immigrants is text-book behaviour. Look how many times in history the Jews have been hounded from their homes and worse because someone needed a scapegoat. It's richly ironic that we now give Israel a free hand to behave just as badly - but that's a different subject.

The champions of this new-wave, anti-woke right wing are all transparently privileged people who don't give a shit about anyone who has to get up with an alarm clock and get on a bus or join a traffic jam. Boris, a truly idle and dishonest man, Farage (fuck's sake, who can't see that he's a total cunt?), Rishi married to a billionaire, Kemi Badenoch who was born in the UK just for the passport then whisked away to Nigeria and the USA up to the age of 16. Do these people represent us? Will they give us what we want and need in a way that (for instance) Keir Starmer won't? Doubtful, I'd say. More likely to keep slanting the playing field towards business profitability on the backs of "ordinary working people". OK, that's what governments have to do but it's a choice as to how hard you crush the working man.

At least no-one in this fred has tried to pretend that Trump has any decent human qualities or appropriate talents for the job of President. That would be too ridiculous. I like to think that he is too obviously bad and incompetent to get elected in the UK, but let's face it a lot of people voted for Boris Johnson. 

I'd like someone to paint a picture for me, explain how the USA will benefit from Trump rather than Harris, tell me how the perfect democracy could work. Persuade me that this popular lurch to the right could be a good thing that doesn't completely break the fabric of welfare and democracy that everyone on this board has grown up with.

I listen to the markets, and the markets tell you two things:

1) Stock Futures soared before the markets opened and then took off further. With Trump having control of the Trifecta there is a near certainty of corporate tax cuts, combined with a zeal for deregulation that presents a sugar rush for corporate America. If you follow Buffet or Ackman like I do then today has been a very good day in that respect.

2) Treasury yields ticked higher on the prospect of lower tax receipts and the prospect of the US deficit swelling from 6% (Very High) to as much as 12% (Outlandish). The cost of borrowing for every country just got a bit harder because Trump is expected to run a big deficit.

The bad news doesn't stop there as beyond fiscal frailty Trump is seeking to impose tariffs as high as 500% on cars from Mexico, 60% on all goods from China, 10-20% on virtually everything else from everywhere else. Trade Wars are bad for everyone - particularly consumers, is Trump that deranged? I don't know. If he is then at least the US is better insulated than any other country from the consequences. It's just the rest of us that are fucked.

It's estimated that "fixing the border" or booting out 8m illegals would reduce US GDP by about 7%. So that won't happen beyond a few token deportations. What's much more likely is much tougher border restrictions.

All of these actions positively scream INFLATION when he's been elected on a platform to reduce prices. For the US and the rest of us it means higher interest rates for longer, and in all likelihood shockwaves in the government debt market.

People may get bored about me banging on about debt, but the more precarious our own position the more we're exposed to this.

That's all I've really thought about for now tbh.

So in short it will be pretty disastrous for the economy if he does what he says he'll do, despite the fact that he was voted in largely because people think he'll improve the economy?

He's a "businessman" didn't you know. 

Even though nearly every single one of them has failed and he only started with a paltry $1 million loan from his dad. 

His money all comes from Russia, because he's in their pocket. His son openly admitted it years ago.