Cruz wins, Trump loses, Hillary and Bernie virtually tie

Chalky

Emp_Fab;967319" said:

It's odd that we are paying so much attention to the choosing of an opposition party candidate in a foreign land.

I reckon 99% of people in the UK couldn't name any other likely challenger to Jeremy Corbyn and 50% probably have never even heard of him !

My instinct is to agree with you @Emp_Fab. I think the reason is that the world's biggest superpower and biggest debtor also makes the biggest show of how it is selecting its biggest tosser to take its biggest job.

Not that I'm trying to big it up...

Chalky

Leader of the free world? No. Definitely not. To call the US President the leader of anyone outside of 'murica is plain misleading.

stickyfiddle

Chalky;967332" said:

Leader of the free world? No. Definitely not. To call the US President the leader of anyone outside of 'murica is plain misleading.

You might not like it, but that's how the rest of the west views the job. As I say, for better or worse...

ICBM

stickyfiddle said:

FWIW I think Obama has been unspectacular but his heart is in the right place. All of this lot appear to be far worse. 

I think history will judge him quite well - I think he's been more effective than he appears, quietly and without fuss. He just seems disappointing because he promised so much - but an averagely competent president is always going to be better than a spectacularly bad one.

He will also always be the first black president, and nothing can ever take away the importance of that, despite how divided America still is. I don't think the first woman president - whether Hillary or anyone else, and possibly especially not if it's her - will matter as much.

Chalky

America wishes the world to see it that way. But it certainly isn't how other countries see it. Many times in the last 20 years the US has struggled to get backing from other countries for its military actions. Canada and the UK are always allies but a decreasing number of countries follow suit.

Its not a matter of liking it - its just an old hackneyed phrase thats way past its sell-by date.

stickyfiddle

ICBM said:

stickyfiddle said:

FWIW I think Obama has been unspectacular but his heart is in the right place. All of this lot appear to be far worse. 

I think history will judge him quite well - I think he's been more effective than he appears, quietly and without fuss. He just seems disappointing because he promised so much - but an averagely competent president is always going to be better than a spectacularly bad one.

He will also always be the first black president, and nothing can ever take away the importance of that, despite how divided America still is. I don't think the first woman president - whether Hillary or anyone else, and possibly especially not if it's her - will matter as much.

Completely agree. As you say, I think he's actually been rather good in a quiet way. Very often government could do with much less"big statement" stuff and far more "just doing all the small carefully and for the right reasons". 

The balls he has put in motion on healthcare and gun control may not be popular with large sections of the population, but it's very hard to argue they aren't a good thing and hopefully they'll both lead somewhere useful.

Megii

Re Hillary Clinton, and just genuinely interested here, what it is about her that people don't like? To me, she seems very possibly to be the least worst prospect for president, even if that's not saying all that much. I honestly can't see Saunders getting elected if he won the Democrat nomination, and none of the Republican candidates are very palatable.

ICBM

Megii said:

Re Hillary Clinton, and just genuinely interested here, what it is about her that people don't like? To me, she seems very possibly to be the least worst prospect for president, even if that's not saying all that much. I honestly can't see Saunders getting elected if he won the Democrat nomination, and none of the Republican candidates are very palatable.

I don't like her because she is arrogant and thinks she can do what she likes because of who she is (the email thing among others), overconfident and incompetent (the Libyan embassy attack among others) and is at least partly responsible for starting the Syrian civil war by encouraging the rebels and being dismissive of the Russians, when she was Secretary Of State. She's also probably personally corrupt (property deals) and has used her husband's position for her own advancement, so it's debatable whether she got where she is on her own merit.

Apart from that, she is probably the least worst candidate available with a chance of winning.

Adam_MD

Megii;967395" said:

Re Hillary Clinton, and just genuinely interested here, what it is about her that people don't like? To me, she seems very possibly to be the least worst prospect for president, even if that's not saying all that much. I honestly can't see Saunders getting elected if he won the Democrat nomination, and none of the Republican candidates are very palatable.

Hillary Clinton has been caught lying way too many times to be credible anymore. Sorry I was wrong she didn't lie she 'mis-spoke' which is also known as lying

Heartfeltdawn

Emp_Fab said:

It's odd that we are paying so much attention to the choosing of an opposition party candidate in a foreign land.

It's not odd to me. American politics over the last few years has set the tone for how our elections are. Clinton Mk 1 was the blueprint for New Labour and Blairism. The rise of GWB set the tone for more attack dog politics within the UK, the high point coming with Lynton Crosby getting involved. Miliband tried tapping into the Obama method by bringing David Axelrod into the fray. For me personally, after being involved in politics both here and in North America in the past, I always keep an interest in what's going on over there. 

ICBM said:

I think history will judge him quite well - I think he's been more effective than he appears, quietly and without fuss. He just seems disappointing because he promised so much - but an averagely competent president is always going to be better than a spectacularly bad one.

Considering the mess he was left, he's done a pretty decent job and he hasn't shat over democracy and his own electorate in the way Blair did. 

Megii

Not sounding too good for Hillary then - cheers for the replies though, some issuess for me to look into there. Would you remind me what the mis-speaking thing was about @Adam_MD? I really do fear the worst for the US election result to be honest.

Heartfeltdawn

Megii said:

Re Hillary Clinton, and just genuinely interested here, what it is about her that people don't like? To me, she seems very possibly to be the least worst prospect for president, even if that's not saying all that much. I honestly can't see Saunders getting elected if he won the Democrat nomination, and none of the Republican candidates are very palatable.

I distrust her completely, I fall on the Christopher Hitchens side of things when judging her husband, she was in favour of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and then fell into the ludicrous positions of not wanting to pull out early nor stay until the job was done, countless lies throughout her political life, the seizing of the feminist tag...

And consider this: her 2008 run for the White House was a financial disaster. At one point, her committee owed $12 million to outside vendors and over $13 million to her personally (she made personal loans to her own campaign). It took over four years to finish repaying that debt. 

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/22/hillary-clintons-campaign-debt-finally-paid-off/

If you can't manage your own campaign finances in a competent manner, then that calls into question your competence at the top of the tree. 

Elizabeth Warren is a far better politician.

Adam_MD

Megii;967491" said:

Not sounding too good for Hillary then - cheers for the replies though, some issuess for me to look into there. Would you remind me what the mis-speaking thing was about @Adam_MD? I really do fear the worst for the US election result to be honest.

She visited Bosnia as First Lady and later as a scenator claimed that instead of a welcoming ceremony when they arrived she had to scramble to get under cover because of all the sniper fire. Unfortunately she forgot other people were with her at the time.

This is Hillary in Bosnia avoiding all of the snipers with her daughter standing behind her. I'm assuming she's using the little girl as a shield... from all of the sniper fire.

Megii

Adam_MD said:

Megii;967491" said:

Not sounding too good for Hillary then - cheers for the replies though, some issuess for me to look into there. Would you remind me what the mis-speaking thing was about @Adam_MD? I really do fear the worst for the US election result to be honest.

She visited Bosnia as First Lady and later as a scenator claimed that instead of a welcoming ceremony when they arrived she had to scramble to get under cover because of all the sniper fire. Unfortunately she forgot other people were with her at the time.

This is Hillary in Bosnia avoiding all of the snipers with her daughter standing behind her. I'm assuming she's using the little girl as a shield... from all of the sniper fire.

Oh yeah, I do remember that now - that is a good one I have to say.

Megii

Heartfeltdawn said:

Megii said:

Re Hillary Clinton, and just genuinely interested here, what it is about her that people don't like? To me, she seems very possibly to be the least worst prospect for president, even if that's not saying all that much. I honestly can't see Saunders getting elected if he won the Democrat nomination, and none of the Republican candidates are very palatable.

I distrust her completely, I fall on the Christopher Hitchens side of things when judging her husband, she was in favour of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and then fell into the ludicrous positions of not wanting to pull out early nor stay until the job was done, countless lies throughout her political life, the seizing of the feminist tag...

And consider this: her 2008 run for the White House was a financial disaster. At one point, her committee owed $12 million to outside vendors and over $13 million to her personally (she made personal loans to her own campaign). It took over four years to finish repaying that debt. 

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/22/hillary-clintons-campaign-debt-finally-paid-off/

If you can't manage your own campaign finances in a competent manner, then that calls into question your competence at the top of the tree. 

Elizabeth Warren is a far better politician.

Cheers, I am just genuinely seeking information, and to broaden my awareness. I'm not wanting to put myself in the position of apologist for Hillary Clinton. But does Bernie Sanders have a hope of ever becoming president? Does Hillary for that matter?

Heartfeltdawn

Megii said:

Cheers, I am just genuinely seeking information, and to broaden my awareness. I'm not wanting to put myself in the position of apologist for Hillary Clinton. But does Bernie Sanders have a hope of ever becoming president? Does Hillary for that matter?

It's a bizarre election because both parties are going through ideological clashes of the like that haven't been seen for a long time. The establishment  centre ground in both wings, represented by Rubio and Clinton, are under attack from people outside of that establishment ground (Sanders, Trump, and Cruz). Right now it's impossible to say who does and who doesn't have a hope. Once Super Tuesday is through, then it should be clearer. 

Megii

Heartfeltdawn said:

Megii said:

Cheers, I am just genuinely seeking information, and to broaden my awareness. I'm not wanting to put myself in the position of apologist for Hillary Clinton. But does Bernie Sanders have a hope of ever becoming president? Does Hillary for that matter?

It's a bizarre election because both parties are going through ideological clashes of the like that haven't been seen for a long time. The establishment  centre ground in both wings, represented by Rubio and Clinton, are under attack from people outside of that establishment ground (Sanders, Trump, and Cruz). Right now it's impossible to say who does and who doesn't have a hope. Once Super Tuesday is through, then it should be clearer. 

Thanks - it does seem a bit bizarre to me I have to say. I'll keep watching events with interest anyhow.

Cirrus

10thumbs;966718" said:

Do we have any American members ?I've always wondered, does Trump mean fart in America , as it does here ?

I've started to preface every fart I do at home with a worried expression...

...and an announcement that I'm about to... :-O

..."Stump for Trump!"...

...*toot* )

hugbot

Emp_Fab said:

It's odd that we are paying so much attention to the choosing of an opposition party candidate in a foreign land.

I reckon 99% of people in the UK couldn't name any other likely challenger to Jeremy Corbyn and 50% probably have never even heard of him !

I find teh larger than life aspect of american politics much more fun than ours, which I more frequently find just depressing. Its like pro wrestling or something.

Rubios utter meltdown on the debate stage for example was wonderful, 

viz

Nice pic of Trump + family in the news after his SC win.

http://i865.photobucket.com/albums/ab217/Vizzage/Mobile Uploads/image_zps8yrxr3qo.jpg