Non Americans . Who do you hope gets in . Trump or Clinton .

As a Brit, the fact that the best two candidates America can offer up as the next replacement for the position of president are Trump and Clinton, leaves a real nasty taste at the back of the throat. The disappointment I feel towards America right now is accompanied with a strong sense of exasperation. Americans don't do common sense, they are too partisan in their nature, too self-exceptional and too self-absorbed, which is why their society is going to hell in a hand-basket.

Americans have an innate selfish streak that they express as utter self-concern. They utterly hate the differences between one another, so much so, that they are a pseudo-nation, a pretend country, with pretend alliances with one another which only exist between them due to the expectation of financial reward they can (in most instances) scam off each other. The country's motto is..."What's in it for me?" All relationships in America come with strings attached, and even acts of kindness have to be publicly acknowledged. There is no such thing as occulted altruism in that land, only selfishness holds its contemporary society together.

Any country that can foist a George W. Bush onto the world, not just once, but twice, needs therapy, and now look at what they are about to give us: two candidates so ill-suited for the presidential office that it is like an election between Goofy and Daphne from Scooby Doo. This election is a caricature, a parody of shame, and utterly absent of any real political virtue.

I don't blame the politicians, I don't blame the wealthy elite who run the country to and on their own whims. They are acting upon the nature of their own self-interest, and have devolved America far away from its founding principles. No. They are not to blame. The responsibility for why America is the way it is today is down to the ordinary American for allowing their country to be what it has become...a concatenation of self-interest parties and individuals. This is how candidates as awful as Trump and Clinton get a real shot at the presidency. They slip through between the cracks of self-interest.

Exasperation indeed!

I just want you guys to think about this.

"Put America FIRST". Trump chants this all the time.

Give a little thought to what you think this might mean for YOUR country and the rest of the world.

Just think about it. Please.

originally posted by: angeldoll
I just want you guys to think about this.

"Put America FIRST". Trump chants this all the time.

Give a little thought to what you think this might mean for YOUR country and the rest of the world.

Just think about it. Please.

I've had a think and you are right, there will be consequences for other countries.
For example..

If Trump does lower the corporation tax to 15% you can expect to see some corporations moving their HQ's back to the US. This will lead to less corporation tax collected in other countries all around the world.

If Trump decides to support Assad and Russia in Syria to defeat Isis, then potentially, other countries may also have to follow suit and have a U turn in their foreign policy. I would consider this to be a good thing.

I get the feeling Trump cares and respects the British people more than Obama and Hillary combined.

Or do you have something else in mind which we should consider?

a reply to: 83Liberty

You've thought about some things I haven't thought about, actually. Your thought processes seem more lofty and economics-inclined than mine actually.

I was thinking too, though, about humanitarian kinds of things. I know many people despise us, but I've always prided myself on the fact that when there is a world disaster, like a horrendous earthquate, we are always among the first on the scene airdropping water and MRE's, and throwing money at the needs. I've been proud of that.

And it costs a lot of money for us to do those things. Even fueling the planes that drop the resources. Millions.
Will he decide it's too costly to help other nations in time of need?

Will he devalue and discard our allies? I don't know. It worries me. He will turn us into selfish, isolated, money grubbing
pigs.

a reply to: hutch622

Trump, I would rather hope that he follows through and starts charging politicians with high crimes to set a rational and valid example of how goverment is supposed to run. With Hillary, you are looking at the same old establishment BS that will end the US by atrophy or by nuclear war. She is after all a Neocon warhawk that revels in the death amd torture of others. Chris Stevens and gaddafi are two examples that come quickly to mind.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: angeldoll

I think you make a fair point about humanitarian aid. There would probably be less available if Trump takes charge.

However he is advocating more military spending but less wars, so I hope he would use your increased military personnel to help with disaster relief rather than killing people in foreign countries.

That's certainly what I would like to see here in the UK.

a reply to: angeldoll

As a non-US citizen, that is a big concern yes. Trump has already cut off water supplies to some Scottish homes, built walls around them and effectively put people under seige so he could build his golf course in Scotland showing he's willing to go to any lengths to maintain his empire; while his feverent nationalist speak is the kind of thing either causes wars or isolated dictatorships and failed states.

If Trump cuts from NATO as planned then the risk of all out World War increases as it'd be a major shift in powers and geo-politics create a huge power vacuum.

Likewise, as the rest of the world is somewhat reliant on the US for various needs and aid - the US is also reliant on the rest of the world for resources, defences, intel gathering to stop terrorism and China in paticular as they bought up all the US government debt bombs and can sink the US any time they want.

Like it or not it's a fact that there are more countries in the world than the US and it is becoming ever more globalised by the year (in my opinion a good thing as I see nationalism as divide and rule/major barrier for peace) - In my opinion it weakens the US to try and go it alone and the fact he's a candidate in the first place has massively devalued mine and other peoples opinion of the average american Joe's intelligence and awareness of the world. While Obama failed on all his promises of change, he did at least reverse the damage Bush did to the countries reputation by being unable to string a sentence together or know the names of world leaders.

As a Brit, I think Trump would be a better bet for a few reasons.
1. He's a kick in the rear for the political elite that will cause them to have to rethink their ethos in the future.
2. I think he will be much more keen to get a trade deal going with a newly independent UK. (I don't think Hillary will be the same as she won't be keen to stomp all over Obama and his back of the queue rhetoric).
3. I really think he will support Assad and this will mean the Syrian mess will get cleared up more quickly and also see the end of IS as a force in the region.
4. I want to see him deliver on his promise to put Hillary on trial so all the dirty laundry will get aired in public.


There you go.

I expect you all to vote your consciences though and not listen to me.
Even if you can't bring yourself to vote for either of them, at least turn up and write something obscene on your ballot paper.

Hillary... by default. The only thing Trump says I agree with is trashing NAFTA. He thinks it's bad for the States? He should be on this end of it. Jeez.

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: angeldoll

I think you make a fair point about humanitarian aid. There would probably be less available if Trump takes charge.

However he is advocating more military spending but less wars, so I hope he would use your increased military personnel to help with disaster relief rather than killing people in foreign countries.

That's certainly what I would like to see here in the UK.

It only takes a nuke or two to end a war. He has implied that. "I will kill ISIS and I will do it FAST". "Why have nukes if we aren't going to use them". Put those two sentences together and it paints a very scary picture.

Do you really think he would increase military spending for disaster relief? I wish he had your good heart, but don't fool yourself. He doesn't. He doesn't even want our own family's making minimum wage and still on food stamps, to make a wage that would lift them out of poverty. He's not about doing anything for anybody else. People need to go into this knowing that.

a reply to: bastion

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I agree with every word. I hope other members learned something from it too.

Looking at polls this morning, and it's becoming a non-issue.

She beating the crap out of him.

Dang, I have four posts in a row. I hate it when that happens.

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: angeldoll

I think you make a fair point about humanitarian aid. There would probably be less available if Trump takes charge.

However he is advocating more military spending but less wars, so I hope he would use your increased military personnel to help with disaster relief rather than killing people in foreign countries.

That's certainly what I would like to see here in the UK.

I think the US would gain a lot of respect if it concentrated on defensive rather than offensive spending and at the same time used military for peacekeeping rather than military occupation and misguided corporate adventurism. So I have agree that directing the military in some cases towards humanitarian causes might be a good idea. We all just can't keep pouring money into rebels that want to eventually kill us all, pretending it's not corporate takeovers and calling it democracy building, which it isn't.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: solargeddon

Well, I certainly never saw this website as being a right wing site. Historically, this sites membership have been anti-government, regardless of which parties have been in power in the US. If you get a right wing government, the people here, regardless of their affiliation or voting history, tend to be on the side of the people, because that side is never the side adopted by government or those elected into it.

Well, that's what I thought...I never saw this site as right wing, yet so many think Trump...who back in the day I think was more liberal/Democrat.

I am even more surprised to see those outside the US supporting Trump, I would have thought being on the outside more objective heads would prosper, but I guess not.

This is not to say I am slaying anyone who believes in Trump has a screw loose, more shocked I am so out of step with the general consensus...although I am happy to own that!

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: MysterX

Do you suppose that Trumps body count is legitimately smaller, or just harder to track, because he has killed people with poverty, by employing underage sweatshop workers in poor countries, rather than with drone strikes and SEAL teams?

I would say that a great many of Hillary's financial associates, sure seem to have a lot of TERRIBLE luck surrounding light aircraft and tall buildings...Trump's financial associates don't seem to have the same...misfortune.

If she's THAT bad luck to be associated with, the entire United states, and the rest of the world by default, seriously can't afford that kind of luck right now.

a reply to: 83Liberty

This will lead to less corporation tax collected in other countries all around the world.

Well, it would do, if the majority of those US corporations actually paid any corporation taxes to the other countries around the world..they don't seem too keen on paying much of it here in the UK do they.

Someone asked us to think carefully about what it would mean to our economies if Trump lowers the corporate tax rate to 15%, and those corps started moving back home to the USA...i think that means he's actually putting America first, not just talking the talk either.

Which of course, since he's running for POTUS, he's not likely to say put South London first is he!

a reply to: hutch622

Anyone but Trump , I thought you'd scraped the bottom of the barrel Electing W. Bush but Trump is from beneath the barrel , part of me hopes he gets in just to see what happens.

Trump. He has an actual action plan to deter terrorism. It may not be the best, but it's something. It's something different to "bomb somewhere". It may not be anything more than a domestic plan, but it'll certainly get others interested, if it works. Clinton will keep the war machine turning, more overseas action, more ISIS creation under her lead. Ugh. Trump will theoretically step in and say "what the pussy grabbing # are you doing?"

I also like his idea of keeping American businesses in America. Something us in the UK could learn from. We've basically been de-industrialized, we're now just a financial centre in London with the rest of the country not much more than a housing estate. Brexit is hard lessons. Trump will be hard lessons. But we'll all be better people taking on the harder lessons than the quick fixes.

ps: British

Ask me again when/if a native American ever gets a shot at presidency (I wonder why that has never happened)

Choosing between Clinton and Trump is a little like choosing your favourite German from a list of two....Hitler or Hess