Election Year or Fear!

[Andy_Faber]

It’s called integrity, AF. He has none. Nothing to do with being ‘personable’. I can’t imagine anyone being allowed to remain in any position of authority with his track record let alone as leader of the ‘free world’.

You’re so tightly wound about the personality involved you’ve forgotten my original point. I’m suggesting you’re wrong to call 20 million Americans fools for voting, after due consideration,for someone who they believe will make their lives better. In the long run those 20m may find their decision to be wrong, but in good faith not foolishness. ‘Integrity’ as you describe it doesn’t put food on the table

[swaledale]

the credibility of any argument you have just falls away when you blanket 20m people as such. Of course some people vote for him (or any person/party/cause for that matter) in a knee jerk or entrenched fashion (it sounds like you would) but the vast majority would have given it some deep thought.

If you actually truly believe that the vast majority of Trump or indeed Farage supporters would have given it some deep thought before voting for either of them, then sadly I have to conclude that you are one of the fools.

This is further evidenced by your concluding from RA's post that it sounds like he would vote on the basis of a knee jerk or entrenched fashion. When its clear if your capable of reading what he posts, that that is far from the case.

Its rather sad when one is unable to distinguish between politicians that may have a different view or philosophy and those that have identified the way to power is to appeal to the ignorant and the prejudiced and feed them falsehoods.

So I might not like Thatcher or Major's political view point and indeed may think Thatcher's philosophy unpleasant, but one could never accuse them of behaving like Johnson, or Farage or Trump, in spreading deliberate lies, knowing they were lie. In inciting contempt and hatred for the very systems that make a democracy function.

Mm I've long known your true colours, but now you are actually revealing them openly. Rather sad really.

[Andy_Faber]

If you actually truly believe that the vast majority of Trump or indeed Farage supporters would have given it some deep thought before voting for either of them, then sadly I have to conclude that you are one of the fools.

This is further evidenced by your concluding from RA's post that it sounds like he would vote on the basis of a knee jerk or entrenched fashion. When its clear if your capable of reading what he posts, that that is far from the case.

Its rather sad when one is unable to distinguish between politicians that may have a different view or philosophy and those that have identified the way to power is to appeal to the ignorant and the prejudiced and feed them falsehoods.

So I might not like Thatcher or Major's political view point and indeed may think Thatcher's philosophy unpleasant, but one could never accuse them of behaving like Johnson, or Farage or Trump, in spreading deliberate lies, knowing they were lie. In inciting contempt and hatred for the very systems that make a democracy function.

Mm I've long known your true colours, but now you are actually revealing them openly. Rather sad really.

I’m not sure where ‘true colours’ come into a belief that people are capable of making informed decisions and seeing through unpleasant personality to a hoped for improvement in circumstances. I just seem to have a higher regard for the voting public than you do, which is something that’s cropped up before.

[ramAnag]

You’re so tightly wound about the personality involved you’ve forgotten my original point. I’m suggesting you’re wrong to call 20 million Americans fools for voting, after due consideration,for someone who they believe will make their lives better. In the long run those 20m may find their decision to be wrong, but in good faith not foolishness. ‘Integrity’ as you describe it doesn’t put food on the table

Hmmm…never going to apologise for believing integrity to be a prerequisite of world leaders.

One final try…I provided just four of many examples of Trump’s unacceptable behaviour. The first proves him to be stupid. The second shows him to be a misogynistic ***ist. The third shows him to be a traitor and finally…the fourth proves him to be a criminal.

Earlier this week you described yourself as having a better grasp of the ‘real world’ than others. If you find it acceptable for the next leader of the ‘free world’ to be a stupid, misogynistic, treacherous criminal then I fear you’ve either lost the plot or are just arguing for the sake of it.

He isn’t fit to hold office, Andy.

[Andy_Faber]

Hmmm…never going to apologise for believing integrity to be a prerequisite of world leaders.

One final try…I provided just four of many examples of Trump’s unacceptable behaviour. The first proves him to be stupid. The second shows him to be a misogynistic ***ist. The third shows him to be a traitor and finally…the fourth proves him to be a criminal.

Earlier this week you described yourself as having a better grasp of the ‘real world’ than others. If you find it acceptable for the next leader of the ‘free world’ to be a stupid, misogynistic, treacherous criminal then I fear you’ve either lost the plot or are just arguing for the sake of it.

He isn’t fit to hold office, Andy.

Just take a rest rA. This discussion started this morning when you described a reasonable proportion of the US electorate as fools. There was no reference, argument or defence by me of Trump, merely of the likelihood that some of those for which you expressed disdain do actually make informed decisions. Regrettably you’ve lost that particular plot in your desperation to tag as many negative adjectives to the names those you dislike, on this occasion Trump. If you can’t stick to the subject at hand it’s not worth me discussing

[swaledale]

It’s called integrity, AF. He has none. Nothing to do with being ‘personable’. I can’t imagine anyone being allowed to remain in any position of authority with his track record let alone as leader of the ‘free world’.

TrickyÂ…saying that Islam/Blair are as bad is a non argument. I donÂ’t agree with how Blair lied - though prior to that I thought he was the best PM of my lifetime - and I donÂ’t agree with many aspects of Islam, but weÂ’re not talking about themÂ…this conversation is about TrumpÂ’s suitability to be PotUS and, imo, he is a deranged individual totally devoid of integrity.

RA, your not making the distinction between those that enable Trump, those who are no fools, and should and do know better, but see him as the path to power despite his undoubted flaws and indeed unscrupulous, criminal behaviour and the average voter who swallows the rhetoric, which appeals to their narrow perspective. AF is actually right in what he says, peoples concerns are very parochial, especially so in the US where millions have little knowledge or awareness of what happens elsewhere in the world or indeed give a toss.

The appeal of the populist is that they offer simple solutions to complex issues, in reality they often offer no solutions just broad unsubstantiated claims, which sound attractive to the majority of what in the US is a very unsophisticated voter base. I mean people who think having 10 days a holiday a year, piss poor wages and very basic health care, whilst an elite enjoy massive salaries and all the perks (of which Trump and his entourage are ironically a part of) and don't think that's odd clearly aren't deep thinkers.

Populists by their nature appear attractive to many because they appeal to be "different", they position themselves as being "one of them" - again Trump with his inherited wealth and lifestyle is about as far from being an ordinary American as one can get, but given the ordinary American doesn't actually think that deeply, they don't care. Somebody different from the rest of the political class is offering them something different, no matter that last time he was in power he didn't actually achieve much that changed things to their extremely simple view of life he might.

Your not wrong to class many of these voters as fools, because that's one of the problems politicians have the world over, the majority of the electorate aren't that bright or actually bothered about thinking deeply about matters, they want a politician that provides the things they value. Lets face it capitalism as it currently operates wouldn't succeed if people actually thought deeply about it, the populists know that if they can keep the majority happy either by lies or bribes, then they can continue to enjoy power and their lifestyles in plain sight.

We really haven't come that far from the peasants being kept in order by a small powerful cabal and indeed that's where Musk and Trump and the others would like to return to. The irony being that Musk and others like him, have openly said that people are too stupid for democracy, they want totalitarian regimes, the benevolent dictator because they know the vast majority of people are either not bothered or too stupid to understand the ramifications.

[ramAnag]

Just take a rest rA. This discussion started this morning when you described a reasonable proportion of the US electorate as fools. There was no reference, argument or defence by me of Trump, merely of the likelihood that some of those for which you expressed disdain do actually make informed decisions. Regrettably youÂ’ve lost that particular plot in your desperation to tag as many negative adjectives to the names those you dislike, on this occasion Trump. If you canÂ’t stick to the subject at hand itÂ’s not worth me discussing

‘If you can’t stick to the subject in hand it’s not worth me discussing’.

So - the ‘subject in hand’ was opened last February with me questioning the suitability of both Trump and Biden as the next POTUS.

Fortunately, imo, Biden has since withdrawn. Unfortunately, also imo, Trump remains.

Since then the subject has broadened and yesterday morning I suggested that the alleged 25% of young black men who are turning to Trump are ‘fools’.

You quickly jumped on that claiming that I’d described a ‘reasonable proportion of the U.S. electorate’ as fools.

So…totally sticking ‘to the subject in hand’ so far…but beyond that, I haven’t been, as you suggest, desperate ‘to tag as many negative adjectives’ to the name of Trump as I can.
Easy as that would be, I have taken just four examples of his behaviour (there are many, many more) which would suggest him to be a stupid, misogynistic, treacherous criminal.

I’ve backed up all four of those claims with examples which leaves two simple questions for you, both very much concerned with the ‘subject at hand’.

1. Which of my four examples/descriptors are you challenging?

2. How can a candidate who exhibits such stupidity, misogyny, treachery and criminality appeal to anyone other than a fool?

[Geoff Parkstone]

It’s called integrity, AF. He has none. Nothing to do with being ‘personable’. I can’t imagine anyone being allowed to remain in any position of authority with his track record let alone as leader of the ‘free world’.

Tricky…saying that Islam/Blair are as bad is a non argument. I don’t agree with how Blair lied - though prior to that I thought he was the best PM of my lifetime - and I don’t agree with many aspects of Islam, but we’re not talking about them…this conversation is about Trump’s suitability to be PotUS and, imo, he is a deranged individual totally devoid of integrity.7

Who do you now think of as the best PM of your lifetime?

[ramAnag]

Who do you now think of as the best PM of your lifetime?

Lol. Still Blair, pre WMD lies, but it’s a very low bar.

[Trickytreesreds]

Just take a rest rA. This discussion started this morning when you described a reasonable proportion of the US electorate as fools. There was no reference, argument or defence by me of Trump, merely of the likelihood that some of those for which you expressed disdain do actually make informed decisions. Regrettably you’ve lost that particular plot in your desperation to tag as many negative adjectives to the names those you dislike, on this occasion Trump. If you can’t stick to the subject at hand it’s not worth me discussing

Any election is the same. Both camps can say the other side are fools. Its a point of view. Many said the same voting for an old man, who clearly had mental problems, as the leader of the free world. He got worse during office and could have started ww3 for all anyone knew.
As I said earlier, my sister had recently returned from the States, after visting her husbands ex commanding officer. What she picked up was the expense of things have gone through the roof, especially food. (that must hurt). And the migration flooding being of biblical terms under the Democrats. So depending who you talk to, both sides can say not fit for office, even Harris, as it was her job to sort immigration out, 10 million in 3 years? WOW.
nb, side note- the officers son told my sis, that everyone in the area they were in, now carries a side arm, under permit. A sad development of the Biden administration.

There are bigger issues than personality to consider in a countrys well being.