Ehhh... I'm kinda with the anti-Trump brigade on this one

In that case then the blame is to be attributed with the more enlightened class of humans who lead the plebs for failing to take into account these problems and do something about it before some fascist comes along providing easy solutions to problems the leadership have failed to solve.

Yes that's it! Take the power away from the proles! So very left-wing of you!

Nope.

Do things to help the proles so they don't elect a fascist.

What's the population of the United States? 200 million plus? How many potentially thousands of brilliant people must be out there who would do an incredible job serving their country but will never ever get a look in because they would never have any financial backing or clout? That can't be democracy, surely? Yes, our top politicians are usually Oxbridge types, but our present Prime Minister is the daughter of a vicar. It may be predominantly Oxford or Cambridge graduates who get the top jobs in the civil service or government, but their background might be as poor as a church mouse.

Yes. Let's "educate" them so they all agree with you.

Yes. Let's "educate" them so they all agree with you.

Also the left has a big history of taking away power from the proles so.... What's your point?

Russia, Cuba, China.... etc

So would I, and also I absolutely think that the police need some serious work to make them less like a giant, violent gang. However, neither Clinton or Trump will do anything about that.

I do think Islam poses a threat, although not necessarily with terrorism. Mainly I worry that elements of its ideology will seep into our culture. I hate any kind of puritanism, and many Muslims are very puritanical.

Its not how western people think its how humans think. If there is a big problem that is repeatedly denied, unaddressed and the politicans views are contrary to a majority of peoples reality... they will go for the person who proclaims to have the will or to address the issue

Very simple stuff. This is the cost of your head in the sand, apologist denialism which spurs the likes of the politicans on

If only a politicans had offered some form of action strong enough to appease peoples worries, then solutions like ban all muslims wouldnt be so appealing to say many

That humans think like that is a fatal flaw and impediment to the long-term success of our species, or at least any given empire.

The point of civilisation and all the laws and institutions we have to create to support it is for us to deny our immediate impulses because we collectively get more out of civilisation and following its rules.

When politicians start pandering to people's neurotic instincts to win votes, that is, the laziest and most cynical way of participating in democracy, that is the last post on the bugle for the civilisation concerned. It will lumber on fatally wounded until such time as a more determined, rational rival usurps it, or at least until it pitches itself into a massive war, whereafter people may finally come to their senses.

True... I do agree with all that. It was a manipulative, emotive thing to do and they shouldn't have been involved. It's also slightly ironic because Hillary is a war hawk and many more soldiers like their son will die under her rule, and also many more Muslims on the enemy side. On the other hand, it was pretty untactful of Trump, and it kinda craps on every other Muslim American who puts their arse out on the line for their country. The mother didn't speak up because she was too choked up with tears, so it was a bit distasteful to make such a tactless and disingenous assumption.

Ah the policy of appeasement, when has that ever failed anyone ever?

In all seriousness this idea that if we give in a little to the far right, that they'll be defeated is ludicrous.
If we move closer to where the far right are, it makes their views seem less, not more extreme.

If the far right say 'ban all immigrants' and we say 'okay lets ban some', then it makes the far-right seem less extreme, not more.

Once you give an inch, they take a mile. Once you accept their premise you're backed into a corner.

Its not giving in to the far right, its acknowledging there is a problem of which the status quo, created and allowed to flourish for years under their noses. The status quo is living under permanent extreme terror warnings (And in Frances case under "State of emergency" kissing Islams arse and constantly making concessions to the religion of peace in the hopes it will appease some of their would be Jihadis.

Giving in to the far right is offering this to the people as palatable, the only choice and telling them the sacrifice of their safety, personal liberty and childrens blood is in the interest of the greater good because you leave the door wide open for them to make a run at

Sure, the anti-Trump brigade totally took his words about Mexican cartel members coming over the border out of context and made it look like he was talking about all Mexican immigrants. They've twisted a lot of stuff he's said, they've misconstrued stuff. His comments that Russia would find a lot of great stuff if they hacked Hillary's email were clearly sarcastic, and said with large degree of tongue-in-cheek. But I think his comments about the Muslim mother and father of the American soldier who died were pretty terrible. It was a really cold hearted response, and it was very stupid and undiplomatic. If you want to know what I'm talking about, see here: [video="youtube;GW1uHqPkG8c"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GW1uHqPkG8c[/video]

I think people are far too lenient on Donald Trump, probably for political convenience.

He is an awful human being, always has been. His raging incompetence aside let's ask the people of Aberdeenshire about the thousands of jobs he promised to come with his protected natural landscape destroying golf monument to his own ego.

Oh right they never materialised and a lot of the construction work was done by labourers brought in from outside.


I'm British, I could care less about hating or liking Trump on the basis of the meaningless distraction which is the US partisan political scene ("Hurr durr, let's choose between two *****y restrictive parties and pretend like US democracy remotely serves it's purpose"), I hate him because he is an awful human being with next to no redeeming qualities.

Forget spin, he's a **** person and an incompetent steward of business and one must assume, state.
His leadership charisma certainly doesn't extend beyond stoking sectarian violence, which isn't really the conciliatory consensus builder you ideally need for leading such a large and diverse country of opinion.

Of course there is a problem and everyone admits there is a problem. I don't know anyone who genuinely thinks that there is not a problem at all.

The issue is when we start blaming innocent ordinary Muslims for the actions of terrorists. We don't blame or punish people for things they haven't done, to do so really is fascism.

There are several, multi layered, complex reasons for Islamic terrorism and the idea that it's the left's fault or the liberals fault is ludicrous. Equally as ludicrous is the idea that if we started to make concessions to the far right that their appeal would dim. If we move closer to where they are they become less extreme and closer to the mainstream.

Nobody is blaming innocent muslims for terrorists actions. The left aid and encourage the victim culture, the hysteria of muslim victimhood and silence, smear and attack people wanting to criticise or discuss Islams problems. People dont want the far right in power, thats why the far right havent been in power in decades. Do nothing, continue with the head in the sand and suicidal policies and they will be elected and grow in support.

Well proposing to ban 1.6 billion Muslims certainly is blaming and punishing people for what they have not done.

What should we do that we are not already doing?
What position should we take that will magically quell the far-right while at the same time solving the problems of Islamic extremism?

Why should all of us non plane hijackers be screened at airports? Because there is no magic solution to routing out and identifying would be hijackers.

This happens in numerous circumstances - The minority ruin it for the majority. Is it fair? No - Is it reasonable yes

I dont have the time to address the second part but there have been numerous ideas put about. I might even argue that the illusion of recognising and dealing with the issues robustly is as important. People are sick of being condescended to by politicians, the media and "moderate" muslims about Islam

It would be so refreshing and reassuring for a leader to talk about the reality of Islam and its problems instead of carefully reading from a sensitively worded script. It wouldnt magically make any problems disappear but it would make people a lot happier that they are not being led by a blind, appeasing coward who fails to understand the link between the two