Will the UK have to be nice to President Trump?

how even is hillary better when she's proven she's extremely corrupt, fickle, fake and murderous? why would she change her ways simply for becoming more powerful? in fact, surely this would potentiate her corruption? :|

Because she actually knows the way things work. She has been in government for almost three decades, she's been Obama's right-hand woman for 4 years.

Trump is this outsider who has had NO EXPERIENCE in politics whatsoever.

Therefore, all of his dream-like proposals of making America great again, building the wall, extreme vetting, becoming stronger, making great deals - all of them are complete assumptions. He has no realistic idea of whether they can be achieved or not, he is sitting aside and nitpicking the various faults of the Obama administration as if he could do better. He can't, he has no political experience, his economic experience alone isn't enough to facilitate the US, he is rich and completely out-of-touch with educated people.

And this is ignoring all of the racism, hatred and vileness that his campaign is causing. True, he isn't racist himself, but his position as the Republican nominee legitimises the hate of the average racist American.

They have a massive figure suddenly blaming other races and countries for problems,

whether they are responsible or not, this sentiment is increasing racial tensions in the US.

If he becomes president, the average hillbilly Alabama/South Carolina racist whiteman will feel better about his anti-black or anti-latino or anti-Muslim feelings such that he would be more willing to dispense what he now sees as legitimate justice.

Hillary Clinton is no gem, I hate her for stealing the nomination from a far more inspirational and qualified candidate, and I don't like her record. But at least she has a record.

She knows how to be realistic,

Trump is purely idealistic and there is nothing whatsoever to prove that Trump will accomplish his dumb claims,

not forgetting the nation-wide controversy he has caused, the world-wide problems he is highlighting. And the fact that he is an isolationist.

There's nothing wrong with putting America first, but shutting off America's responsibilities on the world stage is stupid. Putin and Kim Jong Un will be under less pressure from the US and they will have one less superpower opposing them.

So when it comes to Trump vs Clintom, Clinton wins a thousands times over because she is a realist and not an idealist.

she got kicked out of office though. that's not exactly a sign of competence in office, mate.



on a scale of 1 to 10, how important is this criterion to you? because honestly, you're putting *waaay* too much emphasis on this, because it's like you're assuming a president has no aids. or generals. or chiefs of staff.
also, what "experience" did obama have?



how rich. you think he's out of touch while hillary somehow is?
and at least he's actually laying out *some* ****ing policies, right? what is *****n offering? except her gender?



err, say what now? :| you're calling republicans racists? ...why? why would you blindly buy into a cultural stereotype? how degenerative of you. I expected better - it's like if somebody said "most muslims are sexist" or something - how "racist" that would be, right?



...what? "races"? or countries? there's a stark difference.



as if racial tensions weren't already bad enough for reasons relating more to liberals than conservatives? you think black lives matter is a symptom of republican racism? I'd take it as "liberal" racism. and oh yeah, whatever did mr symbol himself do for race relations? you know who I'm referring to. the lame duck.



nahhhh. you're being ridiculous. I could just as easily say that obama legitimised anti-white sentiments in black communities.



a ****ing appalling record, sure.



yeah, like the way she realistically accepts millions of dollars from massive corporations and expects the people to think that they're not bribing her. very realistic of her.



what are you referring to?



oh boy, do I really have to play teacher here and educate you on the differences between "isolationism" and "non-interventionism"? ffs



you're sounding a lot like rumpsfeld right now. very neo-con.



trump isn't even that though, he just has spelled-out policy objectives.