Turn on thread page Beta

Trump has won presidental election - he has the secert army watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    One of the issues is that we can't reliably anticipate what stance Trump would take if he were to make his way into office. He's made substantial changes to his positions in his transition from democrat-leaning public figure to conservative politician. However with appointments like Pence as his VP and Santorum on his Catholic Advisory council, he is surrounding himself with some of the most ardently religious major politicians in the Republican party. Santorum's anti-LGBT position is blatant and extensive, he had signed a pledge defying any legal changes to the definition of marriage a couple of months before Trump brought him onto his advisory council. Meanwhile Pence has signed bills allowing organisations to discriminate on the basis of their religious beliefs, and also signed into law one of the most restrictive abortion laws in modern American history, a bill quickly overturned by a federal court. Trump may not have been explicit on virtually any social issues over the course of the campaign, but he's been very clever in hinting which way he's going to lean with the people he's surrounding himself with.
    Although I understand where you're coming from, there are too many assumptions being made. Having Pence and Santorum around doesn't mean he himself his anti-LGBT. He most likely appointed them for their other strengths, not because they're anti-LGBT. Trump even said himself in the town hall interview that he wants to restore the dignity of the LGBT community. Should we assume that Hillary Clinton is racist? She did say, in 2008, that Martin Luther king "wasn't that great". Trump is erratic in the way he approaches things, but I don't think he deserves these false accusations. (I am a neutral, not a Trump or Hillary supporter).
    Offline

    15
    Last I heard trump was trailing behind clinton. I don't like trump, so that god.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Pink news is not a reliable source. Furthermore, if what they said is true, then why hasn't this been said in BBC News, CNN(proper news channels).

    Hrc actually indicates mostly that Donald trump supports LGBT. It's only at the beginning of the article where they are "unsure" about his views.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusarium)
    Pink news is not a reliable source. Furthermore, if what they said is true, then why hasn't this been said in BBC News, CNN(proper news channels).

    Hrc actually indicates mostly that Donald trump supports LGBT. It's only at the beginning of the article where they are "unsure" about his views.
    The statement is sourced from Trump's website.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    The statement is sourced from Trump's website.
    OK then
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusarium)
    Although I understand where you're coming from, there are too many assumptions being made. Having Pence and Santorum around doesn't mean he himself his anti-LGBT. He most likely appointed them for their other strengths, not because they're anti-LGBT. Trump even said himself in the town hall interview that he wants to restore the dignity of the LGBT community. Should we assume that Hillary Clinton is racist? She did say, in 2008, that Martin Luther king "wasn't that great". Trump is erratic in the way he approaches things, but I don't think he deserves these false accusations. (I am a neutral, not a Trump or Hillary supporter).
    As I said, it's difficult to know about Trump because he's been clever in avoiding making any explicit statements on a lot of social issue. Pence, Santorum etc were most likely chosen to fully secure the conservative base of the party, but in the terrible likelihood that he's elected I'm hoping he leans closer to the centre than the politicians he's choosing to surround himself with.

    Should we assume that Hillary Clinton is racist? She did say, in 2008, that Martin Luther king "wasn't that great".
    In the interests of being fair, this isn't really a fair comparison. Hillary hasn't placed any politicians in positions of importance than have tried to push racist legislature while Trump has granted senior positions to those that have worked aggressively to bring anti-LGBT and anti-abortion legislature into law. Again, I'm not saying this outright condemns Trump on LGBT issues (although he has positioned himself heavily as pro-life and, as mentioned above, has pledged to sign into law an Act that would permit religious discrimination), but it would be a break in convention if Trump surrounded himself with politicians who disagree heavily with the stance he would take whilst in office.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hillary_Clinton)
    Not true.
    (Original post by Gofre)
    Wat
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    WUT. Are you kidding me?
    Told ya, read my post and compare it to what I predicted.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Uni12345678)
    The original poster is the reason why tsr needs to bring back negative rating.
    (Original post by IYGB)
    +rep for the gif!
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Googling "Donald Trump shy voters" just turns up lots of arguments against the hypothesis that there are a lot of shy Trump voters not giving his name in the polls.

    We have zero evidence that the phenomenon exists. It wasn't present in the GOP primaries - in fact, if anything, the primary polls on average overstated Trump's support.

    Also, Trump supporters don't remotely fit the stereotype of a "shy voter" cause. The archetypal example is the 1992 "shy Tories" - a case of Tory supporters being, in general, reluctant, unenthusiastic, and embarassed about their political leanings. Trump's supporters, by contrast, are extremely vocal, enthusiastic, and demonstrative of their political leanings. If anything, it's the Clinton campaign which more closely mirrors the 1992 Tories.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Who has Trump and Clinton neck and neck? Is that nationally? where? Which state?

    You believe he has a secret army and all the polls are wrong?

    Dont start a thread and then fail to back it up with something intelligible or you just confirm what people think.
    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    What if Clinton's shy voters are so shy that even you don't know about them?
    Told ya, read my post and compare it to what I predicted.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I'm not entirely sure what he was attempting to prove. For the sake of curiosity I went through the predictor he linked to with the poll results from that page, voting for whichever candidate had the most poll "wins" for that state and choosing Trump for any ties, to minimise my liberal bias (I also gave Trump Iowa, which it had no polls for). I also elected to keep going after the battleground states (at which point Hillary was winning). I got the following result:

    Attachment 590186
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I believe they are a she. I was just curuious as to the rationale behind things, which it seems on TSR seems to be asking too much for many posters.

    This is how the BBC have it, based on the poll of polls of the last 5 in the BG states. Realclearpolitics gives a more details breakdown of polls.

    Attachment 590214
    Told ya, read my post and compare it to what I predicted.
    Your ones are clearly wrong.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Ya'll quiet now aren't ya, think again before trying to correct me.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckfeister)
    Ya'll quiet now aren't ya, think again before trying to correct me.
    I apologise for not being awake at 7:30 in the morning to reply to your gloating.

    But yeah, you called it. You had no evidence beyond "look at Brexit" but you called it correctly. There's now a president who vehemently denies climate change, will strip millions of Americans of the healthcare they're finally receiving for the first time in their lives in the hopes that the free market will treat them fairly this time, and will be standing in front of a federal court next month accused of raping a child. I'm glad at least someone's happy about that.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    These threads are always popping up from Pro-Trump supporter or articles from Pro-Trump websites. There is literally nothing at this stage to suggest a Trump win is going to happen or that it is even likely to happen. The overwhelmingly more likely option is that Clinton will win this election fairly comfortably. Trump still has a chance and he's not dead and buried but if you were betting on him at this stage you should be expecting to lose your money. US polling in recent years has been far more accurate than UK polling, and these polls aren't as tight as Brexit. The undecided votes throw in some uncertainty but the biggest uncertainty is not in the states which are mostly likely to tip the election. Iowa for example is not a big prize even thought its is one of the more likely ones.
    No words.
    • Section Leader
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Peer Support Volunteers
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I apologise for not being awake at 7:30 in the morning to reply to your gloating.

    But yeah, you called it. You had no evidence beyond "look at Brexit" but you called it correctly. There's now a president who vehemently denies climate change, will strip millions of Americans of the healthcare they're finally receiving for the first time in their lives in the hopes that the free market will treat them fairly this time, and will be standing in front of a federal court next month accused of raping a child. I'm glad at least someone's happy about that.
    This. All of this.

    You were right OP, who cares?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckfeister)
    Told ya, read my post and compare it to what I predicted.
    Still don't know why you support him, he won't be able to do half of the stuff he promises because Congress hates him
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:


    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    He won't want to do anything that social conservative, he couldn't care less. He will be safer on Russia than Hillary.

    And he will be milder and less damaging than Bush.

    The running mate is a freak designed to appease I think.

    Can congress force him into hardcore stuff? Surely people didn't vote for a real conservative- they voted change re foreign and trade policy.

    Think Le Pen will be next.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I apologise for not being awake at 7:30 in the morning to reply to your gloating.

    But yeah, you called it. You had no evidence beyond "look at Brexit" but you called it correctly. There's now a president who vehemently denies climate change, will strip millions of Americans of the healthcare they're finally receiving for the first time in their lives in the hopes that the free market will treat them fairly this time, and will be standing in front of a federal court next month accused of raping a child. I'm glad at least someone's happy about that.
    We have a perfect shot of getting a radical (younger?)democrat in 4 years time, rather than the establishment stitch up that was Hillary, which would have led straight to a suicidal conflict with Putin.

    He's less dangerous than Bush.

    Not condoning any of his conduct, but these are the important things- getting a paradigm shift in place, and foreign policy.

    Simply couldn't validate the status quo, stitching up Bernie when he was so much more wanted by the people but they put the knife into him, and failed to learn the lessons of the world(Brexit and more), failed to provide true representation, and let their meglomania and self-entitlement, and sense of knowing what's best, and failure to listen, and personal ruthlessness rule(it goes on..)- and guess what ?? They got done over.

    Now the democrat party will have to rediscover the grass roots and actually care about the people it's supposed to.

    The people changed the game with Thatcher and Reagan, now everyone thinks they were right- history will show they are right now. In the long run it's for the best.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    We have a perfect shot of getting a radical (younger?)democrat in 4 years time, rather than the establishment stitch up that was Hillary, which would have led straight to a suicidal conflict with Putin.

    He's less dangerous than Bush.

    Not condoning any of his conduct, but these are the important things- getting a paradigm shift in place, and foreign policy.

    Simply couldn't validate the status quo, stitching up Bernie when he was so much more wanted by the people but they put the knife into him, and failed to learn the lessons of the world failed to provide true representation and let their meglomania and self-entitlement, and sense of knowing what's best, and failure to listen, and personal ruthlessness rule- and guess what ?? They got done over.

    Now the democrat party will have to rediscover the grass roots and actually care about the people it's supposed to.

    The people changed the game with Thatcher and Reagan, now everyone thinks they were right- history will show they are right now. In the long run it's for the best.
    I think you're somewhat underplaying the amount of short term damage he's capable of inflicting. Healthcare and the environment are two very large causes for concern that immediately spring to mind. His plan to repeal Obamacare will almost certainly leave tens of millions without access to healthcare, even if Trump's vision of open markets drastically reducing cost is realised there is almost zero chance that predatory insurance companies will let it drop to a price attainable by the millions of Americans living below the poverty line. Meanwhile his plans to begin working towards energy independence by exploiting the country's fossil fuel reserves will further deepen the country's reliance on these fuels, something he will have no reservations over given his on-recird position that climate change is a hoax. These are two policies he wants to begin enacting immediately and will have the support of all levels of reoublican-majority government. Even if the democrats take back the presidency and majorities at lower levels, everything Trump has torn down and repealed will need to be renegotiated, setting the country back at a time where it was primed to push further forward.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I think you're somewhat underplaying the amount of short term damage he's capable of inflicting. Healthcare and the environment are two very large causes for concern that immediately spring to mind. His plan to repeal Obamacare will almost certainly leave tens of millions without access to healthcare, even if Trump's vision of open markets drastically reducing cost is realised there is almost zero chance that predatory insurance companies will let it drop to a price attainable by the millions of Americans living below the poverty line. Meanwhile his plans to begin working towards energy independence by exploiting the country's fossil fuel reserves will further deepen the country's reliance on these fuels, something he will have no reservations over given his on-recird position that climate change is a hoax. These are two policies he wants to begin enacting immediately and will have the support of all levels of reoublican-majority government. Even if the democrats take back the presidency and majorities at lower levels, everything Trump has torn down and repealed will need to be renegotiated, setting the country back at a time where it was primed to push further forward.
    It wasn't going forward, inequality was rising and huge, it was spiralling into the failing neoliberal systems death trap, and race relations were rapidly going backward to the dark ages, and civil war was approaching.

    They had made disastrous foreign policy moves and Hillary is part of the war machines who would have the world on the brink re Putin.

    Not saying Trump will make a perfect world clearly, but change is need if it's just 4 years. Don't care that he's a knobhead. Hillary is a lying and devious so and so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well, it happened! LOL.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 14, 2016
The home of Results and Clearing

3,502

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Will you be tempted to trade up and get out of your firm offer on results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.