Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Genuine fear of Trump becoming president? Watch

    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moura)
    I am genuinely so scared of Trump becoming president and the impact America having a bigoted evil man in power running the country. Not just for myself but for the rest of the world. And I can't do anything about it.

    Anyone else feel like this
    If you were the most powerful person in the room who tried to be nice to earn everyone's respect and you received their contempt instead, you might consider scaring them a bit to demand their respect. I think Americans want the world to be a bit wary of what their leader may do. Not too much, but just enough to keep the obstinate children in check.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    He will be unable to build any sort of national coalition that is necessary to win a General election. The majority of polls putting him against Sanders or Clinton have him losing. That trend will only increase as we get closer to November. This is of course assuming he becomes the Republican party nominee.. The GOP seems to be it's own worst enemy these days.
    (Original post by Supersaps)
    Better to trust bookies can pollsters. Remember bookies take into account how polls tend to swing before an election. Polling is just dodgy sampling of the current mood of the population.


    Betfred has Clinton at 5/6 to win.

    Trump 5/2.



    So Clinton has a pretty great odds at the moment.

    SS
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    Trump is not going to become President.

    He is basically an attention seeker and so he is thriving on the media attention he is getting at the moment. He appeals to a core of right-wing voters who don't like immigrants and think the world is too politically correct, and the more outrageous and controversial he is, the more they cheer him and he enjoys the adulation. Given the disarray the Republican party is in, he may be able to get the Republican nomination on the back of that.

    Those voters are not going to win him the Presidency though, if he is to become President he will need to have a broad appeal and reach out to other sections of the electorate, but the hole he has dug himself is that by chasing the adulation of his core vote he has alienated lots of other sections of the electorate. Trying to brand himself as this anti-establishment rebel isn't going to win for him any more than it did Farage - remember all the hype about UKIP are going to do this and that and when it came to the General Election he didn't even win a seat and UKIP didn't make the projected progress.

    Nate Silver's blog is always good for cutting outside the hype and he points out the big problem for Trump: amongst the general public he has bad favourability ratings and if he wins the nomination he will start the campaign with the worst favourability ratings of any nominee. There's not much time for him to mellow and build bridges with groups he has alienated.
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...ection-voters/

    Now I am sure his core supporters will suffer from a kind of confirmation bias about Trump's inevitable victory: the websites they use, the people they talk to, have similar views to them and they will conclude that everyone thinks like that and the 'establishment' is in for an almighty shock on election day. They will then get a massive shock on the day, and will be reduced to ranting again about how "America is finished", "the US will become Muslim by 2030" and how they are going to emigrate etc.

    We saw all this before, in 2012, when loads of people were confidently predicting that Obama was "toast" and would be a one-term President, and then they were genuinely shocked when Obama won.

    I don't think any of the current Republican candidates are really strong enough to win the Presidency so the real battle is Clinton v Sanders. It will probably be Clinton, and she will go on to be President.
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    I'd put him at odds on to take the nomination, but unlikely to win the presidency.

    Clinton would beat him convincingly. Sanders would probably destroy him, taking the wind out of his anti-establishment sails.

    Bloomberg could mess that up if he enters though.
    It is a mistake to invoke the standard American politics playbook in regards to Trump's campaign. He has defied it every step of the way thus far and the paradigm will be broken more so if/when he gains the nomination. Consider that the same pundits who claim Trump has no chance in the general election are the same people who have completely underestimated him from the beginning. Many of them also happen to be invested in seeing him fail. The general election is too far away for any polling to be very relevant as well. Trump has displayed an impressive instinct for politically destroying his opponents. This will probably continue to be true if he faces Hillary. I believe her campaign is very concerned at the prospect of running against him. Regardless of what current polls and conventional wisdom suggests. Hillary would prefer to run against any other Republican. Imagine a Trump vs. Clinton debate! I actually think Sanders is more equipped to deal with Trump than Hillary. Sanders may be the one candidate in any party that Trump's style will prove ineffective against.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moura)
    I am genuinely so scared of Trump becoming president and the impact America having a bigoted evil man in power running the country. Not just for myself but for the rest of the world. And I can't do anything about it.

    Anyone else feel like this
    Clinton would be worse tho.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckingalt)
    Trump has displayed an impressive instinct for politically destroying his opponents. This will probably continue to be true if he faces Hillary. I believe her campaign is very concerned at the prospect of running against him. Regardless of what current polls and conventional wisdom suggests. Hillary would prefer to run against any other Republican. Imagine a Trump vs. Clinton debate! I actually think Sanders is more equipped to deal with Trump than Hillary. Sanders may be the one candidate in any party that Trump's style will prove ineffective against.
    I agree with all of this, especially the last part. However, I struggle to see a large enough constituency for him to appeal to. A large part of the country thinks he's nuts. It's true that we're a way out, but his net favourability is a disaster.

    At least, he would have a huge, a tremendous, job on his hands convincing enough of the public that he's a temperate leader who can be trusted with the presidency, especially given he's campaigned in the primary on pretty much the opposite ticket.

    Perhaps he could win over the electorate by running on his independence, non-politicianness, and sound business judgement, and get away with the stuff he's come out with on immigration and foreign policy etc, I don't know. You're quite right that he's baffled the commentariat before. I just can't see a path to it right now.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Potentially, he can single-handedly bring about a global recession. I am not bothered to explain the reasons how, but just my 2 cents. In essence, I think he will be like a 'Hitler' or 'Mao' type leaders, who actually can benefit their country & economy a lot and advance the country to a new height. But in other countries eyes, he is a potential threat to them. As a leader of USA I think he is alright, but he can seriously bring about instability to the entire world because of his sweeping comments on Veterans/Minorities/Women etc.

    I must admit he is a good negotiator, he has brought about amazing deals for his corporation but at the same time he is an idiot. If you guys watched the GOP Republican Debate, you must've seen the question of what he will do with the nuclear triad and his opinions on its capabilities. He made a complete fool out of himself by giving an answer completely irrelevant to the question. He could've simply asked what a nuclear triad is instead of having Marco Rubio explain to him later in public of what it is. He may be a great businessman, but ALL of his opinions and plans are completely baseless. The reason to every solution he is planning on bringing is 'to make America great again' or something ludicrous such as that. His political knowledge was also tested several times in which he shushed the interviewer.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    I agree with all of this, especially the last part. However, I struggle to see a large enough constituency for him to appeal to. A large part of the country thinks he's nuts. It's true that we're a way out, but his net favourability is a disaster.

    At least, he would have a huge, a tremendous, job on his hands convincing enough of the public that he's a temperate leader who can be trusted with the presidency, especially given he's campaigned in the primary on pretty much the opposite ticket.

    Perhaps he could win over the electorate by running on his independence, non-politicianness, and sound business judgement, and get away with the stuff he's come out with on immigration and foreign policy etc, I don't know. You're quite right that he's baffled the commentariat before. I just can't see a path to it right now.
    You may be correct. There are certainly plenty of "experts" who agree with your assessment. Mine is based more on instinct. I'm an American citizen. I am obsessed with current affairs so I am very well informed. I have lived all over the U.S. so my perspective is not confined to one region. He is not as "nuts" as the initial first impression indicates. The american people are more in tune to this than the international community. I have also lived overseas (Australia). International coverage of U.S. politics (Sky news, BBC, etc) is not comprehensive. The coverage isn't objective. It would be like living in the U.S. and only having Fox news as a source on European affairs.

    The result for Trump's coverage is that his obnoxious sound bytes get played over and over without any honest debate into the validity of his positions. Trump has displayed impressive leadership qualities during his campaign. Strong Leadership is what disenchanted Americans are seeking more than anything. If you want a good insight into why Donald Trump is having such a successful campaign watch Morning Joe on MSNBC.
    http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckingalt)
    It is a mistake to invoke the standard American politics playbook in regards to Trump's campaign. He has defied it every step of the way thus far and the paradigm will be broken more so if/when he gains the nomination. Consider that the same pundits who claim Trump has no chance in the general election are the same people who have completely underestimated him from the beginning. Many of them also happen to be invested in seeing him fail. The general election is too far away for any polling to be very relevant as well. Trump has displayed an impressive instinct for politically destroying his opponents. This will probably continue to be true if he faces Hillary. I believe her campaign is very concerned at the prospect of running against him. Regardless of what current polls and conventional wisdom suggests. Hillary would prefer to run against any other Republican. Imagine a Trump vs. Clinton debate! I actually think Sanders is more equipped to deal with Trump than Hillary. Sanders may be the one candidate in any party that Trump's style will prove ineffective against.
    He may well not be a typical candidate, but I don't see how any person can maintain a Base like his whilst similtanoisuly chasing moderate and democrat votes. He'll lose for the same reasons Romney did, you win the nomination on a policy and ideological Base that loses the rest of the country.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckingalt)
    -snip-
    Thanks for your response, cking. It's great to have an American weigh in on this one with some "boots on the ground" experience. You're certainly right in the sense that Europeans are always amazed and consistently snobby about American politics. We do have a difficult time understanding issues on the other side of the pond!

    Trump has defied political gravity so far. He has made a thousand comments that would have killed a leadership campaign in the UK in its infancy. Again, Brits have a hard time grasping why this man is so appealing.

    Whilst I can't comment with any authority on any domestic issues in the states, I am terrified by the incredibly simplistic view he has of foreign policy.

    I give one example:

    Trump has pledged to build a massive wall on your southern border and to make Mexico pay for it. Meanwhile, he has promised to deport 11 million+ illegals, without explaining how, then plans to allow them all back in legally according to criteria he has yet to fully explain.

    Now, he gets away with it because so many intelligent, educated, brilliant Americans have absolutely no idea about foreign policy. Intelligent people in the US are often very insular (we've all heard the statistics about Americans owning passports...) and US news is almost completely focused on just US issues. Being so far away from many countries, not owning an empire, pretty much being a continent (in land mass & population) by itself, being the richest and most important country in the world all contribute towards this very introverted attitude. This doesn't make them any less brilliant, or any less intelligent, it's just a cultural thing.


    For my part, I'm married to an American and have spent a lot of time discussing with my very worried, very Republican in-laws who agree with Trump on lots of issues but realise he has no appeal to the centre ground.

    Also, he cheats at golf.

    SS
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I can't see Trump winning even the nomination. It's too much of a risk to the GOP. If Trump were to win the nomination I'd envisage a 1964-style result.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersaps)

    Whilst I can't comment with any authority on any domestic issues in the states, I am terrified by the incredibly simplistic view he has of foreign policy.

    I give one example:

    Trump has pledged to build a massive wall on your southern border and to make Mexico pay for it. Meanwhile, he has promised to deport 11 million+ illegals, without explaining how, then plans to allow them all back in legally according to criteria he has yet to fully explain.
    I don't know exactly what Trump has in mind but I can speculate how I would do it. Mexico's immigration policies are far more restrictive that the U.S. The reason they become so indignant by proposals to eliminate undocumented immigration into the U.S. is because their economy is dependent on Mexican immigrants living in America. Once a wall is built an argument could be made that Mexico should contribute towards its' construction since the Mexican government has been complicit for enabling and even encouraging illegal immigration into America in the first place. I'll come back to that point later. The first priority in to actually control the border. A wall will do that to a manageable extent.

    Next policies need to be implemented to make legal immigration an easier/quicker process. Provide incentive for undocumented workers to self-deport by recognizing and prioritizing visas for those who do. Simultaneously implement policies to make living in America illegally less appealing. Impose harsh penalties on employers who hire illegals. Eliminate access to public services to illegals. Any illegals arrested get automatically deported. Any illegals seeking medical attention get automatically deported after emergency treatment. It won't be necessary to go door to door. Improve the opportunities for those willing to leave and come back legally, and make the quality of life for those determined to stay illegally unbearable. They will eventually leave by their own volition and many of the desirable ones will come back legally. It won't happen immediately but the ultimate result will be the same. Illegal immigration will be reduced to manageable level. Brute force is not necessary. It can be accomplished by exploiting positive and negative incentives working in tandem.

    Remember how Mexico's economy depends on its American immigration population. Now that most of those immigrants are legal, a "wall tax" can be added to the cost of their visa or citizenship. They would pay it. Mexico would help them pay it. The opportunity to relocate from Mexico to the U.S. legally is worth it to many, and the Mexican economy depends on it.

    Maybe not so incredibly simplistic after all.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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