Kingsmills

It's A Mad Mad World

Recommended Posts

I appreciate that people are increasingly disillusioned with conventional politics and the establishment but the fact that an avowedly open misogynistic, racist, lying, islamophic abuser of women who mocks the disabled has been elected President of the United States is beyond worrying.

The world is, in my view. a much darker place this morning. A very sad day indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly agree with all of the above, but it must be added that what has led to the election of Donald Trump is the very same passing phase of social lunacy throughout the West which has also led the politically illiterate towards kneejerk support for various other crank causes such as UKIP and the SNP. Were it not for this kind of political behaviour, which also manifested itself post-recession/depression in the 1930s, roasters of this kind would never have progressed past their natural status of comedy minorities.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Charles Bannerman said:

I certainly agree with all of the above, but it must be added that what has led to the election of Donald Trump is the very same passing phase of social lunacy throughout the West which has also led the politically illiterate towards kneejerk support for various other crank causes such as UKIP and the SNP. Were it not for this kind of political behaviour, which also manifested itself post-recession/depression in the 1930s, roasters of this kind would never have progressed past their natural status of comedy minorities.

It's a great pity that you spoiled what would have been a rare reasonable post by grouping a moderate left of centre party which has been mainstream for half a century and in government for a decade in the same category as the extremists.

Whether you agree with their policies or actions and whether you support independence or not, no reasonable person would do so. Whatever ones view, the SNP and what they espouse are neither a passing phase or remotely close to social lunacy.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight. Other places have naturally dodgy boltholes for politically illiterate cranks but not Scotland. Instead we have the squeaky clean, cuddly SNP.

The only difference between the SNP and other crank political movements benefiting from the current global brainstorm is that, unlike Trump, UKIP, the French Front National etc, the SNP claims to be a left rather than a right wing pressure group. It expediently made the transition some years ago when it realised that, in Scotland, left wingery was more likely to assist its sole objective. Nothing to do with ideology - this was pure, cynical political opportunism but it still doesn't detract from well established historical parallels.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

So let me get this straight. Other places have naturally dodgy boltholes for politically illiterate cranks but not Scotland. Instead we have the squeaky clean, cuddly SNP.

The only difference between the SNP and other crank political movements benefiting from the current global brainstorm is that, unlike Trump, UKIP, the French Front National etc, the SNP claims to be a left rather than a right wing pressure group. It expediently made the transition some years ago when it realised that, in Scotland, left wingery was more likely to assist its sole objective. Nothing to do with ideology - this was pure, cynical political opportunism but it still doesn't detract from well established historical parallels.

Hello Charles. As usual, so much to take to task in what is an utterly incontinent post. I don't know if it's an image you are fostering but you are increasingly coming across as a puce faced old colonel in danger of blowing a righteously indignant gasket as you strain away. Anyhow, let's disabuse you (again) on the quantumly small chance you will listen. The SNP have heehaw to do with the other two examples of people elected solely on the grounds of popular disconnect between the political mainstream and the electorate. Michael Moore - a vastly more respectable intellect than you - has called this the greatest "f*ck you" in history. That's all there is behind this. There is, as may well become frighteningly apparent with Trump, no plan. That has already become utterly transparent with Brexit.  The SNP can't be lumped in there because it is the political mainstream in Scotland and doesn't seem to suffer the same ills as Labour, Democrats et al. It will only do this if and when it has disillusioned it's core support - whether that support is left/ right/ centre is immaterial. It's leaders do not espouse discrimination, bigotry or hatred despite having an independence agenda. One other thing - there are boltholes for "politically illiterate cranks"  in Scottish politics but I fear that those wishing to flee to them will have to share with an inconinent old colonel that others stopped listening to years ago. Still, you should enjoy their company.

 

  • Agree 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a day of madness, hats off to the Buchan Observer for the lead headline on its website - "Aberdeenshire business owner wins presidential election"

:lol:

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets not turn this into another SNP thread ... there are enough of them already and the tenuous addition of the SNP to the thread then a full scale discussion of what is right or wrong about them is blatant thread hijacking. The SNP is (currently) irrelevant to this thread and should probably remain so. For better or worse (mostly worse IMHO) this thread should remain focused on the American Presidential election and the people involved - which bizarrely includes Nigel Farage - and the outcome and repercussions. Molly Forbes is about the only relevant Scottish connection !!! (see HERE

On this side of the Atlantic it was a long night and the Canadian Immigration website crashed before the result was even known !!! https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/09/canadas-immigration-website-crashes-as-donald-trumps-us-election-lead-grows

I watched that Michael Moore videoclip on YouTube and saw the page on his website that said DT did not really want to be president and he was basically the only media figure who I thought had the same opinion as me ... Its complicated and there are nuances but simplifying it and posting it in short form ....  From the very start I have believed that Trump did not want the nomination to begin with, he certainly didnt want to be President, all he wanted was a temporary platform to promote his next business or TV venture which would come at the end of his run as a candidate, but each time he tried to say something controversial to basically get himself out of the race he got more popular, he insulted by race, colour, gender, religion, size, nationality, sexuality and more but every hate filled soundbite that came out of his mouth just made him more popular ... and with an opponent on the other side who is viewed as untrustworthy, over-ambitious, accused of being corrupt and just thoroughly unpopular he actually went and won the whole damn thing !

There has never been an election with two candidates who are more unworthy of the job and I really fear for how things will shape up over the next four years. I saw a couple of comments on twitter last night that it was like having to choose between Cancer and Heart Disease or HIV and AIDS and that about sums it up I think ...  

 

Michael Moore video - interesting which states he mentions right at the start ... the ones that Trump should not have woon but did and which basically made him President !!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How stupid of me, Davie, not to appreciate that, uniquely in the world, Scotland DOESN'T have a large cohort of life's less fortunate who are currently expressing their general pissedoffness by espousing maverick causes and thereby, for the moment, converting them into an unfortunate mainstream.

But indeed, to return to the USA. Thos nation has guaranteed world peace for the last 75 years, travelled to the moon and amassed an unprecedented number of Nobel Laureates but has now, via inflicting on the planet the invasion of Grenada, the bombing of Libya, American Football and McDonalds, descended even further to the depths of placing us at the mercy of Donald John Trump. Think about it - had his mother's family not decided to emigrate, his half-clone might instead have been standing for Provost of Stornoway on a ticket of banning mosques, declaring Sabbath football a capital offence and sowing a minefield to separate off the Catholic Southern Isles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can believe Trump did not initially want to be President but I imagine that the prospect increasingly became more attractive to his ego.  He could have withdrawn at any stage but has obviously decided to go through with it.  

In this politically correct world we live in we expect our politicians to be squeaky clean, but one thing that has struck me from listening to interviews with potential voters is the number of times people say that they don't like this or that about him but the most important thing is whether he will be good at the job.  They feel that as a successful businessman he is someone who can "get things done"  There is also still a huge number of folk in the USA who hold very reactionary views and felt Clinton was far too liberal.  One woman who I saw interviewed said she was a God fearing Christian and thought the job of the President was not "appropriate" for a woman!  Another said she thought the allegations of his misogyny weren't a concern because "he has repented before God"  He seems to have struck a chord both with the disaffected left and with the reactionary right.  We may speak the same language as the Americans (sort of) but we shouldn't be fooled into thinking that our attitudes are the same.

The other thing that those who know him say is that he delegates well.  Truth is, you cannot run a successful business empire unless you do delegate and then trust those you delegate to to get on with the job.  He is also said to listen to those with expert advice, accept they know more than he does in their area of expertise and takes that advice on board.  These are highly valuable skills for running a country.  He does not have a lot of political baggage and won't be frightened of taking difficult decisions if he believes they are the right ones.  As long as he listens to sage advice and doesn't press on with some of his more stupid ideas (such as banning Muslims from entering the USA) he might surprise many with how inclusive and effective he is.

He would not have been my choice but we have to respect the verdict of the American people.  We need our political leaders to give him the benefit of the doubt and work constructively with him to further mutual interests.  He needs to be judged on what he does as President and not on what he said during the campaign.  You don't become an effective CEO of a country by being nice, you do it by getting the job done.  Can't say I'm not worried but at least it will be interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too many will remember this, but when Ronald Reagan was elected on 1980 at a particularly tense period of the Cold War, all was doom and despondency but he ended up winning that Cold War. Trump is several degrees of roastership removed from this, but we may yet be pleasantly surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is being pre-judged due to his comments and actions and that is only fair and proper, but you are right, in the end his legacy will be what he did and how he did it .. but some (most) of his comments, statements, and potential policies have me pretty worried. Ronald Reagan was ridiculed as a bit part actor when he became president but by all accounts he was a pretty good one .... although he at least had political experience as governor of California.

Having sat through the Rob Ford era here in Toronto for 4 years while he was our mayor, I know its going to take this city many more years than that to recover from some of his policies ... multiply that a million-fold and include in it that every policy or action has global consequences and the idea of DT running amok in Washington, whilst moderately amusing in that it will put a lot of noises out of joint is also pretty scary !   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Donald is not already sobered by the fact alone that he is now the president of the mighty United States of America, the thrill and acclamation of the win will fade soon enough. And then he will have to get down to business quickly.

Being, apparently, now one of the wealthiest men in the world he has now  ...probably... become financially astute enough to at least be able to balance the books on an annual basis. He certainly is smart enough to  have taken  advantage of the American tax laws  to allow him to have avoided paying any taxes at all on his recent  past incomes. Now that takes b..lls or some faith in the probable fact that the U S tax systems will still be  operating in the same way after many further years. If so this will  favour the businessmen of America , like him, and such measures will, feasibly, be encouraged by Donald to enhance the economic prosperity within the country..... I think.  Unless, of course his plans already include long term spending strategies that will at least take him up to the next election in four years' time, by which time the fruits of his labour will at least be showing an upward trend in popularity by evidencing some increasing GOOD which will compel the electorate to re-elect him --or the reverse will apply and he may be out on his ear as new , more politically savvy,  actors stride upon the stage.

Putin:  My wife is Ukrainian and says that Mr Vladimir Put-the-boot-in  will eat him for breakfast.  There is no doubt that , with his KGB connections he is a very well-connected politician who has also survived more then one possible reversal of fortune in his past from which he has escaped unscathed. Like the blowing up of a rival many years ago in which he was alleged to have been closely implicated--an event that directly furthered his upward progression in the political sphere of influence. Externally this is unlikely since Mr Putin's continuous rise in power and prestige relies on deriving economic benefit from an association with the U.S. whose military alone far surpasses that of the Soviet Union in size.

It's also my opinion that a dangerous  threat may come from China who is building up their  military might  in an alarming fashion and is already hell-bent or "re-acquiring" the islands off their Eastern coast against the warnings of the USA to stop. In addition, one of  the Kremlin's beefs with the West is suggested to lie in the fact that much of the bellicose attitudes of Mr. Putin and his cohorts is  engendered because Russia has not been recognised for their power  and importance in the International arena and not asked for their opinions etc. when the rest of the world is making political moves. This lies at the root of the daring invasion and take-over of the Crimea against which the Western powers complained mightily but did nothing to stop him and his intervention in Syria.  If their talks go well then other countries may be persuaded to at least consider  some form of trading agreement with Moscow as desirable.. seeing also a diminution of general world tension with the Russian Confederation as a valuable side effect as well as an economic benefit.  Further, the stationing  of  military might in far-flung places very close to Russia, as is currently underway, only serves to antagonise the Kremlin and is also very expensive to maintain and service with spare parts and supplies. There is an old saying .."keep your friends close and your enemies closer."  

For me,  first impressions are that Mr. DT has a nasty steak in him and so  he will not at  all like playing second fiddle to the Russian President.  But since this is the Donald's  first foray into the political arena and concentrated on his business acquisitions etc, these two powerful men  might just get along with Vlad the Lad weighing him up very carefully but being gracious enough to convince DT that they have much in common and he appreciates his having been elected and welcomes further talks and so on. I also think that Mr. trump is sharp enough to see that a more favorable climate of reconciliation with the Russians could be very favorable to the USA and to even allow a reduction in armed forces  which could reduce his bills for the military substantially. Not to mention the fact that  a favorable trade agreement with  Moscow could bring not only peace but considerable financial benefits to his bottom line. 

Russia is a mighty geographical empire but is small indeed compared to the huge economic enterprise  and connections of the U.S.A.  ESPECIALLY since Putin is a very smart thinker and has selected all the main industrial bosses to run his vital enterprises from those who are highly intelligent, experienced, well-connected and successful people. Russia is also exporting oil (and gas?) in huge amounts through their pipelines to the West via Ukraine and so on. In short they are,  one might say, fairly self-sufficient and independent.

The main reason, INMHO, for his election is because the public perception of BOTH candidates throughout  is one of shocking unsuitability, but in such an important election they just had to vote one way or the other. Phew! What a choice!And they chose  a very aggressive, outspoken but perceived to be more honest and open person in Donald, whose business skills far outweighed anything she had to offer, and the USA population wanted work and jobs and Donald promised that. Hillary was also  perceived to be far too well connected with the upper echelons of power ( meaning there was unlikely to be hardly any change at all in the White House) and crooked with little regard for either the basic rules or the people to whom she should be accountable. Donald, however, categorically promised many radical changes whereas really she promised nothing at all....except same old, same old.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the many interesting/unusual things about Trump is that he once appeared on The Saint & Greavsie, drawing teams out of the hat in the draw for the Rumbelows Cup. And he managed to do it without offending any monorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good summing up from Scarlet there.  One of the things about the US system is that the President is severely restricted by what he can get through the Senate.  Obama got elected on a wave of optimism about how he was going to make big changes, but the reality is that in his 8 years in office, he didn't really achieve a great deal.  He has been the "Yes we can, no he couldn't" President.  Trump really doesn't have too many allies in the Republican party and even if the Senate and Congress have republican nominations, Trump is not going to get things through unless there is mainstream support.

Regan was surprisingly successful because as an actor he was used to playing his part and doing what he was told.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reluctant, bizarre, short term conclusion at least has to be that Trump is good for your pension fund. Overnight the Asian markets have gained more than they previously lost and Europe has opened higher again. It will be interesting to see what the Dow does later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE SITE FOR THE SORT OF RAVINGS THAT HAVE PRECEDED THIS POST!

Edited by Scotty
removing the 48 point font !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JockWatt said:

I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE SITE FOR THE SORT OF RAVINGS THAT HAVE PRECEDED THIS POST!

Quite apart from the 48 point font used in your post - which I sorted - and which itself was the most inappropriate content of this thread ... why is discussing the election of Donald Trump to the position of the most powerful office on the planet inappropriate for this site ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

Good summing up from Scarlet there.  One of the things about the US system is that the President is severely restricted by what he can get through the Senate.  Obama got elected on a wave of optimism about how he was going to make big changes, but the reality is that in his 8 years in office, he didn't really achieve a great deal.  He has been the "Yes we can, no he couldn't" President.  Trump really doesn't have too many allies in the Republican party and even if the Senate and Congress have republican nominations, Trump is not going to get things through unless there is mainstream support.

Regan was surprisingly successful because as an actor he was used to playing his part and doing what he was told.  

You are right about Regan and he got on well with Maggie Thatcher but I can't see the same friendship between Donald Trump and Teresa May.  I wonder if he will get an invite to visit her majesty at Buckingham Palace :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

The reluctant, bizarre, short term conclusion at least has to be that Trump is good for your pension fund. Overnight the Asian markets have gained more than they previously lost and Europe has opened higher again. It will be interesting to see what the Dow does later.

Drop in the shares again today, my shares have taken a battering since the Britexit vote and again today.  I hope this changes over the next few months or I might have to go back to work :sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, IBM said:

You are right about Regan and he got on well with Maggie Thatcher but I can't see the same friendship between Donald Trump and Teresa May.  I wonder if he will get an invite to visit her majesty at Buckingham Palace :blink:

I'm sure Trump and Prince Philip would get on just fine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Scotty said:

Quite apart from the 48 point font used in your post - which I sorted - and which itself was the most inappropriate content of this thread ... why is discussing the election of Donald Trump to the position of the most powerful office on the planet inappropriate for this site ? 

Scotty.... I suspect that Jock may have taken offence at my more global philosophy of current political trends. I could, in my defence, rally the support of one Leo Tolstoy but let's just stick with the Yanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DoofersDad said:

I'm sure Trump and Prince Philip would get on just fine!

I think you could be right on that one they have many things in common :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.