ForumGarden

I've heard it said if Donald Trump becomes POTUS, it would have an affect on other countries.

Curious: For those of you living outside of the USA, do you feel that Trump will/would have an affect your lives?

If the President of the richest country doesn't affect the rest of the world, he's not doing his job.

There's no way it wouldn't affect the rest of the world. He's already stated that he will reshape how NATO works so that it isn't an alliance, but that America will have overall control. Nuclear Weapons are not to be used as a deterrent, but as a First Strike option. No doubt the First Strike will be on Syria, followed by all the other Muslim countries. He has already made it clear, many times over, how much he admires Putin, and judging by the secret comuniques between himself & Russia already, I could well imagine him allying to Russia.

The man is totally insane, and a country that would vote him to be the leader of such a power must be even moreso.

cars;1502332 wrote: For those of you living outside of the USA, do you feel that Trump will/would have an affect your lives?


Mr Trump's stated position is that he'll withdraw US protection from countries which don't pay a proportionate contribution toward their own defense, and as part of that reassessment he intends to review the present purpose of NATO given that it's mission statement never had anything to do with terrorism.

He says he intends to hold a national discussion on whether the US should continue its claim to be the world's policeman.

He says he wants to build a partner relationship with Russia instead of the current antagonistic posturing.

He says he wants a national discussion on whether always pursuing regime change is a sensible approach to foreign policy given that it always results in disaster.

What's not to like? I haven't heard Hillary voice any of those concerns. Hillary likes regime change. Change in those policy areas will all make the world a far safer place.





FourPart;1502334 wrote: Nuclear Weapons are not to be used as a deterrent, but as a First Strike option. There's never been a day since Hiroshima that the First Strike option hasn't been America's official policy. Can you think of any US administration when it wasn't?

So why have a 'Defence' Budget, when it has never been used for Defence.

FourPart;1502338 wrote: So why have a 'Defence' Budget, when it has never been used for Defence.


It's a euphemism for all military matters. Nobody has a War Department any longer but that lack never stopped a war.

Regarding your "judging by the secret comuniques between himself & Russia", where may I find a copy so as to judge?

Since I will be moving to Canada, yes, I'd say it will affect my life...

Oh, I forgot to mention that he may blow up the world in a nuclear holocaust before I can get to Canada...

But that would affect my life too.

I believe the Donald is a family man first, and a blow hard second! He's boisterous, rude, crude, and rubs people even his own political party the wrong way! However, having a family and even for self preservation, I don't believe he would start WWIII! He's too rich and powerful to actually really "want to die"!

If he were elected, he would likely follow his many advisor's advice.

And yet, in his security briefing he asked "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?" three times....

Saint_;1502359 wrote: And yet, in his security briefing he asked "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?" three times....


His advisor's would tell him that would start WWIII! He's learning as he goes! At least would hope so!

cars;1502360 wrote: ... He's learning as he goes! At least would hope so!


Um, yeah, ..., good luck with that.

cars;1502360 wrote: His advisor's would tell him that would start WWIII!


He has rarely listened to his advisors so far. Why would he suddenly change? I tell you this as a dispassionate scientist, ( I have two EE degrees ) he is the world's absolute worst case scenario: a fascist, megalomaniacal egoist within reach of the world's largest nuclear arsenal, backed by the world's most powerful and largest military complex.



I have been thinking about what the AntiChrist would look like in a practical environment, and, without exaggeration, Trump fits the bill.

If you think Spot exaggerates America's ability to cause havoc in the world, imagine he's right, then imagine that same super-power with a Mussolini-style leader at the helm, and no moral boundaries or limits...

Saint_;1502359 wrote: And yet, in his security briefing he asked "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?" three times....


It's an interesting, provocative and necessary question, every incoming President should ask it in public. I've heard no reply to his question during the hustings, have you?

I see nothing in the words to suggest he has a pro-nuclear stance, or a desire to fire one. It sounds more like an accountant's question - if we have no use for these, why are we paying for them.

It would take a different meaning without the "If" at the front perhaps, but it has a qualifying "If". Reading it without the "If" and the emphasis on "them" might sound like a suggestion to use them but it's not what he asked.

Saint_;1502359 wrote: And yet, in his security briefing he asked "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?" three times....


If he needs to ask the question he probably wouldn't understand the answer. It's noit as if the US is the onlky country that has them nowadays is it.

gmc;1502365 wrote: If he needs to ask the question he probably wouldn't understand the answer. It's noit as if the US is the onlky country that has them nowadays is it.


Exactly, and he knows that, he may be a lot of things, but he's not dumb. So I say again, I don't think he would want to annihilate himself and his own family, do you?

cars;1502366 wrote: Exactly, and he knows that, he may be a lot of things, but he's not dumb. So I say again, I don't think he would want to annihilate himself and his own family, do you?At this point the discussion is moot. He's going to lose badly unless something completely unforeseen occurs.

ADDED LATER: Just heard on the radio (12 noon) that the stock markets are skyrocketing (up 340 points) due to Hillary's apparent victory!

cars;1502366 wrote: Exactly, and he knows that, he may be a lot of things, but he's not dumb. So I say again, I don't think he would want to annihilate himself and his own family, do you?


There are a lot of people who are not dumb either that believe the second coming is due and onald trunp is the sent by god. Intelligence and rationality are not synonymous. He strikes me as the type that likes to threaten someone in the expectation that they will back down and/or only picks on those he can bully. You're assumimg he's bright enough to grasp the consequences of nuclear war and won't decide that hgitting forst is the best option. It's not as though that hasn't been seriously advocated in the past.

I think Mark hit the nail on the head, Trump won't win, so no worries!

He said something out loud (use of nuclear weapons) that he would do what every president took an oath to do, which is to protect and defend.

Leave nothing off the table.

-bolded is the edit-

I hope for America and probably the rest of the world, that you are right there, cars. The man is an idiot. As far as I can see his electioneering has consisted of ranting at Hillary Clinton, slagging her off and making acccusations that in this country would get him arrested for slander ! What an article he is. A very dangerous one too, and unpredictable.

This afternoon I was sitting in my cardiologist's waiting room prior to a routine check-up and I happened to pick up the current issue of TIME magazine, or as the right-wingers call it, SLIME magazine.

There was an article stating that Trump is considering, or possibly has already decided, starting his own right-wing party to rival the GOP.

No doubt the best news Democrats like myself had heard in decades! Bring it on!

P.S. The check-up went fine, I'm good for at least a few more weeks!

Mark Aspam;1502389 wrote: This afternoon I was sitting in my cardiologist's waiting room prior to a routine check-up and I happened to pick up the current issue of TIME magazine, or as the right-wingers call it, SLIME magazine.

There was an article stating that Trump is considering, or possibly has already decided, starting his own right-wing party to rival the GOP.

No doubt the best news Democrats like myself had heard in decades! Bring it on!

P.S. The check-up went fine, I'm good for at least a few more weeks!


Happy for your health. really

My docs keep wanting to poke a probe to find a reason I shouldn't drink.

Election day! Well it won't be long now! :-3

I may get up early to follow the count.

spot;1502406 wrote: I may get up early to follow the count.


Just like Christmas ?

Holy crapola, :-2 the world as we know it has just changed forever, whether or not you believe, lets pray to God for POTUS Trump to receive divine guidance!

I may have got this bit wrong - did Hillary Clinton order all her supporters out of the Democrat Election Night venue without thanking them for their effort? Seriously? No appearance, no thank you, no speech, nothing?

spot;1502449 wrote: I may have got this bit wrong - did Hillary Clinton order all her supporters out of the Democrat Election Night venue without thanking them for their effort? Seriously? No appearance, no thank you, no speech, nothing?


In the news here, The Clinton campaign had planned a two minute firework display over the Hudson River which would be visible from her election night party in anticipation of her winning the election – but now those plans are over. It was was said, She conceded to Trump over the phone, She didn’t concede or give a speech at her election night party. !

I sincerely hope our new POTUS Trump will now tone down his previous show biz antics. And apply the honor, respect, and dignity his new office requires/deserves.

I cant see the people allowing him to tone it down. If he does then he'll just look like all the other politicians, and he stood on a platform of being different.

Whats interesting is he's been elected by ghost voters. Those who didnt want others to know they have black souls. Lol

magentaflame;1502453 wrote: I cant see the people allowing him to tone it down. If he does then he'll just look like all the other politicians, and he stood on a platform of being different.

Whats interesting is he's been elected by ghost voters. Those who didnt want others to know they have black souls. Lol


By tone it down, I meant for him to use decorum, respect, and thoughtfulness, while still keeping his promises! Not using his show biz style.

Holy CRAP!!!

spot;1502364 wrote: It's an interesting, provocative and necessary question, every incoming President should ask it in public. I've heard no reply to his question during the hustings, have you?

I see nothing in the words to suggest he has a pro-nuclear stance, or a desire to fire one. It sounds more like an accountant's question - if we have no use for these, why are we paying for them.

It would take a different meaning without the "If" at the front perhaps, but it has a qualifying "If". Reading it without the "If" and the emphasis on "them" might sound like a suggestion to use them but it's not what he asked.


1. Every child knows that we don't use nuclear weapons because it would mean the end of mankind.

2. Just asking the question implies that he is either:

A. Too stupid to know the answer or

B. Is contemplating using them.

Either option means devastation.

cars;1502456 wrote: By tone it down, I meant for him to use decorum, respect, and thoughtfulness, while still keeping his promises! Not using his show biz style.


Well, it would be nice, but I have never seen any indication that he has any of those qualities.

I hope We are all wrong about that, since it would seem we are stuck with him for four years.

Saint_;1502458 wrote: 1. Every child knows that we don't use nuclear weapons because it would mean the end of mankind.Perhaps you could explain why no US President has ever renounced the option for first use of nuclear weapons.

LarsMac;1502457 wrote: Holy CRAP!!!


My thoughts exactly.

Actually his promise of getting people jobs and work...... get making those bricks people!!!

And try not to die whilst building that wall........ you might be buried in it!

Hey, its happenned before.

Just a thought....... you know how presidents and primeministers tend to go grey very quickly after taking office? I wonder what colour Trump will turn?

spot;1502462 wrote: Perhaps you could explain why no US President has ever renounced the option for first use of nuclear weapons.


Well, duh! Because stating that would be asking belligerent nations like Russia to take a shot at us first, and destroying the weapons on the ground.

Not only that, but President Obama is considering that right now...

President Obama & Nuclear Deterrence: No First Use Policy Is Dangerous | National Review

I believe we here in Canada get a free wall keeping the rats out of our country lol

Hey, that call for bricks on that show 'The last leg' only needed just over a million of them and recieved pledges for just under 3 million. They'll be calling those pledges in now.

More brick jobs for America!

Scuse me america, if you have any left over from the Mexican wall, Canada would like to buy some bricks.

Hillary gave a heartfelt eloquent patriotic political unity speech yesterday. In an effort to bring both parties together. And if She and Donald are able to put their hurtful bickering behind them, all will not be lost. Here's hoping for a unified government!

(Or at least a civil alliance)

Saint_;1502482 wrote: Well, duh! Because stating that would be asking belligerent nations like Russia to take a shot at us first, and destroying the weapons on the ground.

Not only that, but President Obama is considering that right now...

President Obama & Nuclear Deterrence: No First Use Policy Is Dangerous | National ReviewSo in what way is President Trump refusing to renounce the First Strike option any different to every president since Truman? I don't see why you single the chap out of an identical pack.

cars;1502494 wrote: Hillary gave a heartfelt eloquent patriotic political unity speech yesterday. In an effort to bring both parties together. And if She and Donald are able to put their hurtful bickering behind them, all will not be lost. Here's hoping for a unified government!

(Or at least a civil alliance)


Seriously?

If either Clinton speaks disrespectfully of the new President to a journalist in the next year or two, there'll be a special prosecutor appointed the next day with "email server" on page one of his brief. He has her over a barrel.

We are not looking at an era of consensus government.

spot;1502496 wrote: Seriously?

If either Clinton speaks disrespectfully of the new President to a journalist in the next year or two, there'll be a special prosecutor appointed the next day with "email server" on page one of his brief. He has her over a barrel.

We are not looking at an era of consensus government.


I concur.

spot;1502496 wrote: Seriously?

If either Clinton speaks disrespectfully of the new President to a journalist in the next year or two, there'll be a special prosecutor appointed the next day with "email server" on page one of his brief. He has her over a barrel.

We are not looking at an era of consensus government.


Naw, she put herself over a barrel.

She is free to speak freely as she wants.

I see no reason she should get special treatment to protect her from her criminal acts.

cars;1502494 wrote: Hillary gave a heartfelt eloquent patriotic political unity speech yesterday. In an effort to bring both parties together. And if She and Donald are able to put their hurtful bickering behind them, all will not be lost. Here's hoping for a unified government!

(Or at least a civil alliance)


She was very eloquent to be sure.

She lost and must know there is no alliance, only to respect the results.

spot;1502496 wrote: Seriously?

If either Clinton speaks disrespectfully of the new President to a journalist in the next year or two, there'll be a special prosecutor appointed the next day with "email server" on page one of his brief. He has her over a barrel.

We are not looking at an era of consensus government.


Progressive groups vow to ‘obstruct, delay, and halt’ Donald Trump’s agenda

ACLU also fires warning shot, says ‘ready to fight’ his policies in court

Despite bipartisan calls for healing and unity after a brutal presidential campaign, liberal activist groups vowed Wednesday to fight from the get-go to stop President-elect Donald Trump’s agenda.

Democracy for America, a leading liberal political action committee and dependable advocate for the Democratic Party, called for a “progressive political revolution to stymie what it described as Mr. Trump’s racist and sexist agenda.

“So let’s be absolutely clear: Democracy for America will do everything in our power to obstruct, delay and halt the attacks on people of color, women and working families that will emerge from a Trump administration, said Charles Chamberlain, the group’s executive director.

“We are more convinced than ever that our country needs a massive, multiracial, multigenerational progressive political revolution led by women and people of color that is not beholden to the broken political establishment that brought us to this moment, he said. “And that’s precisely what we’ll work with our members and our allies to build in the days, weeks and months ahead.

Democrats, particularly those on the progressive left, for years accused Republicans of blindly obstructing virtually anything put forward by President Obama and his allies in Congress. But now, with Mr. Trump’s unexpected defeat of Hillary Clinton, and with Republicans retaining control on Capitol Hill, Democrats must decide whether to pursue their own obstructionist strategy.

[url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... lt-donald/]Washinton Times[/uel]

Clik the link for the full story.

What is your new President elect position on abortion, gun laws, Obamacare, LGBT issues ?

I think I know, but how will that work in a modern country ?