|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
So it's the final day. Let's be clear about the choice;
Hillary Clinton is deeply unpopular. She may not be a nice person. There are so many negative reports about her, it is difficult to believe there is 'no smoke without fire.' However, some allegations are disproven, and most others are unproven - almost the only definite negative is that she's been very 'careless' with her e-mails. Beyond that, whatever you think about her politics, she is experienced, and a force for stability in America.
Then there is Donald Trump. Again there are unproven allegations - the recent spate of rape and sexual abuse allegations for instance. I'll discount those at the moment, as they are unproven - just like the allegations against HRC. But what IS proven? He has lied on numerous occasions on all kinds of issues. far far more than Mrs Clinton (proven by audio and video evidence), and he has grossly exaggerated on other issues. He has made widely sweeping 'policy' statements without any substance behind them, and frequently had to retract or amend them afterwards. He's shown a tempermental unsoundness for the job of being a calm, rational president with his over the top reactions - petulant or bullying - towards protesters or towards tweets on Twitter. He has shown an ignorance of foreign affairs and a seemingly casual regard for the nuclear deterrent asking on more than one occasion 'if we have them, why can't we use them?' He's alienated your NATO allies with his apparent disdain for the alliance. And he is sceptical about climate change.
He lumped together all Mexican immigrants as rapists, effectively accused a judge of bias because he was of Mexican descent, made grossly misogynistic or xenophobic comments, and has openly mocked a disabled reporter's body movements. He advocated Russia hacking into Mrs Clinton's e-mails, and yet he's had his own e-mail scandal in the past. His wife plagiarised Michelle Obama, and Republicans unwittingly cheered Mrs Obama's words! He's said he would bring back waterboarding (a recognised form of torture) and 'a hell of a lot more'. As far as his one strong suit - his business acumen - is concerned, he has refused to release his tax returns, and he has apparently filed for bankruptcy six times.
He ridiculed John McCain for being captured by the Vietnamese, he attacked Carly Fiorina and Ted Cruz's wives for their looks, and made sexually clear insinuations about Megyn Kelly. He also implied that Ted Cruz's father may have been involved in the JFK assasination. He's described Mr Obama as the 'founder of ISIS' and Hillary Clinton as 'cofounder', and he's said ISIS is 'honouring President Obama'. He's described Mrs Clinton as 'the Devil', 'a monster' and 'the most corrupt candidate ever.' He's also implied she's unbalanced, seriously ill, and perhaps on drugs. He's said Mrs Clinton wants to abolish the 2nd Amendment (not true) and he's said that Second Amendment Advocates might 'do something about that'.
Most seriously of all he has claimed the media and moderators of debates, and also the FBI, are biased, and that polls are rigged (though he is enthusiastic about polls which support him). He's also described the debates themselves, the Republican led Benghazi Inquiry, and independent fact checkers, as rigged. And he's said he may not accept the result of the election. All of that creates a very very very dangerous climate, in the event of a Clinton victory.
Unsurprisingly in the light of all this, many of the most senior and influential of Republicans including former presidents have refused to back him. As for those of us looking on in bewilderment from afar - Donald Trump has said that America has become a laughing stock. In truth the only way in which people in democracies around the world regard America as a laughing stock, is in the fact that Mr Trump has become a serious contender.
Below is a link to a video and text with links which expresses these and many many more problems with Donald Trump more effectively than I can. '176 Reasons Donald Trump Shouldn't Be President.'
Anyone who reads this may have already voted. I hope you voted the right way.
http://www.gq.com/story/176-reasons-don … -olbermann
Thank God this election is over... and all the bias (and boy is this a bias write up if there was one) questions and articles can be over... for three years or so anyways.
As for your question... Trump. Not because I love the guy but because he is the ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT least bought and paid for Candidate running.... while Clinton is the poster child of bought and paid for Wall St. lackey.
Obamacare... benefits the Insurance companies... benefits those politicians waiting for it to fail so they can force down our throats the socialist/national health care, that DOESN'T work for a small country like Canada... for the world's 3rd largest (population wise) country it will be a DISASTER for our floundering no-growth economy.
Clinton has been rattling her saber at Putin and the Russians, she is bought and paid for by Saudi Arabia, who in turn wants us to be their hired thugs and go fight in the Sunni - Shiite proxy wars for them... she will sell out our men and women to go fight in the Middle East, and beyond, since Russia is determined to defend its interests in Syria... where we never belonged going *thanks Secretary of State Clinton for helping stir that pot!
No... I am a sane voter with a fair understanding of what is going on in the world and how economics (TPP) work. So no, I'd never support Hillary...because of the issues that matter to my wallet, and my children's futures.
Thank you Ken. You can say that my post is biased, but is there anything inaccurate in what I said? I believe everything I said about Donald Trump can be proven with audio and video recordings. I pointedly said that some of the most serious allegations against him, such as rape, should be discounted in this contest as unproven. But you must apply the same rigorous standards for Hillary Clinton.
As for the rest of your reply, I can only more or less repeat what I said to 'Live to Learn'. The anti-establishment argument effectively means that you would rule out any candidate with experience, and settle for giving arguably the most important job in the world to someone totally lacking in experience or knowledge of world affairs and diplomacy. Yes you may have valid economic arguments against Hillary Clinton - I just feel that the character of Donald Trump - uniquely in recent history - makes his suitability for the presidency more important than left-right arguments on this occasion. Many senior Republicans seem to agree.
Anyway, we'll see what happens if Trump wins. If Clinton wins, I hope the democratic vote will be respected.
Are you serious?
Most important job in the world to someone with no political experience...
Someone who is bought and paid for by people who care nothing about America or Americans, only their own self interests and rewards.
That's like giving me the choice of:
Doctor A - just out of Med school, brilliant kid, has a foul mouth, thinks too much of himself, but he has some really great qualities.
Doctor B - been practicing for over 30 years, has arthritis in her hands now, occasionally that costs a patient his life, has occasionally removed the wrong organ, you have about a 50/50 shot surviving her operating on you.
But hey, you don't know what that kid can do at all... better a 50/50 shot right?
No... no thanks. I'll take the guy I don't KNOW for sure will sell us all out over the one for certain who will.
False analogies are just that Ken - false. And your analogy is certainly false, unless you really think Donald Trump is 'brilliant' with 'really great qualities'.
And regarding your first question, yes I am serious. It comes down to the question of whether one believes all the unproven Clinton allegations - and then weighs that against all the proven Trump allegations, plus his self-expressed social views, plus his inexperience, plus his self-evidently suspect temperament, plus the weight of opinion of experienced politicians and political observers including many conservatives.
Unproven? Seriously? Most are proven. The only question I see is how she can be found to have done so much without ever having to pay the piper. Although the answer to that goes back to corruption in Washington.
There is nothing 'unproven' about the hundreds of millions the Clintons have taken from foreign interests, Wall St., etc.
You don't spend hundreds of millions on living it up, weddings, mansions, and also be worth a hundred million or more (the two of them and Chelsea) but have no business... no inheritance... just the Clinton Foundation and 'non-profit' charities.
You can play dumb, you can ignore all her corrupt and criminal activity... but there is so much information of it out there, not just WikiLeaks, 60 minutes, 20/20... they have been at it for 30 years, and only those that want to be willingly blind to that information deny it exists.
"...plus the weight of opinion of experienced politicians..."
Good point. If the weight of opinion of "experienced" politicians (read career politicians that have spent a lifetime accumulating political power and don't want to give it up) is behind Clinton (and it is) then my vote needs to go the other way. For it is those same power brokers that are causing such destruction to my country.
But that leads us to a dead end, Wildreness, as far as debate is concerned. You say effectively that you wouldn't listen to experienced politicians - even those Republicans who have come out against Trump. Presumably also the financial institutions (Wall St and all that). Given that many Trump supporters are also calling media bias (both TV and the press), conspiracies, bias by all institutions including the FBI, basically it seems that many will not accept any information or any idea unless it comes from a right wing, pro-Trump source. Equally nothing will be believed about Hillary Clinton unless it is negative.
In the face of that, proof and evidence cease to have any meaning, and there is no value to debate.
You got it, you really do... you just laid it all out.
So yes, we do NOT support the corrupt establishment, that includes the politicians that say they are going to stop Obamacare but do not... that stay silent when the Obama Administration sells the most incredible lies to the American public (IE - Benghazi and the Riots throughout the Middle East were caused by a YouTube video) or that the TPP (the gold standard) is actually good for American workers and our country...
The Media hides the corruption and protects Clinton rather than expose everything that is out in the open... we have WikiLeaks and Foreign News media exposing the collusion and criminal activity our own media... nearly all of it... bury.
Our government tells us we have only 4% unemployment when we have 100 million capable Americans out of work.
They say they are creating jobs when they are not, they are doing away with full time jobs with benefits and replacing them with part-time jobs with no benefits... wages go down not up... healthcare costs go up not down.
WE ARE NOT BLIND.
Many Americans may not have near the experiences or education or interest that I (and many on here) have... but they KNOW... they KNOW they lost their job to an H1-B immigrant that they were forced to train before they lost the job they were counting on to care for their family.... they KNOW that Toll Bros have hired thousands of illegal aliens to build the new neighborhoods going up in NC, SC, CO, etc... rather than pay out of work construction workers twenty something dollars an hour and have to worry about Workman's comp.
Americans KNOW that Washington is AGAINST the people... they promise to fix things, only to make things worse... they play the game of pointing their finger at each other Rep vs Dem... while BOTH sides take money from Wall St., Lobbyists, enrich themselves, while selling us down the river.
So yes... we want to do away with the crud that is ruining our country... and that IS the politicians you think are so important, so critical... they are not... they are a CANCER to our Country, to all Americans... the Swamp needs to be drained... When hundreds of millions of Americans have no hope, no jobs, no future, change really is coming... not some cheap campaign promise version... now in the form of Trump, or something likely more volatile and dangerous in the not too distant future.
But Ken all you've done is repeat the beliefs of some in America. Honestly I know those beliefs exist. I understand you think they are also 'facts'. But others think differently. That's why they are only beliefs - NOT facts. It's futile to discuss that in the circumstances, when all contrary arguments are dismissed out of hand.
All I can say is that millions of Americans think differently, both about Washington (though NOBODY in the democratic world loves politicians), and also about America itself. In 2015 a Gallup poll randomly sampling 13,000 Americans in all 50 states, recorded a new 7-year high in the Standard of Living Index. 81% of Americans expressed satisfaction with their standard of living. Only 23% felt it was getting worse. Now I know you will say that statistics can be made to prove anything, and also that there's more to life than standard of living - but the point is 'Americans' is a very broad, all-embracing term. Many feel like you. Many others are not so cynical.
The last part of what you say is what depresses me. 'Draining the swamp' is Trump's phrase. Hearing that chanted at his rallies by a baying crowd, together with 'lock her up!', takes one back to lynch mob days. Donald Trump has stirred up intense hatred by pandering to the basest instincts in society.
You think this is specifically directed at Clinton. It is not, she is just the only establishment politician left standing. Same was directed at Bush, and even Cruz during the primaries. Why do you think the GOP is so pissed... why do you think there was a Never Trump movement?
This was always a People VS the Establishment movement... the Dems had the same thing with Bernie, he was essentially running on the same platform as Trump, his critical reasons for support was he was anti-Wall St. anti-corruption, and Americans first (in a slightly different way, like college costs rather than economy/trade)...
And that "People" is at about 50%+ of the population... if it weren't, this wouldn't be a close election, it would be a landslide.
You think Trump stirred it up, he gave it focus, but it was there before he came along... it will be there after this election (Trump isn't going to 'win' I called that weeks ago) and it is only going to continue to grow, and get more restless, unless the GDP starts growing like it hasn't in 20 years, unless people stop losing their fulltime jobs, and having to replace them with part time $9 dollars an hour ones.
That isn't likely to happen, when this election is over, interest rates are going to be raised by the Fed, gas prices are going to go up... and taxes won't be going down, only up, Clinton boldly promised as much during the campaign.
I'm not wishing that to happen... none of it... none the less, it will.
OK Ken, I'm genuinely interested in what you're saying. I don't necessarily agree but I can see where you're coming from. But if we look at this purely from the People V Establishment viewpoint, and completely ignore one's conventional political bias (ie: Republican V Democrat), then maybe you would think that a narrow Clinton victory (as opposed to a landslide) may not be such a bad thing in the longer run? (beyond the next election).
I say that on the basis that a Clinton victory would provide stability which Trump cannot. But a very narrow victory, together with the awareness which both camps have of the great dissatisfaction with both candidates, plus the apparent contempt and mistrust of the 'establishment', may act as a wake-up call? After all, neither party wants to lose in 2020. The Democrats know that any other more competent Republican could probably have beaten Clinton, and the Republicans know that any other less-establishment tainted Democrat could have beaten Trump.
Perhaps that will cause both parties to think carefully about how they relate to the 'people' in future, to avoid antagonising minorities, and to be more transparent about their internal workings and financial dealings. Any party which can change its ways and encourage less fear and more trust would surely be on their way to a landslide in 2020! Any party which can't change its ways, will surely be doomed?
I'm only throwing speculative ideas up in the air - as I say, ignoring obvious Republican leanings, what do you think?
I mostly definitely did NOT say I would not list to career politicians. I made it clear that I DO listen...along with digging through the spin and lies to reveal the underlying truth (if any). Along with looking for reasons for what they say - sadly it is most often because it pads their pockets or increases their power.
But yes, it might shut down the debate. Of course, I find that this years "debates" is almost entirely about throwing dirt without every bothering to see if it is true. It's about spinning for all we're worth, it's about ignoring the faults of our own choice while spreading more lies and insinuations about their opponent. As far as I'm concerned that isn't "debating" - it's about trying to swing someone else's vote without ever giving actual, real reasons to do so.
But I do agree - the only thing worthy of debate between these two losers is whether we like having masters or are willing to try something else. Whether we're willing to try something new to recover our country from the rich and powerful or will once more sit back and allow it to continue and grow. As far as I'm concerned the only thing we can expect to lose is the respect of foreigners...who are making the same mistake as Trump haters in deciding that they already know what will happen with an unknown quantity in the White House.
Sorry if you feel I misrepresented your view wilderness. but you said :
'If the weight of opinion of "experienced" politicians ... is behind Clinton, then my vote needs to go the other way.'
That seemed to imply to me that whatever career politicians said, you would do the opposite. That effectively seemed to imply not listening, or leastways not willing to be persuaded.
Obviously when you describe the choices, I'd put a very different slant on it. 'Whether we like having masters or are willing to try something else' becomes 'whether we like having experienced, reliable leaders or are willing to try something unpredictable and divisive.' But I can agree with much of the rest. It's been very negative, less about policy, more about character, lies and dirt slinging. It's sad, and I hope you never have another campaign like it.
TV coverage is now beginning over here. I may stay up all night if it looks like a Clinton victory. If it looks like a Trump victory, I might go to bed - I'd rather have nightmares whilst sleeping, than stay awake and watch nightmares on the TV!
If I truly thought we had "leaders" I'd be a lot happier with listening to them.
But I don't. I think we've got 535 members of congress, of which perhaps 10 actually care about the people or the country. The rest are their for their own personal gain. We've lost control of our government and we either take it back or lose the country to the rich and powerful that are running it now. Putting someone that rivals Hoover for political power (and has the same lack of ethics) into the White House isn't going to help.
Wilderness, what constitutes 'caring' is remains highly subjective
Your definition of what that is and my definition are distinctly different.
The American Constitution was written on hemp paper and it glues American integrity and optimistic hopes together. It is the best written documentation I have ever seen, second only to the book of Taoism for sound ethics and flow of harmony for people and nature.
What else bonds American more clearly than the Constitution. Many countries around the world have adapted the US Constitution to their lives, where Americans less and less. US Constitution of freedom, security, happiness and even the musket ball guns could be used to Unite the planet one for all and all for one. The franchises of Corporatism will never work for the vast majority of people on this planet.
I don't think America would be losing any "respect" of foreigners... that is a media peddled lie... you are talking some European countries maybe... where as Iran, Russia, already have no respect for Clinton... China feels they own her, as does Saudi Arabia.
So if anything, it would be better for Foreign Affairs if it was him.
Voted the right way? You are a foreigner. Why are you attempting to influence our election? What do you actually know about this country?
I voted for Trump. It was a vote to attempt to start a chain of breaking the corruption in Washington. It is not a vote for Trump as much as a vote against the corruption and cronyism which has poisoned our political process. It was a vote to let Washington know that 'We the people' is not just some little phrase with no meaning. It was an attempt to send a signal to Washington that they have not done their jobs and anything was better than watching them for another election cycle turn their backs on their duty to represent the American people.
Trump is an ass. For sure. But, he didn't preside over a department within our government that 'lost' 6 billion dollars. He didn't sell our government favors to the highest bidder. He hasn't used a political position for personal gain. He didn't wantonly disregard protocol and put himself into a position where government secrets were so easily accessible. I'll take an ass over a blatant crook who thinks we owe her something any day of the week.
Sadly, Live to Learn, America is a superpower. As such its policies - and the rationality - of its president, affects the whole world. (When America gets involved in a war for example, Britain usually gets involved too). When one adds in crucially important global issues such as climate change, I hope you can see why everyone has a vested interest in American politics.
You ask what I know about America. I know my limitations in that regard, and I try not to comment on most aspects of purely internal politics such as the economy. I'd freely admit to not knowing enough about that, and to vote against Clinton on the basis of economics may certainly be legitimate in most scenarios. I also fully understand the mistrust of the 'establishment' in Washington. Nonetheless, an attempt to change these things by electing someone as inexperienced, and seemingly as dangerously unpredictable, as Donald Trump, may be much too high a price to pay.
These are worrying times.
I agree that we are a global community and our actions affect those outside of our borders. However I don't believe a foreigner (especially a Brit) can fully understand our fierce independence and our adamant desire to maintain full personal freedoms.
Trump, oddly, is probably the best bet to not move us closer to a more widespread war. Plus, we are sick of the corruption in Washington. This election cycle has shown what a stranglehold the power of Washington has. Our news media has been proven, time and again, to be in collusion with Washington power. We, the people, are not represented, our welfare is not considered in policy decisions and our values are not represented in our government's actions abroad.
Doing nothing or worse, voting to maintain the status quo, would make us complicit in their behavior.
I think that it is incorrect to assume that just because an observer is BRITISH that he can not appreciate what is at stake. I am AMERICAN and I certainly do. We all make comments about affairs in other nations without being accused of meddling in their politics. Greensleeves is well aware that the decision in this election belongs to the AMERICAN people just as I respect the rights of the ENGLISH people to make the ultimate decision in regards to their remaining in their European economic union.
So he has as much right to his observations as you to yours and me to mine..... I would like to hear more regarding the opinions of those outside the U.S., I have no fear of that discourse, who does?
All this shows that who ever you Americans vote as President, it's going to be a disaster for our world.
You might well pray, "God Help Us!"
Oh for goodness sake. The rest of the world needs to grow a pair. We ain't all that.
Oh! So you are just pretending to be "all that."
I am all that.
I was speaking of the country, as opposed to any other.
I don't have any stake in this US election except I need to gun it faster to Bolivia if Trump wins. I hear Cher is leaving the planet if he wins.
Right now Hillary has 275 electoral votes , she only needed 270 to win, is that not correct.?
I'm sorry to have to tell you but Cher left the planet long ago.
Have you looked at Trump's celebrities. Never seen so many Nick, cowboys, hillbillies and rednecks on steroids. When I look at Trump riot fans, I get a white head growth on my neck.
Monica Lewinsky is voting for Clinton. I guess the Last Clinton did not leave that bad a taste in her mouth.
Haha, Castle, that "white head growing on your neck" is what we here in Tasmania call our second head. Imports like myself have to grow one and hope it gets to maturity before we pass on, so to speak.
It's a hereditary advantage, because it comes from the old saying, "2 heads are better than 1." Hence, we are all superior in our own little way, much more super than any other race,(sorry, culture!) in the world; and a little b(p)ig-headed with it. And it does mean that if one head makes a silly decision it can always be blamed on the other.
So, let that white head grow. It might get you out of a tight spot sometime.
Sorry this is a bit off-topic, but I feel a need for light relief.
I'm just eternally grateful we will never have to ever hear any more downtrodden 99% woe is me the 1% stuff. Seeing that the liberals or democrats are voting for the candidate that has more ties to wall street and the 1% than an ATM. HIllary Bill and the Chelsea wedding /charity foundation are a walking talking ATM for Wall St, Banks and the Kings of OPEC. No more 1% nonsense ever.
We have had a democrat in the executive branch for long enough. Rep's turn.
I just love the fact that a Australian or New Zealander and an Englishman are arguing over what would be best for America ---- AFTER both of these two countries sold away their own liberties , freedoms and power of the vote giving BACK to their respective governments the power of your peoples ! England still has a Queen for god sakes and the other one is apparently jealous of the threats against the impending Coronation of Queen Hilary for America ! They are burning effigies of Trump throughout England , my suggestion - Clean up your own house.
Ronald Reagan realized something about foreign power and their policies towards the US., Make them respect you out of their own fears . That there is no better way to guarantee peace -than to be prepared for conflict ......always
Want a peaceful world ? Be the toughest guy on the block.
Thanks, but I don't quite understand the meaning of 'sold away their own liberties , freedoms and power of the vote giving BACK to their respective governments the power of your peoples !' My apologies, I'm not trying to make a point, but can you clarify?
As far as the Queen is concerned, she has no effective power. It's just a figurehead position, without any power to make policy. Many in The UK, and of course in Australia, would abolish the monarchy, and if that ever becomes a majority, then democratic will would mean they'd have to go. But the large majority at the moment support the institution first for the traditions it represents, and secondly because the monarch is a stable, unifying figure uncorrupted by politics. I guess the attitude towards the monarch is similar to the American allegiance to the flag - something to rally around. It's not undemocratic in that sense.
'Burning effigies of Trump throughout England'. I wasn't even aware of that until you mentioned it! I just looked it up. It's happened in a few places, but it's nothing very hateful. There's always bonfires on 5th November in the UK - it's traditional, and lighthearted. Usually they just have a stuffed dummy on the top (Guy Fawkes, who tried to blow up Parliament in 1605), but I guess sometimes for a laugh they make an effigy of the most repulsive current political figure they can think of. It's probably usually a British politician, but I guess if they've been choosing Mr Trump this year, then that indicates just how low is the esteem for that man.
The Result? Well I think I'm going to bed. It's now 4.00 am over here, with 15 states left to call. It looks like it's going Trump's way. If Florida goes to Donald Trump - and it seems to be - then it may come down to Michigan and Wisconsin. Hillary Clinton will possibly need both of those. Maybe even tiny New Hampshire will be decisive?
Believe it or not, even a tie is possible, if Michigan goes to Trump, and Wisconsin and New Hampshire go to Clinton, and other states go as expected.
But it looks more and more like Trump will win. You know how very stupid I think that is, but if that's what happens, it'll certainly make the next four years very interesting.
'Interesting' would be an understatement, it's mourning in America.
I'd like to point out that the majority spoke. So, the mourning in America will be the portion of the minority too selfish to attempt to understand why.
I think 'too selfish to attempt understand why' is a strange phrase to use 'Live to Learn'. I think the difficulty to understand why, owes less to selfishness, and more to the incomprehensibility of the thinking employed by so many in this vote.
As a foreigner I wouldn't expect you to understand. I have attempted to explain it to you so I can only assume you are accusing me of not possessing the ability to think. Either way, we are now in a position to possibly start cleaning house. If we can get our house in order maybe we'll have time and develop an interest in your house so we can spend time on the internet bemoaning things we don't understand also.
I wish you didn't feel the need to asume that because I am a foreigner, I don't understand. That's just being condescending. I do understand what I regard as the most important issues. And I said 'so many' - not all. I did not say you didn't think. But many millions - Americans as well as foreigners - find the result of that thinking, incomprehensible.
Oh but wait a minute - the vote was rigged wasn't it? ....
A guy with no political machine to use to strong arm wouldn't be able to rig the vote. I will admit that I was surprised it wasn't rigged. Very surprised. Maybe we aren't quite as far gone into corruption as I had feared. But, there is still a lot of work to do.
I would also hope to allay your fears on at least one count. I do realize that growing up in Europe, whose history involves dragging the world through two world wars, you would be concerned about such things. I don't see Trump as the candidate we should have feared on that front.
I'm sure you realise I wasn't seriously suggesting that Trump rigged the vote - I was merely pointing out that this was the first of hundreds of allegations Trump made which can probably now be discarded as wrong.
As far as WW1 is concerned, at least you only went back 100 years, and not to the Revolution, which is where discussions of this kind between Brits and Americans usually seem to end up As far as WW2 is concerned, perhaps it's a little unfair to blame a whole continent for the actions of Nazi Germany!
I blame Europe for the wars. They chose to allow circumstances to move in the direction of war. I'm sure there were crossroads between the two wars which might have allowed the world to avoid conflict. Which, incidentally, is what caused America to develop its strategy which has brought us to today. Whatever you say, we haven't had another world war so maybe we've done something right along the way.
The revolutionary war is a prime example of who we are as a people. Honestly, we are experiencing the shackles of tyranny and we do not bear such without complaint.
You might as well blame America for every war that the US has been involved in. I don't, any more than 'Europe' as a whole is to blame for Nazi Germany - because it doesn't always take two to make an argument.
The reason world war has been avoided since 1945 is primarily down to a strong NATO alliance (which Mr Trump is rather unenthusiastic about) and above all - the nuclear deterrent, which I support.
I think you mistake our political rhetorical of NATO for the reality that Americans see. We think we pay too much for NATO-- in blood and treasures .We always have. Watch this as well , the strength bred out of fear , in other words "Good fences make good neighbors " returns to the picture ! This cannot be emphasized enough.
The cold war was good for one thing --Peace!
I would say Trump's beef is probably tied to Europe expecting us to foot the lion's share of the bill.
For what it's worth I can agree to a large extent with that. It's true that America has been largely responsible for the defence of the free world, and that is one of the reasons I have always been a much stronger supporter of American defence and foreign policy than the majority of Brits. It's something we in other countries should be more grateful for.
You may not believe that, but I am NOT anti-American - merely anti-this presidential nominee, and many of the attitudes he and some of his supporters espouse.
Then your political ideology is liberal and that's fine , I do understand , But in America today a majority of people right now ,of both parties, feel extremely exploited by the rest of the world ! We feel that we pay too much for our involvement outside of our borders , economically , militarily , politically .
Sadly , I believe that we also feel the same way right here within our own borders ,from our own leadership ! That is the message that was delivered last night . That's all .
Believe me though , America knows very well who its friends and enemies are . It knows intricately where they are politically and how that alone affects us , England and America have always had ,realized and appreciated our unified relationship . It's peoples have known that too. Make no mistake though , America cannot survive , as England is learning as we speak , without a healthy amount of sovereignty , isolationism and nationalism . This is just one election I realize , the voices that are speaking right now however and its message , is extremely important .
I don't mind being called 'liberal', though that also has a different meaning across the pond. But liberal to most of the world is a benign, moderate term - it doesn't imply left-wing' in the way that 'socialist' does.
My only hope about Trump is that - as he is a businessman - he now tones down the extremism, lies and divisive language he indulged in whilst campaigning, and adopts a more pragmatic approach to the realities of government. It won't diminish the concerns over his abilities and his morality, but that's my hope.
I'll let you in on something about American media., I'd bet it works the same way in Britain. They find the most ignorant to showcase in order to garner viewers.
If you can't understand the statement made by supporters of Trump is one of sick and tired of a corrupt government who does not represent the average American anymore , then you aren't listening to us; but you are listening to a corrupt political machine which wants to keep you in the dark.
I don't think it's quite the same in the UK, where TV is pretty neutral. It is true that extreme views (on both sides) get more than their fair share of coverage, but not to garner viewers. TV tends not to be sensationalist in that way (some newspapers are). It's more to do with trying to get the widest range of viewpoints on air - even if extreme views are very much a minority.
I have heard both sides at various times - Trump rallies, Clinton rallies, CNN, Fox news, plus UK reports and Internet sites.
I remember a video someone posted on this site. It was some kids in the riots saying they were mad because they weren't being given enough. Obama owed them. People ran with that as if he was indicative of the mentality behind the riots.
That's typical. Of both sides. Everyone wants to see any opposition as ignorant. Life doesn't work that way. Both sides have legitimate concerns which must be factored into the equation of governance for this country to work together toward progress. I honestly hope and believe we have a chance for that.
Don't be disappointed , watch as the countries of the rest of the world ,including yours , grow a healthy re-respect of America .....even to the point of proving your attitude , you have O business opining as to the character , integrity and moral standing of Americans and THIER choice of a leader ! It's just your envy to begin with . If the meaning of liberty is so strong in your personal and political existence I suggest your immigrate TO America !.
Time for those outside of America - to crawl back into the shadows of socialism - the people of America have spoken clearly .
1) I think you are deluded if you seriously think this is going to lead to more respect for America. This truly will lead to America being thought of as - in Donald Trump's words - a laughing stock.
2) I have every business opinioning about character, integrity and moral standing of anyone - just as you do. That is debate and free speech. The 1st Amendment?
3) Envy? No, I really don't think so. This isn't the place to go into all the reasons, but I seriously doubt many people in free democracies will envy the choice you've made.
4) America has a different interpretation of the word 'socialism' to almost all in the rest of the world. Nobody would call me socialist - except right wing Americans and maybe Saudi Arabians!
If you are going to debate Americans about American politics you will have to accept our definitions within our political system. It goes back to the statement of not knowing anything about us.
I DO know things about you - I'm well aware that politics in America are far to the right of most other democracies. Conservatives (the right wing party - including me) in the UK are more akin to Democrats in America. But a country cannot just make up its own definitions, and expect the rest of the world to follow suit.
If I ever choose to insert my nose into the business of your politics I'll expect to abide by your definitions.
Edit., I will point out the European arrogance of your statement. Europe and Britain's little kids (Canada and Australia among them) don't get to define anything except within their borders. That ended with Europe's imperialistic days.
You are perfectly free to discuss British politics if you like. I welcome free speech and an exchange of views from all sources, including those who have no personal axe to grind, and who can therefore look at things objectively. But terms such as socialism have an internationally recognised meaning. To change that meaning is to distort it.
Sorry, it isn't European arrogance. It's just a recognition of how people throughout the world use these terms. I don't think people in Asia, Africa, Australia, South America or Europe would regard me as socialist. Nor would Democrats in America. Your definition of socialism is very much restricted to one section - admittedly a large section - of American opinion.
I haven't referred to you as a socialist. I'd need to know your politics first. But the guy who was speaking may know and can define them as he wishes. You've defined us as idiots. As you wished.
My politics are that I am right of centre in the UK. Generally a supporter of the Conservative Party (as opposed to the left of centre Labour Party). Incidentally I voted for Brexit, though the issues in that campaign were very different in many respects to those in the Trump campaign, despite the fact they are often linked.
But when did I call you an idiot? I'm sure I wouldn't say that, so I have to know the context.
When did you call me an idiot? When you made a derogatory comment to that effect about people who voted for Trump. I voted for him. You apparently are not interested in anyone's reasons.
Incidently, Brexit was touted here as being the result of ignorant voters. I ignored that because I believe you know what is best for you and your country.
I'd have to know the comment, to see whether I was referring to all Republican voters or just hardcore Trump supporters, or what aspect of it I was talking about. Of course I think the electoral result as such was stupid, just as you would think a decision to elect Clinton would have been stupid. It doesn't follow that all people who vote are stupid. I don't think I said all people who voted for Trump were idiots.
Both options in the Brexit campaign were very reasonable. Most 'remainers' voted to retain the economic advantages of free trade and a large trading block. Most 'leavers' (myself included) voted because we saw an erosion of sovereignty and rights to decide for ourselves issues such as immigration controls. There was no ignorance on either side.
(I know you - or others - may see parallels, but most brexiteers are not anti-establishment. I have no concerns or suspicions about our national government having full control of such issues - I just didn't want that control to pass ever further to a foreign body, namely the EU.
Americans have spoken loudly and like it or not ,this is America's day. When the rest of the world watches in rapt attention - AND then comments so critically , I can only assume that envy is the larger part of your conversation.
#1 . Fear breeds respect , Reagan taught you that . Americans are actually sick of being manipulated and laughed at by the outside forces and voices !
#2-The first amendment is a hard won American constitutional right - we took it from the kings and queens that you could not and cannot .
#3-No Envy ? Then why DO you care about an election so far from those of your own?
#4-Socialism -economic Entitlementism -call it what you will , In reality , someone has to pay for the perception of YOU reaching into MY pocket- and that someone is me . And the" Me's" ,who are now economically broke , have spoken loudly .
Of course we watch and criticise. America is a superpower. What happens there affects the rest of the world. Why should criticism be down to envy?
We all have free speech, even without the need for a 1st Amendment, but sometimes it seems anyone who criticises is told to shut up.
1. Fear shows in your religion, your disrespect for people different from yourself, those better educated and informed.
2. 3. and 4. You might care to clean that mirror, then take a long hard look at your self as an American and ask yourself, "What must I do in my own life that will improve America's standing in the world?"
The answer you might arrive at : "personal honesty, responsibility, further education, wider horizons, genuine humility and experience."
How America looks to the rest of the world ; If you really cared about that ; You would already know !
The world wars that kept us all safe from speaking German
The last economic superpower that will ignite the rest of the economies again .
The blood and treasure spent to preserve even YOUR liberties.
I think America has performed very well , I think we all hear far more about America and its dirty laundry than we do about the rest of the worlds too.
At best if Russia loss it in world war 2, most Europeans could be speaking German. Chinese , Spanish and English would have not changed since they have dominatly established for centuries and far more widespread.
Germans would not gotten pass American citizens with all their guns population and history of violences. The only white country America has fought since loosing to Canada in 1812. Why? because it is US Corp job to own the world, not nazi Germany.
You foreigners never cease to amaze me. Never once have I seen an American chime into any forum on a foreign country (if one exists) and insult any of you.
Is life so incredibly boring in Australia that you can't find something of value to do?
I am simply going by what I see exchanged here in these forums. You have just admitted you don't know if such a forum exists in a foreign country - how logical is it that you have not seen one?
There a few people here in the HubPages forums who love to push the idea of how the "American Way," in terms of patriotism, commerce, religion, etc., is something the world needs to emulate.
Commerce and religious zeal have been exported to almost every other country. My country especially has been strongly influence by the United States.
So I do have the right and the duty to point out where I see anomaly, as does Greensleeves and any other commentator here.
I am open to fair and credible criticism regarding Australia's affairs, if you have sufficient familiarity to know what you are talking about.
For sure, I cannot know very much about the internal workings of your country. But what I have seen in the rhetoric and argument coming from yourself and ahorseback causes me to hope you will change things for the sake of a better world.
Do you leave it all to the next President? Where does any change have to begin?
First, since we have participants from all over the world I was referencing this forum.
Second, I have not seen anyone pushing that you need to emulate anything so I believe that statement to be a fabrication.
Third, we are not responsible for your religious zeal anymore than your English heritage is so that is another fabrication. English history proves you guys exported commerce before we came into existence so another bizarre belief on your part.
Fourth, since you admit you have little knowledge of this country and you don't live here it seems rather pushy to think I owe you anything, as if I, alone can resolve our problems. Nothing can be resolved with petty whining all the left has to offer.
Free your refugees from the island they are imprisoned on. Move forward with rights for gays and, for goodness sake get those frogs under control and then,.and only then, will you have time to spare to grace us with your solutions to all of the problems you perceive us to have.
Interesting points you have raised:
The Cane Toad, native to southern and middle America, was imported from Hawaii. I wonder who advised it.
The strongest anti-gay propaganda comes from American-style christian religiosity.
The company managing those Pacific island refugees is Spanish, very poor reputation, authorised by a right-wing Australian government that takes a lot of advice from your government - dominated in both Houses by right-wing philosophies.
The World is watching, we hope.
Ah, I see. It's everyone else's fault. If the entire attitude in your country is to irrationally transfer blame I see why you can't solve your own problems
Not trying to impose blame; merely showing you that your perceptions of matters in Australia might be slightly ill-informed...as mine might be regarding matters in the USA. It's up to you if you wish to educate us on those.
As a matter of further interest, prior to election results Donald was suspecting the Dems might rig the Election. What does he think now? Very convenient if he thinks such tactics could only come from liberals.
But - who are we to question that Will of the American People?
The election system itself worked just as it has been created and adjusted to work. The numbers show it . The media IS the Biggest problem here , breeding extreme sensationalism , bias , hatred , bigotry and deceit . The government by decree is but the will of the people. Always has been except for it's apathy to progress [when I say progress I mean work ], it simply needs this outcome - An outsider promising to abolish political apathy and stagnation.
"The media IS the Biggest problem here , breeding extreme sensationalism , bias , hatred , bigotry and deceit ."
And who makes so much mileage out of the media? Just one side or the other? Or both?
I once thought the news sources I use aren't biased. My naivete was shattered in this election. The desire to have a hand in moulding public opinion is too great. Read democrat responses here. If they had the power they'd take the vote away from large swaths of the population. Why? They just know they know best and it would be for the people's own good.
I suppose I should adopt a when in Rome philosophy for any discussion with you. The Russians rigged our elections, the Chinese wrecked our economy and I swear there is an illegal alien living in my house, taking the cakesfrom the cupboard when I'm not looking.
Funny. I can't quite tell if i sounds like an Australian or a democrat on this.
Are my questions to you a bit too confronting and make you nervous because deep down the answers are too close to the truth?
OK. That attitude kind of scares me. I'm just hoping for a more fiscally responsible approach to America and her problems and a focus on helping Americans who need it before we send money over the ocean to throw it into some hole of corruption elsewhere. Oh. And to stop lining the pockets of the Clinton Foundation.
As I see it, there are two factors that could see the downfall of your country over the next 4 years: Hypocrisy and Divisiveness.
I completely agree. Unfortunately, democrats and republican I've spoken with have the samehopes and wants for this country as we independents. The main problem driving our problems is arrogant assumptions about others. No one wants to listen. They all know so much about others they don't need to listen to them.
Like this election. Liberals are so sure ignorant bigoted idiots elected him that they won't listen to the real reasons the majority voted. I was listening to the radio this morning. They had a guy on to comment. He was attempting to explain how the average working class American felt disenfranchised. How they felt Washington had turned their backs on America. The host kept insisting they not talk about that. He wanted the conversation to be about the minority of those who could be labeled racist. The commentator kept reiterating that wasn't the voice that elected Trump. To no avail.
Liberals want to feel good about themselves at the expense of the truth. I hope they grow up, learn some manners and give the entire country the benefit of wanting what is best for all and not simply seek to have their personal desires satisfied.
We might start with the first woman to ever run a successful presidential campaign Kelly Ann Conway for Trump ! Or we could celebrate the first Latino -woman elected to the senate in AZ.! We could relish in the victory of "glass ceilings " like this in THIS election . You see though , these are the victories and advancements that liberals have and will always conveniently ignore , Why ?
They do not fit the liberal agenda - While liberals whine the world progress' just fine .
by PrettyPanther2 years ago
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ … ogyny.htmlThis:"Donald Trump holds one core belief. It’s not limited government. He favored a state takeover of health care before he was against it. Nor is it...
by wiserworld19 months ago
Will you move out of the United States if Donald Trump becomes president? Where would you go?
by Grace Marguerite Williams18 months ago
WHY would ANYONE even vote for Donald Trump at THIS juncture?
by Yves20 months ago
And The Winner Is? Who do you think wil become the next President of the United States of America?Trump's un-favorability rating is at 65%, while Hillary's is at 55%, but she also has a possible indictment hanging over...
by Susie Lehto11 months ago
After THUMPING Clinton in Monday night’s debate, Trump headed to the sunshine state for a YUGE RALLY in Melbourne, Florida. (National poll has Trump 46.7% and Clinton 42.6%: http://www.latimes.com/politics/ )...
by Ralph Schwartz15 months ago
How will the Left react when Hillary Clinton loses the election to Trump?Even with her cronies fixing the polling, she's declining and Trump is rising. Trump is moving into new territory, talking directly to...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.