To be watching the President Trump show on 4?

[Orda1]

A, I the only one watching it? It's so difficult to believe it's real.

The sudden fake Christian part pissed me off no end too.

"What I don't understand, in America there is such a strong emphasis on the split between church and state. How come they are all so religious as they campagain?"

There is no separation between church and state in America. You are thinking of France.

Americans want to see their presidents being/acting/talking religious. That was a major selling point of W Bush. They don't tire of saying "God bless America" and have the phrase "One nation under God" in their Pledge of Allegiance. "In God We Trust" is the official motto of the US.

The sudden fake Christian part pissed me off no end too.

Yes! And it's so transparent! Last night they showed that clip again where Trump was asked his favourite Bible verse. He blustered and said that it's private but it was clear he'd struggle to actually name/quote one.

I didn't watch I will now. @ the abortion comments. I didn't think he could shock me more.

Both Republican candidates are competing to be the toughest on Isis. The voters are uninformed enough to believe that Isis can be beaten with bombs and that the reason Isis exists is because 'Hillary and Obama invented them' .

You couldn't make it up. That duck hunting advert was hardly reassuring either. I guess a huge sector of the electorate don't want intelligent people to represent them.

People have been saying 'imagine Trump as president and Boris Johnson as PM!' but the two have nothing in common.

I'm under no illusions about Bojo, I know he's a right wing git. But he is a highly educated, massively intelligent statesman. All of his buffoonery is an act. He has slightly mad hair too but it's hardly relevant.

I'd never vote for Bojo in a million years, but at least he's an actual politician, with an awareness of history and the foreign policy.

You just need to read the thread about Trump in the News section to realise the extraordinary depths of self-delusion some of his supporters reach. Basically it seems to come down to a blind belief that he will sort out ISIS overnight and abolish political correctness, and it doesn't matter what he does or how much he lies and cheats so long as he gets into power. I seriously begin to believe some of them would support him if he announced slaughter of the first born as a policy.

Saw a good FB post recently that was quite scary in its possibility:

2016: Trump will never be president.

2017: President Trump will never get away with that.

2018: Hope my district win this year's Hunger Games.

They do, gush, but not in too much detail. We're not horrified by his politics, he's not an absurd, jingoistic clown, and he's not going to get the nomination, so he's not the focus.

Depressing. There's this huge and unexpected movement of people voting for a liberal left-winger who wants healthcare for all and free college and immigration reform and LGBT rights, and no one in the UK is interested because they're too busy gasping at the stupidity of Trump supporters.

There is no separation between church and state in America.

Yes, there is. It's not as stringent as in France, but the Constitution provides that there be no establishment of religion which, through the years, has been interpreted rather broadly. The constitution also provides for the free exercise of religion so that comes into the equation as well. For example, in state schools, there can be no religious observances like school-sponsored prayer or nativity plays, but the school can't prohibit children praying on their own or wearing religious symbols to school.

But on the whole, there is a higher percentage of people who practice their faith than in many other countries, although the hold on politics is actually lessening with this election cycle. That could change, of course, in the future, but many think it's a trend brought on by increasing diversity and by the increase in people who don't practice a religion.

Before we start - I do not support Trump. I think some people are missing the point about his "policies". Trump must know (I am sure he does) that these things can't be done, at least not as he describes them.

Seneca - Yes, separation of church and state is a spectrum with perhaps Iran on one end and France on the other, but US really does not have much of it. As I said, the official motto of the US is "In God we trust".

"Constitution provides that there be no establishment of religion which, through the years, has been interpreted rather broadly."

Sorry I don't understand what this means. "There can be no establishment of religion"?

"The constitution also provides for the free exercise of religion so that comes into the equation as well."

Nothing to do with the concept of separation of church and state.

"in state schools, there can be no religious observances like school-sponsored prayer or nativity plays"

But talk of God is everywhere and Pledge of Allegiance is often recited in American schools with the line "One nation under God".

And that God is the Christian God, not any deity or spiritual power that Americans might believe in.

There are Muslim countries where state is less entangled with the dominant religion.

Sorry I don't understand what this means. "There can be no establishment of religion"?

It's the Establishment Clause. It means government may not interfere with the establishment of a religion, and it may not establish a state religion. I think it's actually 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...'

I see. The sentence wasn't clear.

Surely free establishment of new religions is neither here nor there, though. The fact is that every presidential candidate is expected to be practicing and vocal Christians. (Which is why I don't think Bernie stands a chance, sadly). Even after they are elected, they continue to talk about faith, prayer, "God bless America" etc. There is an involvement of Christian faith in US state policy that would be unthinkable in Europe. That is not what I would call separation of church and state.

Oh I agree. Politicians are expected to appear to be Christians whether or not they really are...

But if Congress passed a law protecting one religion over another, or that was clearly based on religious beliefs, it would be overthrown by the Supreme Court whose job it is to ensure laws are constitutional.

Hence for example, Trump can talk till he's blue in the face about banning Muslims from America, but constitutionally there is no way he could do it.

"Established religion" is a term of art here. It means no state religion as in the case with the Church of England.

I agree that God is included in the Pledge (it was added in the 1950s) and in the motto, but just as one example, children cannot be forced to recite the pledge.

When I say "interpreted rather broadly" I am talking about court cases decided through the years, mostly by the Supreme Court, such as Engel v. Vitale which held that school prayer violates the establishment clause.

And the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in many of these cases.

From Engel v. Vitale"

For this reason, petitioners argue, the State's use of the Regents' prayer in its public school system breaches the constitutional wall of separation between Church and State. We agree with that contention, since we think that the constitutional prohibition against laws respecting an establishment of religion must at least mean that, in this country, it is no part of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of the American people to recite as a part of a religious program carried on by government.

Just to add, we need the First Amendment because there is so much religion in the US.

In threads about mandated acts of worship in English schools, there are always quite a few posters that say it does not harm, just go along with it. I think that is because UK society as a whole is much more secular than the US so many parents are not worried about it affecting their children in any meaningful way. In the US, the danger is that Christian fundamentalists and others of their ilk will affect school policy, ethos, and curriculum and we need protection against that.

I just can't understand why more American's can't see that he'll say and do whatever he thinks they want to hear in order to get what he wants. He clearly has absolutely no interest in most ordinary citizens and just sees the Presidency as another win for him.
That's what scares me, he doesn't seem to have any real policy or show any real understanding of public service.
Maybe he comes across differently to Americans, or is not taken so seriously buy the voting public?

Actually the vast majority of Americans can see perfectly well that he's lying, and they have no intentions of voting for him. He has the highest unfavourability rating of any candidate - 60% of people say they would not vote for him, and that includes a large number of Republicans.

But facts like those are not really getting reported on in the UK I guess. Maybe they're not sexy or ghastly enough?

I was just about to post along the lines of BeALert. In particular, Trump's unfavorability ratings are very high with women.

Ah that makes me feel better. In UK we only really hear about Trump and Cruz, to a lesser extent Clinton and hardly ever about Sanders, at least in mainstream media. But like you say they are maybe not quite so exciting to write about.
Hopefully he'll just be a sideshow like ukip were during our last general election

There's quite a bit of coverage of Clinton and Sanders here in the US, and I'm a Democrat so I am always interested in coverage of my party's race, but for the most part their contest has been very civil, and when they fight, it's always about policy. With the Republicans, though, it has become a soap opera, and very personal. It's more dramatic and thus more interesting for the media, especially television.

That's interesting, according to UK media most Americans are Duck dynasty types, whooping and yelling at leaders who mostly seem to be arguing about who's got the prettiest wife and the size of their hands it all comes across a bit 9th grade.
I'm glad it's not really like that

Well, most media coverage of the UK in the US is about the Royal Family, so I suppose we're about even in selective reporting.