is it really possible that Donald trump could be president????? [Part 3]

[Lweji]

Continuing the thread, and in reply to the two last posts of thread 2

Today 08:15 OhYouBadBadKitten

I don't think it is about Trump taking risks, its more that he is a narcisstic sociopath. He feels untouchable in what he says and has no regard for the consequences.

Today 06:53 fourmummy

To be fair, voters know that all political rhetoric mostly comes to nothing (rhetoric = argumentation and persuasion, elevated to an art from in Ancient Greece). Why do you imagine Labour want to introduce votes for 16 year olds? They know that people don't become "more conservative" as they get older-they become wiser to the political process and its lies rhetoric. So what's different with Trump? Why hasn't his unbelievably unlikeable public and private persona sunk him?

Answer=risk

He is not a ready-rolled, ready-prepped and ready-to-go politician (think Blair's son parachuted into a constituency; MIliband brothers, Clintons). These are not risking much because they were cast in the role when they were made. We know that this is the case with, certainly, Clinton (numerous interviews with aides attest to this; ditto for the others). Voters are doing a risk assessment of his risks and have decided that he is worth something. It's not as simple as suggesting that if someone votes for him then they must be racist or sexist, as I've seen journos assert. Voters are effectively doing a risk assessment and deciding that given the enormous costs both to him (energy, health, time away from family, reputation, financial, career, historical implications, ) and to his voters (risk of being viewed as sexist, racist, intolerant, asshole), the benefits must outweigh these costs. Very unwise to dismiss ordinary voters as simplistically sexist and racists, as many, many journalists have (shortsightedly) done. Even non-experts are very good at performing cost/benefit analyses

As I said I don't see anything of what he says as taking a risk. Because he is saying what many people want to hear.
As for personal cost, he is clearly someone who enjoys the power, the limelight, the adoration. All that is missing for him is the ultimate power, particularly as he sees other true billionaires taking central stage.
But he doesn't have the heart to be Gates.
So, he's going for the highest office, and on the back of American voters most primal fears.

But...
He's not averse to risk. He's built his empire on it. He's had four bankruptcies. Anyone should be worried about the way he manages risk.

AugustaFinkNottle, no one believes Trump will do half the things he says, but the people don't care. Trump says things to put the cat amongst the pigeons, to shake things up and to signify that he is different to the rest of the politically correct political class.

That is why people vote for him because they want a shake up and some "action" as opposed to the "all talk, no action" politicial class. What exactly he will do will be determined in the future.

'Surely no-one is saying illegal immigrants should be allowed in. '

The people have lost faith in the political class doing anything real to stop it. That is why Trump has said he will build the wall and deport illegal immigrants.

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down key parts of an Arizona law that sought to deter illegal immigration
...
[Jan] Brewer, [a Trump supporter and at the time Governor of Arizona] responded angrily to the decision, calling it "outrageous."

"I think this is another assault on the state of Arizona," she told CNN. "It began with them downplaying our border problem and them not securing it, and then, you know, suing the state of Arizona for trying to protect the people of Arizona and of America, then doing backdoor amnesty."

Brewer told reporters earlier that she expected further lawsuits on the immigration status checks, adding, "this certainly is not the end of our journey." "

edition.cnn.com/2012/06/25/politics/scotus-arizona-law/

Everybody knows that most of the political class doesn't treat the issue that seriously and is for amnesty and a path to citizenship

"Rubio defends Gang of Eight immigration bill
...
The Florida senator has been facing fire over his support of the 2013 immigration reform bill, dubbed the “Gang of Eight.” The bill would have granted a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States.
...
“Every effort over the last 10 years to do those comprehensively has failed. And it has failed because the American people have zero trust that the federal government will enforce our laws,” he continued."

thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/268525-rubio-defends-gang-of-eight-immigration-bill

Boris Johnson was for amnesty. It is the same everywhere with the political class.

Trump says he will be different. We will have to see if he means what he says.

Nearly everyone I know is paying cash in hand to their 'nannies'. Many of them are 'undocumented workers' ie here illegally. There is no way I would ever consider hiring someone like that to care for my children. These illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from the poor Americans and those legally here and allowed to work.

It's the same with cleaners and construction workers. The union workers are legal residents and much more expensive than non Union workers who often (at least in this area) are 'undocumented' workers.

People don't want an amnesty. They want the rules enforced and for someone to do 'something'. Trump is proposing to do something. The issue is that something is a waste of time. We all know they dig tunnels so building a wall is never going to achieve the intended objective.

Personally I would start deporting illegal immigrants back to the country they entered from. If they can't tell you then they either go to Canada or Mexico. Either way they can't stay here. After a while people would get the message. It's rather simple to determine if you are here legally or not. Also, I would stop this nonsense of the parents of children born to illegal immigrants being allowed to become American. If you are not here legally I do not see why that should change because you had a child here.

Both DH and I went through numerous hoops to have the right paperwork to live here legally as a citizen and Greencard holder and did this before starting our family. We paid considerable money and flew back and forth to our countries of origin to ensure everything was done legally.

Personally I would start deporting illegal immigrants back to the country they entered from. If they can't tell you then they either go to Canada or Mexico.

Obama has deported more illegal immigrants than any president in history.

You can't deport back to the country migrants entered from without some sort of agreement (like the Dublin agreement in Europe).

I'm not sure how you replace 11 million working migrants when US unemployment is below 8 million, and it's likely that unemployed Americans are in the wrong places and have the wrong skills. A New York auditor can't employ a former automotive worker from Detroit as a nanny...

If they can't tell you then they either go to Canada or Mexico. Either way they can't stay here.
And when Canada and Mexico told you they wouldn't accept them and to piss off? How about Cuba?
Dump them at sea?

Illegal immigrants don't enter only by land, or even sea. And you certainly can't just dump them in the nearest country.

And you certainly can't just dump them in the nearest country.

Yes, I am shocked that an apparently educated person even believes this is possible (legally or practically possible) :-/

kateinKorea The reason people pay cash to nannies is because of the nannies. By paying cash they still will qualify for assistance with housing, food, after school programs for their own children and healthcare. Some of these nannies are making $40-50k a year.

There are also lots of people around here in the NYC area who are available for work. There is no shortage of labour.

As for deportation, I understand the vast majority of illegal immigrants are here on expired visas. That makes it very easy to determine country of origin. For those coming from Cuba, they are already allowed to claim asylum. The others who have no papers came from somewhere. Given the two borders to America are Mexico and Canada the logical answer lies there.

The effect of illegal immigration can be seen here. It heavily impacts the poorest groups and so far no one in office has done anything about it. There is a very good reason as to why these illegal immigrants were denied access in the first place. You can't allow people to live in a country without going through the proper process. If you do it makes a mockery of the system you have in place and the most vulnerable members of our society are not supported.

Given the two borders to America are Mexico and Canada the logical answer lies there.
Hardly. And even so, how do you choose? Do you profile them?
How do you know and prove a Spanish speaker came from Mexico, when it could have come from another Latin American country?
What about an Asian immigrant who came hidden in a boat?
You're not really thinking this through.

the vast majority of illegal immigrants are here on expired visas

This is definitely not true in the US (though it is almost certainly true in the UK which has no significant land border). The figure may be around 40%.

And you have to find them first, and then take the necessary legal action. You talk as if no one is actually doing this, when as I said above Obama has deported more illegal immigrants than any previous president.

the entire establishment, media and world "leaders" are terrified of him.

No, they aren't. These sweeping nonsensical pronouncements are so tedious.

Dear god, he's visiting UK on 24 June to open the infamous golf course in Scotland. He's a madman, and very clever. And yes, I think he has every chance of winning the presidential election. :(

In answer to this question again as the thread is still running, yes. I think he will be President.

'No, they aren't. These sweeping nonsensical pronouncements are so tedious.'

'Trump terrifies world leaders'

www.politico.com/story/2016/04/trump-terrifies-world-leaders-222233

And that is putting it mildly to how world "leaders" are feeling. It is the end of all the schemes of their bosses and masters, it is the return of the people.

it is the return of the people.

No, it's not. Trump is not and never was "the people" and he's certainly not on the side of the ordinary citizen. It's very naive to think he is.

Here is an article about Trump and why he will win by a very clever fiction writer and poet in America. This article was recommended on the Keiser Report last night by Stacy Herbert who said she thinks the author has got it right. It is a bit deep and above my head in some parts, but the author says that Trump will win and the reason is that Trump represents reality versus the abstractness of Hillary and Wall Street and the markets. Trump is with the people, Hillary is with the system, the markets.

The author says that Trump will win, but that he won't be able to beat the markets and that they will eventually beat him and the people.

I don't think the author has got it exactly right, his previous article was bang on the money, but this one is a bit too deep and abstract and wrong in parts.

Here is his previous article which was bang on the money

www.salon.com/2016/05/06/our_awful_elites_gutted_america_now_they_dare_ring_alarms_about_trump_sanders_and_cast_themselves_as_saviors/

and here is the article that Stacy Herbert recommended, which is a bit deep and abstract and also wrong in parts

"Donald Trump is going to win: This is why Hillary Clinton can’t defeat what Trump represents

People are rising up against neoliberal globalization. Trump represents capital, but also understands this reality "

www.salon.com/2016/05/23/donald_trump_is_going_to_win_this_is_why_hillary_clinton_cant_defeat_what_trump_represents/

It's estimated that 3.1 million people have come to the U.S. in 2014 and 2015 of which 1.1 million are illegally here. It's an almost 40% increase in immigration compared to the prior two years. That is why under Obama there are more deportations.

It's also why Trump is gaining traction. Everyday people are seeing their standard of living drop because of the downward pressure on wages. As employers, almost 150 now, we do not hire illegal immigrants while our competitors do. We also pay more than minimum wage and offer a generous health insurance program for all employees and their families. It means we make less as owners compared to our competitors. We are absolutely fine with this. We make more than enough.

Quite frankly the illegal immigration is a huge issue affecting the poorest and most vulnerable. The fact that our political leaders allow it by turning a blind eye nearly all the time is criminal.

I've got important news for you, claig. The fact that a journalist with an axe to grind reports something doesn't make it true.

Here is an article about Trump and why he will win by a very clever fiction writer and poet

The clues are all there ...

Want2bSupermum, it is part of the globalization agenda. The political class across the world are merely ciphers, puppets and pawns of their bosses who want free movement of labour. We even have the socialist lackeys of the markets saying that "open borders are inevitable". They want a globalized world with the end of the nation state in order to serve global capital.

Trump has resisted them and said "America First", he said we will no longer accept the "false song of globalism". That is why the world "leaders" are terrified because of the bollockings they are receiving from their bosses because Trump will end their entire game.

Here is the recent news from San Francisco. It was discussed on Fox last night, and their attorney hosts say it represenst a huge challenge to the states and could set a precedent which means that the states may have to settle.

"Family of Murdered Woman Sues San Francisco over ‘Sanctuary City’ Policy

The family of Kathryn Steinle filed a federal lawsuit on Friday against San Francisco and other government agencies — just days after the city re-affirmed its “sanctuary city” policy to shelter illegal aliens, including criminals, from deportation.
The 32-year-old Steinle was walking with her father on San Francisco’s Pier 14 last July 1 when she was shot and killed by an illegal alien, Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who had already been convicted of seven felonies and deported five times to Mexico."

www.breitbart.com/california/2016/05/27/sanctuary-city-steinle-family-sues-san-francisco/

'I've got important news for you, claig. The fact that a journalist with an axe to grind reports something doesn't make it true.'

I said he gets this article wrong in parts, whereas his last article was stunningly brilliant. But either way he is very clever and worth reading.

Anyone want to talk about Trump University and the 3.5k lawsuits? It's likely that the Trump Uni case will go to court in November.

To me the most enlightening aspect of this affair so far has been Trump's tweet in which he questioned the judge's impartiality and suggested that he was biased because he was Mexican (the judge in question is an American born in Indiana). Do we no longer expect presidential candidates to show basic respect for the rule of law?

Not only that, but how he cares for the "people" (the students). Clearly not, just making money out of them.

Basically the equation is as follows.

Safe Democratic states according to polling:
California (55 votes)
New York (29 votes)
Illinois (20 votes)
Washington (12 votes)
Massachusetts (11 votes)
Maryland (10 votes)
Connecticut - 7
New Mexico - 5
Hawaii - 4
Rhode Island 4
Maine 4
Delaware 3
DC 3
Vermont 3

= 170

Safe Republican states:
Texas - 38
Georgia - 16
Indiana - 11
Tennessee - 11
Missouri - 10
Alabama - 9
Colorado - 9
Louisiana - 8
Oklahoma - 7
Arkansas - 6
Kansas - 6
Utah - 6
West Virginia - 5
Nebraska - 5
Idaho - 4
Alaska - 3
Montana - 3
North Dakota - 3
South Dakota - 3
Wyoming - 3

= 166

Marginal states (within 5%, according to latest polls):
Florida - 29
Pennsylvania - 20
Ohio - 18
Michigan - 16
North Carolina - 15
New Jersey - 14
Virginia - 13
Arizona - 11
Minnesota - 10
Wisconsin - 10
South Carolina - 9
Kentucky - 8
Oregon - 7
Mississippi - 6
Iowa - 6
Nevada - 6 (NB: no poll)
New Hampshire - 4

= 202

So it's an even race.

People who know about polling seem to think that the unusually high number of "undecideds", and the failure of most polls to include the third party (libertarian) candidate, makes them very difficult to read.