Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

Why do some people think Trump is a good man?

260 replies

Lyannaa · 16/11/2024 19:28

There are a lot of people, even in the UK who act like you have offended their mum or dad if you point out what an awful person he clearly is. Even his own family don't like him and plenty of people have said how his relationships with his own children are merely transactional.

If people like him, is it because they are fascists themselves deep down? Or is it some type of mass hysteria?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Howandwhy · 27/11/2024 03:04

It's because he's entertaining, especially if you don't live in America. I've burned so many dinners by being caught up watching his random outbursts on the news during his previous presidency lool.

Lyannaa · 27/11/2024 10:16

Entertaining does not equal good. I've learned that to my cost over the years.

OP posts:
deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:08

WildCats24 · 25/11/2024 16:33

Really? Donald’s 49.9% to Kamala’s 48.3% (source: BBC news) is a “landslide”?

He won 312 compared to Harris' 226 so that means he won 58 percent. He needed 270 to win but won 312.

I would say a very convincing victory, and landslide victory.

WildCats24 · 29/11/2024 15:12

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:08

He won 312 compared to Harris' 226 so that means he won 58 percent. He needed 270 to win but won 312.

I would say a very convincing victory, and landslide victory.

Do you understand how the electoral college works?

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:15

Usinlimbo · 24/11/2024 18:39

I live in the US in a blue state. I'm british, just back here on holiday. I hated trump until around a year ago, when due to various things I realized like many Americans that most of msm has lied about him.

He is a family man, businessman, and successful enough that he doesn't need bribes to get in office. The democrats are truly awful. They have taken all family values down, stripped away many protections for us citizens while creating sanctuary cities to boost voter numbers. These sanctuary cities have cost billions and made life dirty and dangerous.

Most Democrat politicians seem to become enormously wealthy on modest salaries.

Trump raised /donated millions to those in crisis, has always supported black organizations quietly, without 'trumpeting' about it, and is promising amazing things for America.

Health reform with removal of additives in our food, prosecution and radical punishment for child molesters and human traffickers, deportation of criminals and illegals, going after corruption in the sec and other trading crimes, making life more affordable with no tax on ss for seniors or overtime, cutting down waste and beurocracy (40B on internet with not a single connection) etc etc.

Also he is not a war monger. If even a few of these things are improved I will be happy.

Remember he had 90% negative press while dems had 70% positive.

He won because he has an answer for everything while kamala couldn't give a coherent answer for almost anything and the few things she did promise were going to cost Americans a lot of money; the last straw for many.

I know msm misled the Public and lied so much that no one can believe he won but his was a grassroots campaign that only cost 300m because he didn't pay for supporters and most of his successful adverts were just reposting the democrats promises (they were that awful). She, on the other hand, blew $1.1B, bussing supporters from city to city, on billboards and celebrity endorsements (10m to Beyonce?) and her promises were awful.

Liken it to the petition for a general election to replace starmer which has amassed 1.2m signatures in 24 hours. People hate the democrats for what they have done over the last 4 years. The unhappiness with the democrats forced people like me to realise that trumps way is better.

Once you see past the msm lies and that his way is better, you are then more likely to see proof of all the positive things he has done, and wow, they are legion.

The lawfare against him was also ridiculous. I'm sure he was a little misogynistic and not the most respectful young man but that goes for 70 to 80 % of men. The rape charges against him were laughable (e jean). He is probably not the most virile man in the world now at age 78 and won't be skirt chasing. He has a focus to make everything better for his legacy. He's not going to seek reelection so is more driven to make a mark.

He is also probably our best hope of stopping ww3. Surely you want to live without threat of being nuked?

I am going to quote this excellent long post so that people can read it again.

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:17

WildCats24 · 29/11/2024 15:12

Do you understand how the electoral college works?

Do I understand how many votes Trump needed and how many he got and how many Harris got? Yes

If you think I got something wrong (I didn't) then please say, give a full explanation and link sources.

WildCats24 · 29/11/2024 15:29

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:17

Do I understand how many votes Trump needed and how many he got and how many Harris got? Yes

If you think I got something wrong (I didn't) then please say, give a full explanation and link sources.

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/RESULTS/zjpqnemxwvx/

Great. I’ll explain how the electoral college works. The person who gets the majority of the votes in each states takes the entire state’s electoral votes (apart from two states). For example, Kamala won all 19 of Illinois’ electoral votes, because she had 3,038,725 votes in Illinois and Donald had 2,441,039. Kennedy had 79,834 votes in Illinois. Yes, Kamala took all 19 electoral points, but does that mean that all 5,559,598 people in Illinois voted for her? No. 3,038,725 people in Illinois voted for her. 2,520,873 people in Illinois voted against Kamala. I would not say that even though Kamala won Illinois, that everyone in Illinois wanted her to be president. 2.5 million people disagreed.

Across the entire country, 77,095,526 (49.9%) people voted for Donald. 74,659,711 (48.3%) voted for Kamala. Donald had 1.6% more votes than Kamala. Not a landslide.

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 15:39

WildCats24 · 29/11/2024 15:29

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/RESULTS/zjpqnemxwvx/

Great. I’ll explain how the electoral college works. The person who gets the majority of the votes in each states takes the entire state’s electoral votes (apart from two states). For example, Kamala won all 19 of Illinois’ electoral votes, because she had 3,038,725 votes in Illinois and Donald had 2,441,039. Kennedy had 79,834 votes in Illinois. Yes, Kamala took all 19 electoral points, but does that mean that all 5,559,598 people in Illinois voted for her? No. 3,038,725 people in Illinois voted for her. 2,520,873 people in Illinois voted against Kamala. I would not say that even though Kamala won Illinois, that everyone in Illinois wanted her to be president. 2.5 million people disagreed.

Across the entire country, 77,095,526 (49.9%) people voted for Donald. 74,659,711 (48.3%) voted for Kamala. Donald had 1.6% more votes than Kamala. Not a landslide.

If you look at the electoral college results - landslide
If you look at raw votes - more narrow victory
But it is the electoral college results which are the relevant ones

Quote from even the BBC:
"And [ec] is the number that really matters. The US election is really 50 state-by-state races rather than a single national one.
The winner in any given state wins all of its electoral votes - for example, 19 in swing state Pennsylvania. Both candidates hoped to reach the magic number of 270 electoral votes to earn a majority in the college.
Trump’s 312 is better than Joe Biden's 306 and beats both Republican wins by George W Bush. But it is well shy of the 365 achieved by Barack Obama in 2008 or the 332 Obama won getting re-elected, or the colossal 525 by Ronald Reagan in 1984"

Thanks for your explanation of ec as requested though.

user44221 · 29/11/2024 18:35

Electoral college results aren't really generally referred to in 'landslide' terms. Because of the way they work, while they are determinative for winning an election, they aren't necessarily reflective of what we talk about when we talk about landslides.

In this case, while he won the election fair and square, he did it with a lower percentage of the popular vote than Hilary Clinton won it by in 2016, while still losing the election. Republicans would probably do well to remember that.

deeperdrole · 29/11/2024 19:38

user44221 · 29/11/2024 18:35

Electoral college results aren't really generally referred to in 'landslide' terms. Because of the way they work, while they are determinative for winning an election, they aren't necessarily reflective of what we talk about when we talk about landslides.

In this case, while he won the election fair and square, he did it with a lower percentage of the popular vote than Hilary Clinton won it by in 2016, while still losing the election. Republicans would probably do well to remember that.

I guess whether you would call it a landslide would depend on whether or not you wanted Harris to win instead.

Trump was discredited by the media machine, and many us just jumped on the bandwagon until we realised just how much was being badly reported or taken out of context. I think taking everything into consideration his win was convincing. It would have been better if we had been able to rely on media reporting.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page