Trump is an absolute tool, but let's not forget that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 having launched an estimated 2200 drone strikes in the Middle East since 2004, strikes that killed many civilians. including 160 children.
Trump is an absolute tool, but let's not forget that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 having launched an estimated 2200 drone strikes in the Middle East since 2004, strikes that killed many civilians. including 160 children.
I'm sorry, I stated the estimated death figure as drone strikes, my mistake, he still got the prize though? Try and free yourself from the shackles of confirmation bias.
"But you won’t read that on social media" I can do ad hominem as well.....................you poo face.
I took it in the way it was intended, I find being insulted is the same as being offended, I have no time for it. Posting on this forum is not a personal thing to me, I don't get offended or feel insulted by comments directed at me as I would hope likewise from others.Funny you took that as an insult.
Edited just for you. Or should that be dancers. Possibly the royal you in that case.Unless I'm misreading he's not saying you personally, but the royal you
The thing is the internet is full of figures like that about a whole host of people, issues, countries, you name it, that one minute on the internet shows to be fake. Quite often they’re true presented in a way to discredit or give credit to someone/something. Your post being a classic example of that. Obama killed eleventy billion, end conversation. Put some context to it. You have no idea how many civilians have been killed by the Trump regime in its first term from drone strikes because he’s used his power to ensure that. Obama whether you think he deserved the award or not ensured the opposite. His whitehouse was one of the most transparent in generations and it’s abused by right wing press and groups to do a whole load of look over there. Fact is that if Trump continues to use drones etc at the rates he does he’s going to far surpass the amount under the Obama regime if he gets a second term and he ain’t going to be that far behind if he doesn’t. Difference is of course under the Trump administration you’ll never know how badly they’ve got it wrong but law of averages tells you Trump is very likely to kill more innocents than Obama did. Some would argue that he has already given the reaction to his action of a single drone strike in Iraq.I'm sorry, I stated the estimated death figure as drone strikes, my mistake, he still got the prize though? Try and free yourself from the shackles of confirmation bias.
"But you won’t read that on social media" I can do ad hominem as well.....................you poo face.
The thing is the internet is full of figures like that about a whole host of people, issues, countries, you name it, that one minute on the internet shows to be fake. Quite often they’re true presented in a way to discredit or give credit to someone/something. Your post being a classic example of that. Obama killed eleventy billion, end conversation. Put some context to it. You have no idea how many civilians have been killed by the Trump regime in its first term from drone strikes because he’s used his power to ensure that. Obama whether you think he deserved the award or not ensured the opposite. His whitehouse was one of the most transparent in generations and it’s abused by right wing press and groups to do a whole load of look over there. Fact is that if Trump continues to use drones etc at the rates he does he’s going to far surpass the amount under the Obama regime if he gets a second term and he ain’t going to be that far behind if he doesn’t. Difference is of course under the Trump administration you’ll never know how badly they’ve got it wrong but law of averages tells you Trump is very likely to kill more innocents than Obama did. Some would argue that he has already given the reaction to his action of a single drone strike in Iraq.
Now, maybe your point is that Obama doesn’t deserve the award and who knows maybe you have a very valid point, I’m not arguing that one way or the other. My point is that that isn’t the point of any articles you’ve probably gotten that information from.
Obama should never have won the peace prize but I'm curious how he managed to launch drone strikes in 2004 when we wasn't elected until 2008?Trump is an absolute tool, but let's not forget that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 having launched an estimated 2200 drone strikes in the Middle East since 2004, strikes that killed many civilians. including 160 children.
That's what he won the prize for, his work on time travel.Obama should never have won the peace prize but I'm curious how he managed to launch drone strikes in 2004 when we wasn't elected until 2008?
To be honest then, fair enough?That's what he won the prize for, his work on time travel.
He really is at the top of his game here!!
Trump suggests his supporters vote in another Democratic primary, this time in South Carolina - CNNPolitics
Don't think he worries about anyone - on his side or against him.Except he’s encouraging them to vote for the guy he’s privately most worried about.
Don't think he worries about anyone - on his side or against him.
Sanders gets the nomination and it'll be a carbon copy of UK election.
Don't see any of the Democrat candidates doing particularly well.He has been recorded saying otherwise behind closed doors. We shall see-the two countries are not directly comparable.
Do you think a mentally ill Biden will do better?
Don't see any of the Democrat candidates doing particularly well.
Some of the potentially stronger candidates have stayed out this time as they don't want the stain of defeat going into next election.
Think Sanders will be like Corbyn in that he can't get all his party behind him - let alone mobilize the necessary unaffiliated vote.
Sanders rallies (much like Corbyn's) paint a misleading picture. Idolized by a vociferous minority that doesn't reflect the mainstream.
Talk of a youth vote propelling him to victory much the same as failed to materialize for Corbyn.
Word "Socialist" is an anathema in US politics to anyone over 40 - far more so than this country.
Republicans have yet to launch their "billion" dollar assault on the election campaign.
Holding the level of anti-Trump feeling (particularly as an individual) going to be difficult to sustain over a prolonged campaign (much as it was with Johnson)
BUT this is Trump plenty of time between now and polling to shoot himself in the foot
lot of Democrats won't forgive Sanders supporters for putting Trump in the White House last time. The calls for unity could fall on deaf ears .I disagree, but we will see. He is their best shot by a long distance.
lot of Democrats won't forgive Sanders supporters for putting Trump in the White House last time. The calls for unity could fall on deaf ears .
Trump will win in a landslide.
Wisconsin, Michigan, pennyslvania all went to trump with majorities smaller than the number of sanders voters who voted trump in those states. That's a swing of 56 electoral college seats that would have put Clinton in.He didn't. Only 10% of Sanders voters went for Trump. A higher proportion of Clinton supporters voted for John McCain against Obama and famously shouted 'party unity my ass'. Hillary Clinton lost because she ignored the rust belt and her policy record in terms of job losses there was a horror show. She was simply a dreadful candidate. Funny how unity in practice means that the progressive branch of the party has to fall in line and never the other way round.
The centrists are coalescing around Biden, an establishment figure offering vanilla policies and showing obvious and concerning signs of mental decline. The Democrats collectively have lost control of everything except the House by offering corporatist centrism and it beggars belief that they think it will do any better in November.
Wisconsin, Michigan, pennyslvania all went to trump with majorities smaller than the number of sanders voters who voted trump in those states. That's a swing of 56 electoral college seats that would have put Clinton in.
Many Democrats blame bernie.So it's Bernie Sanders' fault she lost? Not hers?
Many Democrats blame bernie.
Numbers don't lie. Sanders supporters voted for Trump over Clinton in those 3 states and that was enough to put Trump in office.
Shows the divisions within democratic party. Many Democrats will vote Trump over Sanders, as did Labour voters vote Johnson over Corbyn.
Broader picture of why she was seen as untrustworthy and couldn't beat a clown like Trump has to come down to her.
Reasons of how Trump could even get nominated, let alone win still spew forth.
Said before the books after his Presidency is done will be fascinating reading (the historical, political and psychological ones)
The EU wide poll that showed only 4% of Europeans trust Trump highlights how massively different he is viewed on each side of the Atlantic.
Could Obama have won a 3rd term if it were allowed?
So it's Bernie Sanders' fault she lost? Not hers?
purely anecdotal but I spoke to several traditional Democrat voters last time I was in the States who voted Trump because they absolutely hate Hilary.
Didn't realise how toxic the Clinton name was to many over there.
I'm not arguing for any candidate.I think you’re wrong on several counts and you seem to ignore that Clinton voters were more contrary in 2008. I think Obama would have won, his approval ratings were high. Though the polls also had Bernie beating Trump by double digits.
Won’t continue to argue the point further but Bernie is a better chance than a mentally unwell establishment choice. Populism is the answer to Trump.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?