Username:  
Password:  
Register 
It is currently Sat May 03, 2025 6:12 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 126 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 9:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
Well he’s committed to mass deportation on day one, which I read will be particularly interesting for their construction industry. Removing something like 1.5 million workers ‘overnight’ as he has said, will have huge financial repercussions. As will trade tariffs, which no sensible economist thinks will lower prices - quite the opposite.
The American people have spoken though, so I hope for their sake and ours they’ve called it right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 9:23 am 
At least the War in Ukraine will be over by this time tomorrow.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 9:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm
Posts: 22553
Mutley, your track record on predictions isn’t 100%. Yesterday you were convinced that Harris would win.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 10:11 am 
Mr Irrelevant wrote:
Mutley, your track record on predictions isn’t 100%. Yesterday you were convinced that Harris would win.

And where did I say that?
I'm 100% convinced that I didn't like.
Show me where I did.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 10:11 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Like him or not, at least he stands for America first and foremost. He's going to act (not talk) on controlling illegal immigration, he's going to cut back significantly on overseas aid, he's going to refuse allowing the US to become the cheap policemen for the western world, he knows what a woman is, he's decisive, and he's got the entirety of the US political system on his side. Watch out World!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 7:51 pm
Posts: 589
Mr Irrelevant wrote:
The big difference this time is that he has the Senate and the House of Representatives behind him. He won’t be blocked at every turn and he doesn’t have to think about being re-elected in four years. This will be a rollercoaster!


I disagree, a rollercoaster has both ups and downs, and the downs are the most enjoyable part.

But agree with the rest, he’s now got free rein to do whatever he wants without any negative impact to himself (which is the only impact that concerns him). It will also empower all of the crazies that surround and support him, knowing that he can pardon them. Expect his whole family to be employed in the Whitehouse, Ukraine to lose quickly, Lithuania to follow and Project 25 to begin implementation.

Will be interesting to see if his Tariffs policy comes into force, or if some intern with a GCSE in Economics explains the basics to him before he has the chance.

Also keep an eye out for the 25th Amendment, the way that Trump is mentally declining, it could be President Vance before long (if his has the balls to stand up to him).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2024 3:29 pm
Posts: 917
Well done America.
If only we had a leader like that in the UK.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 11:31 am 
We have...sadly...Farage.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm
Posts: 18786
PTID wrote:
Like him or not, at least he stands for America first and foremost. He's going to act (not talk) on controlling illegal immigration, he's going to cut back significantly on overseas aid, he's going to refuse allowing the US to become the cheap policemen for the western world, he knows what a woman is, he's decisive, and he's got the entirety of the US political system on his side. Watch out World!

the bbc and the rest of the woke ites will be in mourning today and unlike this country they,ll be ruled by someone who dares not say what things actually are in case of offending. yes, watch out world you are going to be offended and told a few home truths.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm
Posts: 6995
Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine and sort the Middle East out, let’s see what he actually means by sorting it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 12:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm
Posts: 18786
Jamie1952 wrote:
Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine and sort the Middle East out, let’s see what he actually means by sorting it out.

at least he,ll attempt to do it and not fanny around appeasing everyone that harris would have done. his detractors got a shock last time when he proved he wasn,t the war monger they expected. might throw ukraine under the bus but that country has never been whiter than white as its painted now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm
Posts: 3441
MutleyRules wrote:
We have...sadly...Farage.





Nigel Farage demands that Keir Starmer rolls out the red carpet for Trump after US victory. :laugh: :laugh: clappp clappp


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
Reading the comments above, he's said a lot of things, let's see what he actually does. Mr I makes a valid point that he has the house and senate now but he said lots of things in 2016 that he didn't do - most of what he said was just bluster. He said he'd repeal Obamacare (still there), bring back manufacturing (it declined), prosecute Hillary Clinton (he didn't) and best of all he promised to remove all undocumented migrants. This was in 2016, so why are there even still undocumented migrants in the US if he sorted it out first time round?

The tariffs thing, of everything he's said, will be the most damaging if he really does follow through on the rhetoric. Will get the popcorn out if he goes through with it.

I also think the contrast with how the dems and more left leaning world wide take the defeat, against how the right would have reacted to losing is pretty stark. Thank god at least half of America can put their country first, avoiding an armed uprising.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm
Posts: 18786
Sussex UK wrote:
MutleyRules wrote:
We have...sadly...Farage.





Nigel Farage demands that Keir Starmer rolls out the red carpet for Trump after US victory. :laugh: :laugh: clappp clappp

a trump victory and if he manages to improve things over there and is a good influence in the west it only adds to the popularity of farage who has constantly supported the bloke. if he does visit the uk i can see him spending more time with nige than the british hater the two tier one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
The flip side is, if he fails to improve people’s lives over there he will show the world what doesn’t work. (He will obviously tell everyone he’s done the best job anyone has ever done whether that’s true or not!)

I will say, he ran a very, very effective campaign and there’s no doubt he used every kind of media to consistently ram home a simple message. I’d argue Musk deserves as much credit though. He consistently hammered the message that democracy was under attack. You’d have thought the economy would be top of everyone’s list but exit polling highlighted that the lines feed through by Musk became the number one priority for voters.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm
Posts: 22553
Mikey76 wrote:
Reading the comments above, he's said a lot of things, let's see what he actually does. Mr I makes a valid point that he has the house and senate now but he said lots of things in 2016 that he didn't do - most of what he said was just bluster. He said he'd repeal Obamacare (still there), bring back manufacturing (it declined), prosecute Hillary Clinton (he didn't) and best of all he promised to remove all undocumented migrants. This was in 2016, so why are there even still undocumented migrants in the US if he sorted it out first time round?

The tariffs thing, of everything he's said, will be the most damaging if he really does follow through on the rhetoric. Will get the popcorn out if he goes through with it.

I also think the contrast with how the dems and more left leaning world wide take the defeat, against how the right would have reacted to losing is pretty stark. Thank god at least half of America can put their country first, avoiding an armed uprising.


The house and Senate blocked him at every turn last time. Just look at the nonsense over them turning a Chief Justice down time after time. This time he has a free run.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
Mr Irrelevant wrote:
Mikey76 wrote:
Reading the comments above, he's said a lot of things, let's see what he actually does. Mr I makes a valid point that he has the house and senate now but he said lots of things in 2016 that he didn't do - most of what he said was just bluster. He said he'd repeal Obamacare (still there), bring back manufacturing (it declined), prosecute Hillary Clinton (he didn't) and best of all he promised to remove all undocumented migrants. This was in 2016, so why are there even still undocumented migrants in the US if he sorted it out first time round?

The tariffs thing, of everything he's said, will be the most damaging if he really does follow through on the rhetoric. Will get the popcorn out if he goes through with it.

I also think the contrast with how the dems and more left leaning world wide take the defeat, against how the right would have reacted to losing is pretty stark. Thank god at least half of America can put their country first, avoiding an armed uprising.


The house and Senate blocked him at every turn last time. Just look at the nonsense over them turning a Chief Justice down time after time. This time he has a free run.


So much for executive powers that he always boasts about.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Like him or not, at least he stands for America first and foremost. He's going to act (not talk) on controlling illegal immigration, he's going to cut back significantly on overseas aid, he's going to refuse allowing the US to become the cheap policemen for the western world, he knows what a woman is, he's decisive, and he's got the entirety of the US political system on his side. Watch out World!


Problem is, I don't think he gets how nuanced that needs to be. It is a small world and you have go back before WW2 before you find a US president that was deluded enough to think isolationism would continue to work. Defence and security certainly doesn't work like that so this crap about World Policeman is pure Trump BS. I don't even think he means it beyond winning votes from those gullible enough. Like him or not? Well I'm not into people who fancy their daughters. It's quite an undesirable trait.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 3:06 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Don't think he's isolationist, more like protectionist, looking out for his own country and expecting partner nations to do their bit isn't a bad thing imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
PTID wrote:
Don't think he's isolationist, more like protectionist, looking out for his own country and expecting partner nations to do their bit isn't a bad thing imo.


The difference between the two is like the difference between someone wanting to shag their daughter and someone else saying 'if I weren't happily married and, ya know, her father . . .’

Yeah, technically different. :laugh:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 3:27 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Massively different isolationist would surely be like North Korea or Cuba, protectionism is more akin to the EU.
I don't think he actually said he wanted to shag his daughter but I may be wrong. Whatever I've read that he did say is pretty offensive though, probably most of all to his wife and daughter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
Sussex UK wrote:
MutleyRules wrote:
We have...sadly...Farage.





Nigel Farage demands that Keir Starmer rolls out the red carpet for Trump after US victory. :laugh: :laugh: clappp clappp


It causes Starmer to file a report with House of Commons maintenance dept of an 'irritating droning sound coming from somewhere'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Don't think he's isolationist, more like protectionist, looking out for his own country and expecting partner nations to do their bit isn't a bad thing imo.


Nope it's isolationism. Protectionism is what the USA did in the Great Depression. Caused things to get far worse. Also not a good policy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 6:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2023 4:52 am
Posts: 122
Mctee1908 wrote:
Obviously there is still a majority of racist & misogynistic people in America who would rather have a convicted felon, fraudster and rapist in charge than a black woman.

This is going to be grim.


You're an idiot. Keep watching your daily dose of CNN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
So if he's isolationist he'll not be doing any overseas trade deals at all and all borders including the Canadian one will be closed. He'll withdraw from the UN and NATO and withdraw all US forces personel from overseas territories?
I don't think so, more like he'll demand that members of the UN and NATO do their fair share. He'll try to protect US jobs and create more employment as he tries to improve their economy, he'll do that at the expense of other nations where there's a choice.
He'll try to reduce the drain on the nations coffers from illegal immigrants and shirkers.
If only we had a leader with even half the patriotism and drive to improve their country.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
So if he's isolationist he'll not be doing any overseas trade deals at all and all borders including the Canadian one will be closed. He'll withdraw from the UN and NATO and withdraw all US forces personel from overseas territories?
I don't think so, more like he'll demand that members of the UN and NATO do their fair share. He'll try to protect US jobs and create more employment as he tries to improve their economy, he'll do that at the expense of other nations where there's a choice.
He'll try to reduce the drain on the nations coffers from illegal immigrants and shirkers.
If only we had a leader with even half the patriotism and drive to improve their country.


That's not what isolationism means. Trump is advocating for it and that error has not been made since the 1940s. Backwards.

The immigration thing, not fussed , it doesn't affect us. The 'fair share' thing is BS and has always been BS regarding countries with Russia as a neighbour. You know the ones Trump said he hoped Putin would invade?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2024 10:02 pm
Posts: 574
Whatever you want to call it, looking inwards will affect us. The EU block have the collective heft to make the US think but we’re out in a limb between a rock and a hard place.
Unless I’m missing something? Does anyone see how this will reduce costs and inflation here?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
Mikey76 wrote:
Whatever you want to call it, looking inwards will affect us. The EU block have the collective heft to make the US think but we’re out in a limb between a rock and a hard place.
Unless I’m missing something? Does anyone see how this will reduce costs and inflation here?


I'm going off the massive academic concensus. Seems a sensible way to go.

The USA needs a stable world, particularly Europe. They've known it for decades and nobody has been in office that's been thick enough to rock the boat. I still don't think Trump will. Banging on about it does appeal to the those simple patriotic types though, obviously.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:31 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Being patriotic doesn't mean you're simple does it?
Some of us will be paying tribute at the weekend and on the 11th to the many patriots who gave their lives for their country.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2024 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Being patriotic doesn't mean you're simple does it?
Some of us will be paying tribute at the weekend and on the 11th to the many patriots who gave their lives for their country.


I thought you'd knee jerk and get pompous over that comment But. I thought, nah I won't have to add a caveat for him, he won't ignore the point entirely and make it into a cheap shot. Little did I know.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 6:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:28 pm
Posts: 8856
MutleyRules wrote:
At least the War in Ukraine will be over by this time tomorrow.


Gas n Leccy prices coming down then.
bbolt :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 6:52 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Yeah you're so clever that you dismiss any opinion different to your own by moving away from the point and making personal insults again rather than any discussion.
You dismiss what I suggested as isolationist actions because it doesn't fit your definition.
You infer that patriots are simple then claim that I'm pompous.
Get over yourself ffs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 7:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Yeah you're so clever that you dismiss any opinion different to your own by moving away from the point and making personal insults again rather than any discussion.
You dismiss what I suggested as isolationist actions because it doesn't fit your definition.
You infer that patriots are simple then claim that I'm pompous.
Get over yourself ffs.


What personal insult?
I didn't dismiss it and its not my definition. It's not what isolationist means. I didn't make you wrong, you just are.
I didn't say that about patriotism. You decided to leap to that judgement that all patriots are simple, got pseudo pompous about it and decided to haul in remembrance season to try to give yourself a shaming angle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 7:56 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Most dictionaries define isolationism as being a nation that doesn't engage with political and economic alliances with other nations. They cite North Korea as being among the most isolationist and Switzerland during WW2. So what bit have I got wrong apart from not fitting whatever your definition is?
Might be worth looking up pompous in the dictionary too then reflect on your own posts?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Most dictionaries define isolationism as being a nation that doesn't engage with political and economic alliances with other nations. They cite North Korea as being among the most isolationist and Switzerland during WW2. So what bit have I got wrong apart from not fitting whatever your definition is?
Might be worth looking up pompous in the dictionary too then reflect on your own posts?


The bit where you said USA wasn't. I think the term was even invented for the way the USA was pre WW2 until they rapeseed it wasn't smart. This is what Trump wants to revert to. You also misused protectionism. But all you had to do was Google it and get on with the discussion which WAS going OK and without composite.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 8:37 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Isolationism is massively different in today's world than it was pre WW2, the UN and NATO didn't exist nor did many of the other treaties across many nations globally.
My opinion is that he is not isolationist within the recognised definition of today. Anyone advocating the US return to pre WW2 America and the Great Depression would need to be an absolute idiot which imo he's not.
I'm definitely of the opinion he's protectionist, and my opinion may differ from yours but that doesn't make it wrong, again maybe look up pompous?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Isolationism is massively different in today's world than it was pre WW2, the UN and NATO didn't exist nor did many of the other treaties across many nations globally.
My opinion is that he is not isolationist within the recognised definition of today. Anyone advocating the US return to pre WW2 America and the Great Depression would need to be an absolute idiot which imo he's not.
I'm definitely of the opinion he's protectionist, and my opinion may differ from yours but that doesn't make it wrong, again maybe look up pompous?


Nope. It's a current term. The lectures I attended and books I read last month say so. Or maybe I should tell the lecturers and authors that Professor PTID says they are wrong?

Anyone who advocates protectionism after the lessons of the Great Depression is an idiot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 1:07 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Definitions like opinions differ massively, yours mine and your lecturers. It appears that Definitions do too?
Never mind let's see what transpires, it's certainly going to be interesting and probably uncomfortable for some.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2024 10:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
PTID wrote:
Definitions like opinions differ massively, yours mine and your lecturers. It appears that Definitions do too?
Never mind let's see what transpires, it's certainly going to be interesting and probably uncomfortable for some.


Think I'll go with the brainy folks thanks.

Trump is already on about raising taxes on imports. Stand by for a tariff war.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 5:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:56 pm
Posts: 6995
Joe Biden was left in place for too long, the Democrats didn’t appear to have any clear policies where Trump was saying drill, drill, drill, deport illegals, tariffs on imports etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 5:17 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:07 pm
Posts: 3863
Trump is the same as every other politician, he'll do some of what he said during the election campaign but he won't do a lot of what he said. They're all bullshitters at the end of the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 8:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:00 pm
Posts: 719
Pooly_Imp wrote:

Nope. It's a current term. The lectures I attended and books I read last month say so. Or maybe I should tell the lecturers and authors that Professor PTID says they are wrong?



You certainly should question those lecturers and authors whom you seem to admire so much.

But that humongous chip on your shoulder - which you've presumably paid a small fortune to acquire - won't ever allow that to happen...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 8:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:00 pm
Posts: 719
Pooly_Imp wrote:

Think I'll go with the brainy folks thanks.


Clearly the path of least resistance in your particular case...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm
Posts: 18786
PTID wrote:
Trump is the same as every other politician, he'll do some of what he said during the election campaign but he won't do a lot of what he said. They're all bullshitters at the end of the day.

whatever happens he,ll put the yanks first and at best we,ll only get any crumbs left on the table. it will be more about how the us stock exchange is doing than anything else and policies that will affect it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
Kenny Bottles wrote:
Pooly_Imp wrote:

Nope. It's a current term. The lectures I attended and books I read last month say so. Or maybe I should tell the lecturers and authors that Professor PTID says they are wrong?



You certainly should question those lecturers and authors whom you seem to admire so much.

But that humongous chip on your shoulder - which you've presumably paid a small fortune to acquire - won't ever allow that to happen...


They coined a term for the way the USA was run before WW2. Why would I question it? It WAS run that way. Weird.

I have no chip. I just don't like BS. I didn't pay a penny for this course.... but you did :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm
Posts: 36264
Thank fuck I was out of touch with civilisation from last Saturday till this morning.
So…Trump won…ah well, life goes on.

_________________
It’s what he does….. he’s a terrier.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
Snowy wrote:
Thank fuck I was out of touch with civilisation from last Saturday till this morning.
So…Trump won…ah well, life goes on.


Maybe, unless you are Ukrainian army.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2024 9:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm
Posts: 36264
Pooly_Imp wrote:
Snowy wrote:
Thank fuck I was out of touch with civilisation from last Saturday till this morning.
So…Trump won…ah well, life goes on.


Maybe, unless you are Ukrainian army.

French. :wink:

_________________
It’s what he does….. he’s a terrier.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2024 8:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm
Posts: 3441
Mikey76 wrote:
Whatever you want to call it, looking inwards will affect us. The EU block have the collective heft to make the US think but we’re out in a limb between a rock and a hard place.
Unless I’m missing something? Does anyone see how this will reduce costs and inflation here?



Half a brain if Trump strikes a nice deal with the UK on trade tariffs.


Why do i get this feeling you'd be really peed off if a deal was struck? sctatchinghead


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harris v Trump
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2024 11:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:36 pm
Posts: 2515
Sussex UK wrote:
Mikey76 wrote:
Whatever you want to call it, looking inwards will affect us. The EU block have the collective heft to make the US think but we’re out in a limb between a rock and a hard place.
Unless I’m missing something? Does anyone see how this will reduce costs and inflation here?



Half a brain if Trump strikes a nice deal with the UK on trade tariffs.


Why do i get this feeling you'd be really peed off if a deal was struck? sctatchinghead


Isolationism didn't work for the United States. Protectionism has never worked for anyone. I expect that all this talk of America first was just to win votes andthat Trump will take a more realistic approach to trade.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 126 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Gadgies online

Dodgepots browsing this forum: BansteadPoolie, bobby lemonade, Dorset Poolie, dykey, Essex poolie, Flying Hogans, Gatehouse, Infidel, itwontwork, JohnO55, jonnyraf, Manchester Exile, marcus richardsons third leg, Pools-on-trent, PTID, Robbie10, Saladswerver, Smokin Joe, Stomper409, stupoolie, UKP and 332 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  







The Bunker. The only HUFC forum with correct spelling and grammar.