Political Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

1970crow

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
26,739
Likes
27,480
Location
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
But does the president determine which wars to enter... which we then just follow regardless.

Different parties have different economic policy. Trump is talking about reduced taxes, increased spending & increased interest rates.
What is there to suggest that Trump will take the US into more wars than any of his predecessors? Increased interest rates off a base of 0%, shock horror. Was Clinton's policy to keep them at 0?
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,522
Likes
38,516
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
What is there to suggest that Trump will take the US into more wars than any of his predecessors? Increased interest rates off a base of 0%, shock horror. Was Clinton's policy to keep them at 0?
Where did I suggest Trump would take the USA into more wars? If anything he appears to want better relationship with other large nations like Russia & Chinese, so will probably reduce US influence. Time will tell.

Trump has said he wants to tax less & increase spending, which does what to interest rates...
 

Apsaalooke

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Posts
2,189
Likes
3,054
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Double Blues
Only difference is Obama won in a landslide in the college vote (365-173) and the popular vote (69 million to 59 million) whilst Trump won the college vote (322-216) and lost the popular vote by about 3 million.

Thought there was a possibility he wouldn't even get to the inauguration on Jan 20.
The popular vote is meaningless though as candidates hardly bother to campaign in states they have no chance of winning eg California for the Republicans.

Disclaimer: I think Trump's a jerk
 

Geoffa32

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Posts
42,833
Likes
34,574
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
The Autobots and Team America
I don't really take much interest, the whole show is far too long and boring. It's like all the pre-draft discussion on dozens of players, of which, only about 5 will end up making their way to us. Ask these people who are crazily devoted to who becomes President to explain exactly what will be the difference to Australia over the next few years if either candidate had gotten elected. I've asked a couple of very passionate observers and there's nothing in response but buzzwords and seemingly empty fear. I've asked people to explain his specific areas of complete power, I've never taken any interest in understanding the President's unilateral powers as opposed to their 2 houses of parliament, surprisingly, neither have the passionate observers that I'd had the displeasure to try and learn something from.

I am not a massive follower of politics, but do enjoy economics. It is economists who rule the world, not politicians.

Was listening to the BBC World Business report this morning and the guy on there suggested how Trump rhetoric is just that. He has a big head of steam that will dissipate into nothing. And the lefties who are panicking in New York and San Francisco really have nothing to worry about

A couple of things he mentioned were

- No private enterprise will open coal fired power plants on the insistence of a President who is likely to be in office for a maximum four years.
- There is too much vested interest in the Free Trade Agreement with them and China for him to roll it back.
- He wont be able to build his wall across the Mexican Border. or enforce true border control They can't afford it. The key reason why border patrol is so loose down there is because (a) it costs money to police and (b) states like Texas, California and Arizona rely on the labour of Mexican illegal immigrants.
- The pure economic situation they are in wont allow him to instigate any real tax reform.
- America will eventually have to step up its "protection" of the world via its military. Certainly wont be scaling back the NATO agreement. It is a massive part of their economy and war is good for the economy.
 

deaneus

You wouldn’t believe me if I told you
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
18,486
Likes
34,907
Location
*sigh*
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
this week, the Hawks!
Moderator #1,833
I have been telling my wife, I would give him 12 months before he is assassinated since he managed to win the vote thanks to the lies he spouted to the ignorant masses. After this week I now revise that timeline and make it 6 months.
I'd suspect the far-far-right wingers on that one, angry that after he got elected he didn't fulfill his promises about 'foreigners'

hell, the alt-right is already fracturing - Mike Cernovich and Tim Treadstone are now calling each other cucks about attending the Inauguration "Deploraball"

I though Barrak Obama would not live past his first 12 months in office. His name and being black being a cause of angst among the redneck gun toting masses of America.
Me too, but as time went on I got more relaxed about it.

But does the president determine which wars to enter... which we then just follow regardless.
I believe that Congress has to vote to go to war... i should google that one day

EDIT: joint resolution from both houses, then the declaration signed by El Presidente - but they haven't done this since WW2...
 
Last edited:

Kristof

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Posts
16,956
Likes
16,467
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Soft spot for Brisbane
Thread starter #1,835
What is there to suggest that Trump will take the US into more wars than any of his predecessors? Increased interest rates off a base of 0%, shock horror. Was Clinton's policy to keep them at 0?
More wars?

I would think his statements about fighting ISIS means that they are going to accelerate aggression against fundamentalist Islam.

Currently they are fighting them in four separate conflicts/countries. You'd assume that would increase. He has already stated he would increase the bombing campaign and that he knows more than the generals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kristof

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Posts
16,956
Likes
16,467
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Soft spot for Brisbane
Thread starter #1,838
I am not a massive follower of politics, but do enjoy economics. It is economists who rule the world, not politicians.

Was listening to the BBC World Business report this morning and the guy on there suggested how Trump rhetoric is just that. He has a big head of steam that will dissipate into nothing. And the lefties who are panicking in New York and San Francisco really have nothing to worry about

A couple of things he mentioned were

- No private enterprise will open coal fired power plants on the insistence of a President who is likely to be in office for a maximum four years.
- There is too much vested interest in the Free Trade Agreement with them and China for him to roll it back.
- He wont be able to build his wall across the Mexican Border. or enforce true border control They can't afford it. The key reason why border patrol is so loose down there is because (a) it costs money to police and (b) states like Texas, California and Arizona rely on the labour of Mexican illegal immigrants.
- The pure economic situation they are in wont allow him to instigate any real tax reform.
- America will eventually have to step up its "protection" of the world via its military. Certainly wont be scaling back the NATO agreement. It is a massive part of their economy and war is good for the economy.
All excellent points.

You should check out the Planet Money podcast, a really interesting wrap up of economic issues.
 

Kristof

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Posts
16,956
Likes
16,467
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Soft spot for Brisbane
Thread starter #1,839
The most vilified demographic in today's PC society is the white adult male. Particularly the rich ones.

It ok to wish death upon Trump?
It's only rich white men that say that.

As a rich white guy, I don't have much pity for me or people like me. We do alright.
 

1970crow

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
26,739
Likes
27,480
Location
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
Where did I suggest Trump would take the USA into more wars? If anything he appears to want better relationship with other large nations like Russia & Chinese, so will probably reduce US influence. Time will tell.

Trump has said he wants to tax less & increase spending, which does what to interest rates...
You brought up Australia being led into wars. I'd asked the difference between the 2 candidates and war was your answer. Is that the full length and breadth of his fiscal policy? How does it differ from Clinton? Did she not also want to tax less and be able to spend more? I'm simply asking for interested parties to be able to provide a stated and legitimate point of difference between the 2 candidates and extrapolate that out to something meaningful to the average Australian person.

Not that you've been particularly partisan Kane, but you've cleared nothing up for me. War and interest rates, the former you've backtracked on, the latter is a function of a re-burgeoning economy.
 

1970crow

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
26,739
Likes
27,480
Location
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
More wars?

I would think his statements about fighting ISIS means that they are going to accelerate aggression against fundamentalist Islam.

Currently they are fighting them in four separate conflicts/countries. You'd assume that would increase. He has already stated he would increase the bombing campaign and that he knows more than the generals.
Just the US fighting ISIS is it? God forbid our government makes its own decision as to whether to join the US (and others) in fighting the good people of ISIS. How did Clinton's policy on ISIS differ? I keep asking these exceedingly simple questions to the passionately interested, but I always get a one way response and it's always about Trump, never about the policy of the alternate.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,522
Likes
38,516
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
You brought up Australia being led into wars. I'd asked the difference between the 2 candidates and war was your answer. Is that the full length and breadth of his fiscal policy? How does it differ from Clinton? Did she not also want to tax less and be able to spend more? I'm simply asking for interested parties to be able to provide a stated and legitimate point of difference between the 2 candidates and extrapolate that out to something meaningful to the average Australian person.

Not that you've been particularly partisan Kane, but you've cleared nothing up for me. War and interest rates, the former you've backtracked on, the latter is a function of a re-burgeoning economy.
Are you upset that you made an incorrect assumption that I believed Trump would want more war.

I was just pointing out that because unfortunately we follow the USA into most wars, the thoughts of different presidents & congress will impact on our military.

Also, being linked to a world economy, including the large USA economy, they do impact on our economy... so different economic policy will impact on us.

I have no desire to enter into a major discussion on this, particularly given too early to tell what Trump will change, given his bark is louder than his bite.
 

1970crow

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
26,739
Likes
27,480
Location
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
Are you upset that you made an incorrect assumption that I believed Trump would want more war.

I was just pointing out that because unfortunately we follow the USA into most wars, the thoughts of different presidents & congress will impact on our military.

Also, being linked to a world economy, including the large USA economy, they do impact on our economy... so different economic policy will impact on us.

I have no desire to enter into a major discussion on this, particularly given too early to tell what Trump will change, given his bark is louder than his bite.
I'm not upset, I asked for a difference between the 2 that results in such passionate feelings from a portion of Australian society. You bought up us following the US into war as a reason for the passion. Logically that implies that Trump is more likely to careen us into war, at least in the minds of the passionate anti-Trump brigade. Now you're saying it's just a general concern and not related to a differentiating point between the 2 candidates. We were never discussing general international politics.

If you're discussing general international concerns, then I share those concerns. But I was very clear that I think there's more passion than knowledge in this discussion and I'm keen to learn where Trump differs so greatly to Clinton and how that will impact us. You're responses didn't go close to addressing the differences, so I wonder why you bothered at all.

I have learned something though, deaneus has googled and it appears as though both houses of US parliament need to agree to go to war, so neither candidate would have had unilateral power in that regard. So any further war mongering as described by Kristof looks to be off the table.

Now we can thrash out Clinton's desire to keep interest rates at 0% and that'll be the end of your stated concerns.
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,522
Likes
38,516
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
I'm not upset, I asked for a difference between the 2 that results in such passionate feelings from a portion of Australian society. You bought up us following the US into war as a reason for the passion. Logically that implies that Trump is more likely to careen us into war, at least in the minds of the passionate anti-Trump brigade. Now you're saying it's just a general concern and not related to a differentiating point between the 2 candidates. We were never discussing general international politics.

If you're discussing general international concerns, then I share those concerns. But I was very clear that I think there's more passion than knowledge in this discussion and I'm keen to learn where Trump differs so greatly to Clinton and how that will impact us. You're responses didn't go close to addressing the differences, so I wonder why you bothered at all.

I have learned something though, deaneus has googled and it appears as though both houses of US parliament need to agree to go to war, so neither candidate would have had unilateral power in that regard. So any further war mongering as described by Kristof looks to be off the table.

Now we can thrash out Clinton's desire to keep interest rates at 0% and that'll be the end of your stated concerns.
I was offering up general opinion as to how the USA politics can impact on Australia.

I doubt Trump will be more war hungry than his predecessors, as likes Putin (so far). He doesn't have financial interests in weapons like the Bushes & more interested in business generally.

I think much of his campaign was big talking bollocks, so best to wait & see what he actually does.
 

Bicks

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Posts
29,564
Likes
41,263
Location
Victorian Central Highlands
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Panthers, GWV Rebels Beaufort Crows
I'm not upset, I asked for a difference between the 2 that results in such passionate feelings from a portion of Australian society. You bought up us following the US into war as a reason for the passion. Logically that implies that Trump is more likely to careen us into war, at least in the minds of the passionate anti-Trump brigade. Now you're saying it's just a general concern and not related to a differentiating point between the 2 candidates. We were never discussing general international politics.

If you're discussing general international concerns, then I share those concerns. But I was very clear that I think there's more passion than knowledge in this discussion and I'm keen to learn where Trump differs so greatly to Clinton and how that will impact us. You're responses didn't go close to addressing the differences, so I wonder why you bothered at all.

I have learned something though, deaneus has googled and it appears as though both houses of US parliament need to agree to go to war, so neither candidate would have had unilateral power in that regard. So any further war mongering as described by Kristof looks to be off the table.

Now we can thrash out Clinton's desire to keep interest rates at 0% and that'll be the end of your stated concerns.
A legit tweet from the Russian Embassy confirmed by the ABC's Latika Bourke...

 

1970crow

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Posts
26,739
Likes
27,480
Location
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
I was offering up general opinion as to how the USA politics can impact on Australia.

I doubt Trump will be more war hungry than his predecessors, as likes Putin (so far). He doesn't have financial interests in weapons like the Bushes & more interested in business generally.

I think much of his campaign was big talking bollocks, so best to wait & see what he actually does.
Fair enough, I understand what you were doing now, but it's not what I was asking. Even the dullest amongst us can work out how decisions made in the US will influence Australia. I'm keen for the super passionate, anti-Trump people to explain how his policies will impact us in a different way to Clinton's. And not because I have a pre-determined view, I sit here completely ignorant because I couldn't give a shit because I don't understand their system. But if someone can explain rationally why they're so passionate either way, then I'm more than happy to learn. But, as I said earlier, it seems more a tenet than a rationally formed view.

Almost like our parties aren't providing enough difference to get worked up over, so perhaps people are seeking it elsewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom