President Elect's 'top team'

[RobinBHM]

So you've not heard the expression ‘may the best candidate win’?

In truth and as usual, it is you who has got it wrong. The best candidate wins but that does not mean they are the best leader. Which is the position you’re attempting to argue on.

You are getting confused

your problem is that you havent defined the criteria of "best candidate"

my definition is the criteria for the best person to run the country..........thats not Donald Trump he is morally corrupt, it makes him unsuitable

your criteria is the narrow definition of the person winning

 

[RobinBHM]

He's an opportunistic and duplicitous hypocrite who lied to the public in order to be elected.
You might want to watch the video below. These aren't right wingers, they're rank and file Labour Party supporters and activists who are very disappointed in him and his government so far.
While we're on the subject, what do you think Starmer's chief achievements have been so far? Most new PMs make a habit of hitting the ground running, unfortunately Starmer seems to have fallen on butt!

Tony stop whining, he won you lost, get over it

 

[sploo]

How many economists said on leaving the EU, the sky woudl fall opn our head? Yet we’re doing better than most EU countries.

The overwhelming majority said it would harm the UK economy, and it has. Exactly by how much has been muddied by Covid, but they were right.

 

[RobinBHM]

Yet we’re doing better than most EU countries.

not true

most of the countries in the EU have better standards of living and better public services than the UK

the problem in the UK and the USA is wealth inequality

 

[RobinBHM]

The overwhelming majority said it would harm the UK economy, and it has. Exactly by how much has been muddied by Covid, but they were right.

and most experts say Tariffs will harm the USA, but Delaney is unable to comment as he says he doesnt know

 

[sploo]

Well aside from Boris I agree; he lied with a cheeky smile. Starmer lies and then says ‘what you gonna to do about it’?
One is a cad, the other is more sociopathic. Both are compulsive liars.

Boris is a career liar (sacked from several jobs for such). He's very clearly a sociopath (charming, deceptive, prone to aggression when challenged). I'd wholeheartedly agree that he's a compulsive liar.

Starmer isn't in the same league. Would I trust him? No; he's a politician. But comparing him to Boris is crazy.

 

[paulrbarnard]

So Keir Starmer is the best candidate to be running the U.K.

Keir Starmer didn’t get voted to run the U.K. he just happened to be the leader of the party that has the most seats. This is different to Trump who actually was voted for by the electorate.

 

[RobinBHM]

Keir Starmer didn’t get voted to run the U.K. he just happened to be the leader of the party that has the most seats. This is different to Trump who actually was voted for by the electorate.

yes a fair point

 

[ey_tony]

the problem in the UK and the USA is wealth inequality

We aren't concerned about the USA as we can't influence anything that happens in the USA but here's an opportunity for you to have a rational discussion involving the UK.
How do you think the UK should go about reducing this so-called wealth inequality and if it can be done how will that improve the quality of public services?

 

[TRITON]

He's an opportunistic and duplicitous hypocrite who lied to the public in order to be elected.
You might want to watch the video below

No, no need. You tell me which promises were broken

 

[RobinBHM]

We aren't concerned about the USA as we can't influence anything that happens in the USA but here's an opportunity for you to have a rational discussion involving the UK.

Tony this thread is titled:

"President elects top team"

Which is why in this thread we are discussing American politics

How do you think the UK should go about reducing this so-called wealth inequality and if it can be done how will that improve the quality of public services?

it is not "so called" it is wealth inequality

here is a useful explanation of wealth inequality:

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

This

Let's face it, whatever Trump says or does, you and the other like minded left wing fringe element Trump hating supporters on here will find fault!
There is clearly no off-switch for your default Trump hate issues so any argument is pointless.

If you and others are offended by my use of the words 'fringe element' then I'm sorry but that is clearly how you come across.

The hysteria surrounding Trump and his eventual win by some individuals on here is nothing short of absurd and irrational. I can understand one's dislike of a politician but to take it to such levels...REALLY?

is so far from the truth. I often wonder if you are trying an Overton Window effect...

Nobody here "hates Trump", that's an extraordinary viewpoint to take. What people are pointing out is that Trump's policies WILL (it's a certainty) spark a very large economic downturn in domestic USA - particularly for the least well off - and that the economic down-turn might even spiral to other places around the globe, including the UK.
The words you read are not of "hate for Trump", instead they are well founded and well evidenced observations that highlight the very negative results.
If you believe that "highlighting negative results", is "hatred of an individual", you are very much mistaken. Although it would also explain why you think that those who highlight the evidence that contradicts "your opinion" are making a "personal attack on you". Which untrue, and also an incredibly poor analysis of what is actually going on.

?Perhaps you are actually aware of this, but just trying to stop people bringing credible material that contradicts your opinion, by "claiming" they are making a personal attack on you. That would be disingenuous and dishonest, though.?

 

[ey_tony]

Have you got a cat Robin as you're decidedly quiet!

Nobody here "hates Trump", that's an extraordinary viewpoint to take.

Well I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees it differently.

 

[Delaney]

You are getting confused

your problem is that you havent defined the criteria of "best candidate"

my definition is the criteria for the best person to run the country..........thats not Donald Trump he is morally corrupt, it makes him unsuitable

your criteria is the narrow definition of the person winning

Idiocracy.

 

[ey_tony]

Tony this thread is titled:

"President elects top team"

Which is why in this thread we are discussing American politics



it is not "so called" it is wealth inequality

here is a useful explanation of wealth inequality:

Robin with all due respect I don't need an explanation of what wealth inequality is or how it's defined. As you raised the subject by being critical of the USA and UK then I want to know how you would address it and how it will improve the quality of services?

Surely you can take time out from your obsession over Trump in order to address the issues that the UK faces and offer your solutions to the issue or do your discussion only relate to American politics?

 

[Jacob]

We aren't concerned about the USA as we can't influence anything that happens in the USA but here's an opportunity for you to have a rational discussion involving the UK.
How do you think the UK should go about reducing this so-called wealth inequality and if it can be done how will that improve the quality of public services?

Reducing (real) wealth inequality is not the objective. It is merely collateral damage from necessary tax collecting. Spending more on public services most certainly is a priority - as you hear everyday on the media with all the problems due to cost cutting.
Can you think of another way to raise the necessary?

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

To judge from the comments in this thread it is those who lost who seem the angriest.

It's happened, make it work, stop whinging

If it is a true statement that the UK is £100billion poorer, each year, then it is not a whinge. It's a statement of fact. And fact has no feelings. my personal view is that it would be best not to label those that bring evidence and receipts as "whingers", because that would be, in itself, a disincentive to bring facts and substantiated evidence to any discussions. And that would be a bad thing. <- That last sentence is not an opinion. It's a statement of fact. We require credible evidence from which to base our opinions, decisions and choices. Opinions don't stack up if they originate in a vacuum.

The finance industry is in complete agreement that Brexit is costing the UK around £100billion each year. And it is quite rare for such a broad agreement amongst the finance industry.

For me, it therefore ought to be repeated, intermittently, in order that we base our discussions upon the reality within which we find ourselves. Perhaps it might even act as a future warning so that the same or similar mistake is not enacted again?
For those that "don't like facts", I'm not really bothered whether anyone thinks the earth is flat or not, or whether they keep repeating their bogus claims - I'll keep bringing the credible evidence to illustrate that the opinion of the earth being flat is completely and utterly wrong. There's absolutely no hatred or malice in that endeavour. None at all. Even if flat earthers claim that I'm full of hatred towards them (perhaps because they don't like to be "shown up in public" or some such other infantile and immature emotional response). That's just as bogus as their claim of the earth being flat. It's likely a projection of the hatred that they feel when they fell they are "being schooled by a more knowledgeable individual". Which also isn't true. Just in their imagination.
It's just that a fact is a fact is a fact and no amount of bile or spewing of claims of hatred can change them.
ymmv.

 

[Delaney]

The overwhelming majority said it would harm the UK economy, and it has. Exactly by how much has been muddied by Covid, but they were right.

You’re deliberately side stepping my point.
I’m not interested in ‘economic orthodoxy’.
I’m interested in the truth.
You cannot even quantify by how much the damage is so your point isn’t valid.
Any claims would be subjective given that with ever shifting global trends, you would need a crystal ball to make any predictions.

What we so know is, we sre performing better than most major EU countries. Not one of your economists predicted that, so let’s lack it in with all this Brexit whinging.

It wasn’t a purely economic decision anyway. It was just as much based ln cultural and democratic concerns.

And no that is mot an invitation for you to start trying to bombard me with remain propoganda talking points about EU democracy.

 

[ey_tony]

No, no need. You tell me which promises were broken

Starmer and his cronies can't even define what a working person is let alone be honest and the pledges he made while he was touting for votes, which of those were included in the manifesto?
As for lies. for starters he bigged up his stance on free university education and now it appears they're increasing fees next year.

 

[RobinBHM]

Trump's tariff war could cost Americans more than $3,200 a year, experts claim​

American consumers would bear the brunt of Donald Trump's proposed tariffs, new analysis showed on Tuesday night as the world braced for a new era of U.S. protectionist policies.