"Trump is fighting for the underdog."

As long as the dog isn't so far under that he/she needs welfare support, eh? So how do you define "underdog"?

So it is ok to be on welfare because your job disappeared while you were in it, but not for other reasons then. Or what?

No, I mean you are an "underdog", according to your definition, if you are on welfare because your job disappeared while you were in it, but not for other reasons. Or are you saying that being on welfare for other reasons is okay too?

'okay' meaning you qualify as an underdog

Raff on Jun 11, 2016 at 2:50 PM
"What is more interesting to me is how and intelligent person like you supports Trump."

Your question wasn't directed at me Raff, but I can answer that I might vote for Trump because he strongly appeals to those who object to such obnoxious political elitism as your question displays. You shouldn't be so shy. You should say what your question really meant. In other words, your question simply comes over as "How dare you vote for such a person, you pleb?!!"

Yes, I dare. And fuck you, too.
Like the media, you appear to not understand why so many US electors are voting for him.

In fact, I probably won't vote for him because I regard it as unethical to vote in US elections while I am not resident, even though I am a US citizen.

UK manufacturing jobs have been exported to the Far East.

US manufacturing jobs are being exported to the same destination though different orientation.

If Trump and the US stops funding Climate Science, the Chinese can afford to carry it on, but I think they are more intelligent.

Those made redundant in the UK and US won't be those who had real jobs anyway and they can expect as much sympathy as they have shown to others, throughout the manufactured climate science crisis.

If Trump ends the manufacturing of climate science, it will be a great achievement.

A US president is not all powerful. Even if Trump were to be elected he would be so constrained by the environmental-industrial complex (and its political hold on Congress) that he will unable to do much about climate change. He will also need to appease voters about his Mexican wall, which will also not be an easy task.

michael hart, you misunderstand. I quite understand why the "blue collar and low income white collar" white population in the USA should be attracted by him. What I don't understand is why an intelligent person who is none of those things (except perhaps white) would support him.

Raff, what is wrong with ending the Manufacturing of Climate Science? Let us all give the other 3% of Climate Scientists a go for the next 20 years, and then we can work out if there ever was a problem worth worrying about. It will be so much cheaper, and 97% of the world's population can think of better things to do with the money.

Political interference in growing food does not have a great track record. Go to Zimbabwe for details.

Give people food now if required, and ask them what they need to feed themselves next year, and the year after. Political interference from clueless idiots is not going to be a high priority.

Political interference in growing food does not have a great track record. Go to Zimbabwe for details.

Or look up "ground nut scheme". And keep in mind that, in 1948:
- Britain was skint
- £1M then would be worth around £30M - £40M today.

I think that the reasons why "intelligent" people would welcome Donald Trump's election as president of the USA is likely to remain beyond Raff's comprehension even if spelled out.

I dread the possibility that Trump will get elected. Not for his political views, that's for the American public to judge upon, but because, although eminently electable, he has no political track record and displays little evidence of having any skill there. He comes over as a bully and that won't work in Washington. He will have to work with a largely hostile Republican party (who don't really believe he is one of them), possibly a hostile congress and senate, and perhaps soon a disheartened populus. The better US Presidents of the past (those that got things done and redirected their country), like FDR, Reagan and Johnson, were consummate politicians able to wheeler deal and forge political alliances. I fear Trump doesn't have this heritage, little to no leverage, the existing power structure won't let him function effectively, and the USA will go rudderless.

Alan Kendall
Isn't it the wheeler dealing that many of Trump's supporters dislike the most. Wheeler dealing that ignores their concerns and desires. Depending on how much support he has if elected then these people who wheel and deal may well show their true colours as Vicars of Bray, quite happily working with and for Trump they are, after all politicians.

Time will tell

Alan kendall - I think you may be underestimating Donald Trump on several different axes.

I'm not sure how you reconcile those views with his winning the Republican nomination, his candidacy having been endorsed by a good proportion of the former contenders for the nomination, including a number of senators and state governors.

Martin, my guess is that you wont spell out his appeal because you don't know how to spell it, or because when you try his name comes out not as Donald Trump but as Racist Bigot. His appeal is visceral (to use a favorite word of the big Yin) not intellectual.

He does seem to have a talent at hoodwinking investors. Read about how he fleeced investors in Atlantic City casinos and you wonder why people are so gullible as to invest in him: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/nyregion/donald-trump-atlantic-city.html

SandyS. You may be right. He is electable because he appeals as an outsider. Wheeling and dealing is only one of the political skills he will need. Working with others, including opponents, is necessary in American politics and I don't see indications that Trump has this ability. In his business dealings he seems to be confrontational using his power to steemroller opposition. When he has come up against organized opposition (like over his Scottish golf courses) he has been unable to negotiate a compromise and resorted to threats and bluster). This will decidedly not work in Washington.

MartinA. I never said he wasn't electable. Defeated challangers for the nomination traditionally show solidarity with the succesful candidate for the sake of the party. It means little. How many state governors and senators supported Trump early? Now it's a bandwagon effect, everyone who has jumped is seeking advantage. More to the point is the numbers who have yet to speak out in support. If Trump is ever perceived as damaging the Republican Party look out. He will be rendered near impotent. (The most extreme example of this was the last year of Nixon's presidency). As my earlier post intimated, this stalemate is what I fear. All those who oppose America will be able to make hay.

Time will indeed tell.

Textbook racism, was that what Ryan called it? Trump is a racist, whether he married a foreigner or not. Embrace Trump and you embrace racism.

I well remember George H.W. Bush's "Read my lips. No New Taxes".

You are all still talking about whether he can be elected. I'm discussing whether he can be presidential and work with the other two arms of government. I haven't seen anything yet here to offset my fears, but perhaps you're still thinking.

I haven't even touched yet upon whether some of his populist proposals would pass the Supreme Court. There's just no way he could ban the entry of Moslems - that's a broadside across the boughs of the Constitution.

I think (and I hope I'm wrong) that Trump has the real potential to tear his country apart. It's polarized already. US politics with Trump has already become toxic. The Demoncrats will be forced to follow.

Climate Scientivists want everybody to be fearful about everything they say. As they have a 97% track record of being wrong, there is a high level of confidence in ignoring their fears about Trump.

If Trump listens to the other 3% of climate scientists, the phoney war against CO2 may soon be over. That is the one fear of climate scientivists that may prove right.

Whether he would make a good President of the USA, I don't know, but the UK outside the EU, would certainly benefit from Trump as POTUS

Alan kendall
I think, but could be wrong, that a lot of Americans regard Presidents Clinton and Obama as very weak and not standing up for America and America's interests. They will therefore be quite happy with a couple of years of intransigence by Trump; similar to the Russian support for Putin. Almost an attitude of if the rest of the world hates him he must being doing a good job for us. When you have the world's largest or second largest economy for trade deals you don't have to do much compromising, similarly for military issues. Putin's Achilles Heel is the former, if Trump encourages US manufacturing to stay or return home by curtailing the EPA's remit and reducing green energy subsidies he may even get a second term. You may even get a pleasant surprise.

Also meant to say that as regards preventing certain groups from entering the USA, isn't that up to the Supreme Court to decide finally or have I got that wrong? Doesn't seem that different from what is being proposed by the Brexit campaign, only let those people in who have the skills we need on a points based system. Certain religions give you negative points.