• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Trumps Beginning of the end

Status
Not open for further replies.
When Democrats have won, they did it by fielding young charismatic candidates: Obama: 47, Bill 46, JFK 43.

That isn't always the case - Truman and Carter were both older with the former winning a second term in his mid-60s.


This is not the Queen or Nelson Mandela, acting as a ceremonial Head of State. This is a 14 hour a day, six days a week, conflict management, Executive role.

Mandela's role was definitely NOT ceremonial and it should in no way be confused with or compared to that of the Queen !!
 
That isn't always the case - Truman and Carter were both older with the former winning a second term in his mid-60s.

Agreed, Jimmy Carter was 52 when he was elected, for just one term. He wasn't a success.
An age of 52 makes Jimmy Carter a full generation younger than the current three Democrat candidates.

I highlighted the three most successful Democrat Presidents, who were all in their forties when they were elected by the young US electorate.

In an era when the cultural and corporate leaders of our society are typically in their 40's and 50's, unlike a generation or two ago, when the senior men (sic) were always older.

The point you're missing about Mandela when he became President at 76 is that his leadership of ANC was Presidential. He wasn't a hands on head of the Executive, like Trump. Mandela didn't tell people to necklace key opponents. He had staff to do that for him.
 
Last edited:
Anyway, going back to the subject of the thread.

If you believe that this has been the beginning of the end, head down to the Bookies, where they will give you good odds on your belief.
 
Agreed, Jimmy Carter was 52 when he was elected, for just one term. He wasn't a success.
An age of 52 makes Jimmy Carter a full generation younger than the current three Democrat candidates.

As well as the likely Republican one.


I highlighted the three most successful Democrat Presidents, who were all in their forties when they were elected by the young US electorate.

Kennedy wasn't necessarily especially successful. He was in office for less than three years but he was charismatic, photogenic and died young so is viewed as iconic and with much fondness though with a fair degree of rose tint in the spectacles.


In an era when the cultural and corporate leaders of our society are typically in their 40's and 50's, unlike a generation or two ago, when the senior men (sic) were always older.

A generalisation. When Reagan took office in 1980 many said he was too old ("that old man that's over the hill" according to the awful Simply Red song) yet he was
several years younger than Trump is now.


Mandela didn't tell people to necklace key opponents. He had staff to do that for him.

What ???!!
 
White House Seeks Deal for Whistle-Blower to Speak to Congress
The administration are apparently working to release a "redacted" :rolleyes: version of the reported complaint, in response to Nancy Pelosi's formal announcement of an impeachment enquiry into the affair, in an attempt to defuse the situation. If this enquiry afforded sufficient evidence for formal impeachment proceedings to go ahead then it might posssibly get passed in the Democrat controlled House of Representative only to fail in the Republican controlled Senate. Indeed for that reason some Democrats fear this might be "gesture politics" with little chance of success and only serve to firm up TRUMP support in the forthcoming campaign for re-election.:confused:
Complete List: Who Supports an Impeachment Inquiry Against Trump?
Democrats launch formal Trump impeachment inquiry
 
Last edited:
It is interesting to note that Trump's response to this latest crisis has a lot of similarities to the case involving payments to Stormy Daniels.

In both instances, initial denials have been followed by a constantly changing version of events as he reacts to mounting evidence.
 
This guy Trump would have been great as a Dictator in a small @rsehole country funded by shady CIA.
 
Pentagon: US forces came under Turkish artillery fire in Syria - CNNPolitics
Widely held that TRUMPS announcement of American Special Forces withdrawal gave the green light to Turkey to invade. Apparently at the same time as announcing this to the world on Twitter he failed to directly inform the joint chiefs of staff of what should have been a line of command decision meaning American Troops were still there when it all kicked off! With a commander in chief like that who needs enemies.
 
Mr. P(ee) is a lunatic who seeks conflicts and is considered risky business.
This moron will cause the world to burn between people, religion, color of skin and military conflicts between countries.
Gotta be insane if people vote for this idiot!

What Mr. P(ee) now did to the Kurds withdrawing US forces is a major f@ck up which can never be forgotten.
Ban his @r$e!:rolleyes:
 
Moron should face court.
Hang him by the b@lls!
 
You can't criticise Trump for bringing back home the troops from Syria.

....because he didn't.

That's another problem with Trump, he makes bold and unpredictable announcements but then most of them are not actually carried-out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom