BruceVC

I do think what Romney said is true but its also just galvanized Trumps supporters even more ...but thats to be expected. Remember for the average Trump supporter he can do no wrong Romney is just seen as old school Republican establishment to them and his views are irrelevent

Okay that is one of the funniest things I've seen :lol:

This is a very good post, its reasonable and convincing on resonates with me on some levels, I need time to consider what you say but once again a very good post But let me ask you two questions Do you want the EU to disintegrate and if so what would be the future ...as you mention do you suggest a new EU? What criteria and laws would bind it together... If you want the EU to survive what would your immediate or long term changes to the EU be that you feel the EU has to implement to sustain itself..you say things like " member states need to cooperate and support each other" but thats a little unclear as its not specific enough

The ideology is what matters and yes the European countries ( who are mostly the EU now ) along with other Western countries did win\survive the Cold War Western Ideology = Democracies, respect for human rights, free press, respect for rule of law and free markets to drive the economy amongst other things And the EU is an excellent example of Western ideology and it is a success

Border control is issue to countries that have lots of non-registered refugees like for example, how Greece feels isolated and Austria has expressed their displeasure towards Germany's plans to block refugees on border. Also France didn't like Belgium's decision to control their border. If this countries can't form some sort agreement how border control in EU will work it will only strengthen anti-EU parties in said countries which will lead disintegration of EU. It as single would not be enough, but there is lots issues which EU member states currently have different opinions and have hard time to come up solution that all would be agree. We can see clear examples for this in how Greece feels that it is closed of from rest of EU and how UK (although border control issue has little do with UK's desires to leave as it isn't part of Schengen area) wants to leave from EU. No...no ...no Elerond please, stop thinking the EU is going to disintegrate Its not, border controls and refugees are not enough to end the EU. The main advantage of the EU are the economic advantages, the reduced trade tariffs and ease of countries trading within the EU borders. The EU has survived the Cold War, the rise of Fascism and numerous real economic crisis's...and it has endured Yet you guys think somehow some weak, impoverished, disillusioned and landless people who come from war torn countries where there are no functional governments is going to somehow lead to the end of the prestigious and relevant EU? Greece due to austerity was the most likely country to leave the EU, under Tsipras and all the " harsh" conditions of austerity they could have voted to leave...and guess what? They didn't even leave the EU. So I don't see any real evidence except for right-wing rhetoric that countries " will be leaving the EU due to borders and refugees" Its hyperbole and demagoguery and I encourage all people in the EU to ignore it, the EU will persevere ...the EU will survive this refugee crisis I guarantee you

No, its more than his normal disdain for anyone who questions him. Thats why he refused to attend the last Fox News Iowa Debate http://www.ohio.com/news/break-news/trump-refuses-to-participate-in-gop-debate-calls-fox-s-megyn-kelly-a-lightweight-1.657687

Hurlshot you mustn't insult SJW....they not all weirdos. Think of all the the good the SJ movement has done for the world

Oh yes he does dislike any hard questioning but its particularly vexing for him when someone like Megyn Kelly questions him ....you should go back and watch all the debates he has with her and look at his facial expressions....the contempt and annoyance he has for her is not normal, its very funny

Yes but the initial number is very low, so the figure 822 % may seem excessive but not if you consider there were only 3490 immigrants in 2014 and now there are 32150 Its not a large number? It depends how you look that number. For example UK which has 12 times of Finland's population took only 6k more than Finland. And France that also has twelve time population of Finland took only bit over twice that Finland which seems to already case quite lot problems to them. And when adjust first time asylum applicants to population, then even Germany took less people than Finland. Only Hungary, Sweden and Austria have taken more people adjusted to population than Finland. So 32k isn't that big number put its more than population in most of Finland's cities. Fair enough, I can see the concern both you and Meshugger have..its valid but only if the Finnish government continues to allow 30K of refugees into Finland every year..but it wont. I think there will be far less if any refugees coming into Finland in the future

I have to say the dislike Trump has of any women questioning him is palpable Especially last night when Megyn Kelly was grilling him...he can see him squirm...he really hates having to answer to a women

Yes but the initial number is very low, so the figure 822 % may seem excessive but not if you consider there were only 3490 immigrants in 2014 and now there are 32150 Its not a large number?

That's just a calculated way of building up his votes by bragging. Many people are susceptible to ineccessant and extravagant bragging because they see it as a sign of confidence, and over time even believe some of it. Just because he said it doesn't mean he believes his own bull****. He's got nothing on her spontaneous outburst of psychopathy "He bull****s on purpose, so he shouldn't be held accountable for bull****ting"? The easiest way to hold him accountable is not to vote for him. Other than that he did nothing illegal. Neither did Hillary, but my point was that her outburst speaks of her true character whereas he's not hiding anything in that regard. He's a showman who knows his act and audience. Even so, he isn't an advocate of wars and mass murder like she is. Methinks you've become too complacent with the piss warm pool of western politics, where everyone is disgorged from the same cloning vat and now that something a tad different has appeared everyone is suffering from an acute case of petite bourgeois revulsion. Its true, you really dont have a clue about how US politics works

Just watched the final episode of Suits in the latest season...all I can say is it was hectic and brilliant

That lady has a very myopic view of politics to blame SJW for the state of the Republican party? Also you notice how vitriolic the Republican candidacy race has been, its been very bitter. Compare that to Clinton vs Sanders, you tel me you don't prefer the way the Democrats debate? Yes that is what he is saying, a Republican future with candidates only like Trump will indeed lead to the demise of the Republicans But I can't see that happening, I think Trump will be the first and last of someone who has his type of political views and ethos

WOD, this should be good practice. You need to prepare yourself for a lot a disappointments if Trump becomes the US president

Yeah, gotta love politicians. Yeah it does demonstrate some hypocrisy...hard to deny it. But I suppose Trump has changed since then and I dont think Romney ever really thought someone like Trump would ever get this close to the Republican candidacy

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/mitt-romney-presidential-race-speech/index.html Romney makes a lot of sense during this speech

Nice one Shady You say your first tour? Were 2 years at a time so does that mean you also went in 07?

You know, in my head I'm still a young buck but then you get reminded how much time has passed. Getting old is the worst. I was brushing my teeth the other day and took a good look and my face in the mirror. I look just like my father did now. How the heck the that happen? But if I'm having a mid-life crisis of some kind I'll just drown it in good bourbon. That does not solve any problems true. But it does offer a respite. Bourbon never ceases to make things better

Don't think she has authority over the military enough to 'use' it. At least she probably won't surround herself with devils like GWB did with Clark, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld. Hillary is as bad as any of them. She doesn't need to surround herself with them. Nah she is fine, I would suggest you consider a reality where she becomes the next USA president...compare her to Trump and his ideas of how to " make America great again " ( This is one of the many Trump contradictions. The USA is already great, I'm not sure how much more great Trump can make it ? ) And this video Drowsy keeps posting with some sound bites about Hilary taken out of context is no reason I have lost any faith in her and I encourage others to ignore them as well

Bruce has always been a supporter of Hillary. Indeed, I am But I like Sanders, its just I believe Hilary is better suited overall to be the next US president I thought you didn't like his economic policies. Yes thats correct, well I don't like his more radical economic ideas like the whole restructuring of the financial sector and big business But I don't dislike him on a personal level as he really seems to care about people in the USA who are battling financial So I want Hilary to get the nomination but I won't be very disappointed if Sanders gets it as he also respects most of the Obama legacy

Bruce has always been a supporter of Hillary. Indeed, I am But I like Sanders, its just I believe Hilary is better suited overall to be the next US president

Yeah, this view that " people only vote for Hilary because she is a women " definitely doesn't apply to the vast majority of Democrats We can see this as Sanders initially was no competition to Hilary but as the months have gone by he has gained more and more support....if Democrats only cared about gender then Sanders wouldn't be doing so well Democrats vote on the policy objectives of candidates....if they believe the candidate and like what they hear then they would support that candidate. Its the same as the Republicans And Hilary Clinton basically represents the Obama legacy which many Americans support and want to continue. It makes sense to me, I would vote for Hilary if I could

But foreign policy is Hillary's weak point. Sanders has been consistently right on every matter since the nineties, while Hillary has taken the wrong side. Her brief job as Secretary of State consists mostly of failures like the "Russian reset button". Experience does not mean that you have been a bobblehead on a shelf in the Obama administration, you must point to situations where Hillary's own unique advice and insight has shifted the course of the US to the better. If not, she would be replaceable by anyone. Frankly, I can't think of any such situations, on the contrary with her views I think she might be toxic to US foreign policy. Yes Clinton has been following the standard " Obama idea of foreign policy " ..but for me this is exactly the right policy so why would she decide to redefine it? So for example, The USA respects the veto of the UNSC even if flawed like the initial required military intervention in Syria The USA is not automatically agreeing to the views of historical " friends" around military intervention. So despite massive pressure from the likes of Israel and Saudi Arabia the Obama administration did not just bomb Iran. They followed the path of negotiations The USA is prepared to let other countries take the military lead in regions where typically it was the USA who had to lead. Its okay if there is a perception that Russia " outmaneuvered" the USA in Syria. Its fine if Russia resolves the conflict one way or another I like Sanders but what are some examples of him being on the right side of policy decision since the 90'S ...I feel this would be a subjective debate

No they don't tend to be better, Western countries are better as they offer there citizens overall the best quality of life This is an irrefutable fact. And its not about the view that " white people are running Western countries" its because in Western countries certain laws and views exist that are enforced and end of the day despite criticism these laws are the best way to ensure a happy and prosperous society So in Africa most people want a working and economically transformed continent ....but you still have certain countries where leaders disregard good governance and human rights. This in turn leads to social and political instability and lack of investment. So in the African context certain leaders need to realize that rhetoric is not enough to achieve the required economic transformation ...you need to actually implement the required laws and enforce them