Obama: It's in the interest of the United States that Britain remains in the EU
- Thread starter sonofagun
- Start date
English votes for English laws.
Laeotaekhun
Striker
Thanks marra, seems to make sense.
Laeotaekhun
Striker
D
Deleted member 7101
Guest
I think it's a mistake to assume that if we leave the EU we won't be able to secure trade deals with countries with whom we already trade and to whom we are a huge market. Trying to satisfy the interests of 27 different and often diverse interests could be more difficult than us being responsible only for our own interests. I think we'll be able to conclude our trading deals satisfactorily and the suspicion we won't is a tactic by Remain to divert attention from the real issue.
The real issue in this referendum is the political one of immigration and it's a matter of trying to envisage what life is going to be like here in 5,10 and 20 years time + if we vote to remain. We're perfectly capable of keeping the good things we've got through membership of the EU on things like Health & Safety,Climate Control and so on and adding to them as we go on. We are a small island with modern and sophisticated,but limited, facilities providing the vast majority here with opportunity for a relatively high standard of living,something many countries either in the EU already or applying for membership just don't have. We're not able to absorb the numbers of people who would go through hell and high water to get here in an ever larger EU where the free movement of people is an inviolate principle and which Cameron has been unsuccessful in negotiating us out of. We don't have enough houses,schools,roads,hospitals,police etc. to manage the numbers who could come. Outside the EU we can still allow people to come here to work,but in numbers we can manage.Outside the EU we can still have the standard of living we aspire to ,we'll still work and trade. But if our population balloons to such an extent as it could, our quality of life will suffer,particularly for our children and our grandchildren.
The real issue in this referendum is the political one of immigration and it's a matter of trying to envisage what life is going to be like here in 5,10 and 20 years time + if we vote to remain. We're perfectly capable of keeping the good things we've got through membership of the EU on things like Health & Safety,Climate Control and so on and adding to them as we go on. We are a small island with modern and sophisticated,but limited, facilities providing the vast majority here with opportunity for a relatively high standard of living,something many countries either in the EU already or applying for membership just don't have. We're not able to absorb the numbers of people who would go through hell and high water to get here in an ever larger EU where the free movement of people is an inviolate principle and which Cameron has been unsuccessful in negotiating us out of. We don't have enough houses,schools,roads,hospitals,police etc. to manage the numbers who could come. Outside the EU we can still allow people to come here to work,but in numbers we can manage.Outside the EU we can still have the standard of living we aspire to ,we'll still work and trade. But if our population balloons to such an extent as it could, our quality of life will suffer,particularly for our children and our grandchildren.
He's loved over here mate
Laeotaekhun
Striker
Chocolate Fireguard
Midfield
Obama's reign of tyranny began on the very day of his inauguration when he immediately took away the right of millions of Americans to not have a black president. Since then it's been one outrage after another perpetuated by the Kenyan with the anti-colonial mindset on the American people.
According to that poll he has influenced the debate but not in the way you want. Never mind, you're going to get the result you want. Ten or fifteen years ago you would have been arguing for us to join the euro. You would have handwaved away the idea that it might not be on a sound financial footing and may go to hell down the line and the argument that joining would eventually lead to a banking, financial and fiscal union you would have described as paranoid fantasies, the fever dreams of swivel-eyed nutters.
Seems Obama's intervention has had a detrimental effect on the remain campaign.
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls/
They had and 8 point lead last week
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls/
Logon or register to see this image
They had and 8 point lead last week
Randy Ostrich
Striker
I thought the first paragraph was blinding satire. Pity the second revealed it to be paranoid, borderline racist arse gravy
I thought the first paragraph was blinding satire. Pity the second revealed it to be paranoid, borderline racist arse gravy
Not even borderline.
Chocolate Fireguard
Midfield
I thought the first paragraph was blinding satire. Pity the second revealed it to be paranoid, borderline racist arse gravy
You were right the first time.
He doesn't seem quite so bad in retrospect though...
Joe Public
Striker
Well this is looking optimistic.
errant
Striker
Grossly...
Actually, he seems just as bad in retrospect as he did then.
The fact that Trump is a distinct oddity does not change that. Obama was a horror story for the US, leaving his country and his party so disconnected from what was once their core vote, a group of people they now appear to despise, that they found themselves losing an unloseable election to a Republican candidate who isn't a Republican and who has given as much cash to them as he has down the years to the Republicans. That takes some doing, but , as he often opined in his loudest and most banal tub thumping , "Yes we can!". Well yes he did.
Trump though, for whom I have little time, did at least one great service for his country if he does no other; he kept the corrupt and corrosive Clinton gang out of the White House. Unless the Democratic party grows up and starts being FOR something instead of being divisively against almost everything, he will be re-elected despite the frothing at the mouth of the increasingly deranged American broadcast media.
His campaign manager has just been convicted of fraud. His personal lawyer has just admitted guilt to a number of fraud charges, including campaign finance fraud in the campaign that put Trump in the White House, at - he says - Trump's personal direction. His National Security Advisor has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, and will likely be convicted or plead to crimes relating to working for a foreign power undeclared, his Deputy Campaign Manager has pled guilty to a variety of offences of fraud and financial misdemeanour, one of his foreign policy advisers has been convicted of lying to the FBI, his Health Secretary resigned after spending a quarter of a million quid on private flights at taxpayers expense, his Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency resigned after a string of ethical issues including using his role to try and get his wife a job, the first two Republicans in Congress to side with Trump in his campaign are facing charges of insider trading and of stealing political funds to spend on their own personal expenses, his appointees have made a string of crony appointments, such as making someone director of a service when they have no relevant experience at all, but played college football together and I've probably missed some.
...and we're only nineteen months in to his administration, and I have no doubt that there's much, much more to come out.
I have little time for the Clintons or indeed how the process and nature of US politics is largely corrupt and corrupted. But it seems daft to welcome as a great service the Clintons being kept out by a man and his circle who make them look like rank amateurs.
I am aware of all of the above. I'm also aware of the $45m Russian donation to the Clinton Trust and the circumstances around it. And so on.
Clinton spent almost nine times what Trump did in the run up to the election, some of which will almost certainly have broken rules. They ALL break the rules, there and here. But people are not stupid, much as the political elite always like to assume when those people vote the "wrong" way. They are less persuaded by polished adverts than their campaign runners tell them.
The Clintons are indeed "professional". They are the epitome of what was rejected at the last US election ; professional politicians on the make. Hillary Clinton complained that after six years of her husband being President, they "were almost broke". They aren't now. Cash for favours has done them very well. They are professional politicians, in it for what they can get.
Trump isn't. He is not my cup of tea at all, ( what a state of affairs when a great country is given him and an obsessed and sick old woman as a choice!) but he is not doing it for the money. That is obvious, and it is why he was elected. It's why he will be elected again.
I'll agree on the bit in brackets, but not doing it for the money? Seriously? He's not divested his business interests, like he said he would. Previous Presidents put their assets into a blind trust. Trump has not. We know little about how good his finances are, because unlike Presidents before him - and Hillary Clinton - he refuses to release his tax returns. But we do know that he's a multiple bankrupt who at one point was refused financing from every bank apart from Deutsche Bank - who have been massively fined for laundering dirty Russian money. But that's another post.
He spent one third of his first year in office in Trump properties, which moves money magically from the US taxpayer to his business. The cost of staying there, the cost of his entourage there, the accommodation for the secret service, everything they eat, drink, order, picked up by the US taxpayer, and put in his pockets. You're clearly no fan of Obama - what would have been your reaction if Obama had spent a third of his time - at taxpayer expense - staying in a business he owned?
Since he became President his beloved Mar a Lago has doubled its rates, and one of his main hotels increased theirs by 60%. He mentioned his private businesses dozens of times in his first year in office. Trump's said a lot of flattering things about China: a whole bunch of Trump trademarks in China which had been stuck have become magically unstuck. Companies bidding for government contracts for prisons etc. and foreign governments have started staying or holding events in Trump properties, when they didn't before.
If I'm being really honest - I think Trump ran for the grift and what he could make from the campaign funding, and for the ego, never expecting to win. But as he has, he is absolutely doing everything he can to monetise it.
