Trump says he bombed Iran

[govshill2]

No, the people of Europe aren't behind Trumb.

Back when he started his first term, when he said some outright lies about how good he was, the whole of the UN laughed at him.

He has since put NATO on shaky ground, has screwed up trade with the EU by ridiculous tariffs, has threatened takeover of a sovereign EU member country (which they responded to by activating their military against invasion), and, at several meetings between various European leaders, Trumb has shown he is clueless about almost everything, and people have, of course, laughed at him and his nonsense.

Oh, and Trumb has continued to criticize everyone from other countries at every opportunity, so even the far-right ultranationalists from the EU hate him, too.


The DNC is a purely US political movement. Outside of the US, no US political party has ever been in power, nor are they electable in other countries. Most EU countries have fairer and more sophisticated political systems than the USA.

Nor does the DNC support open migration in the USA. Just doesn't, and hasn't.


As in the USA, most rapes in the EU are perpetrated by someone the victim knows, such as an intimate partner, family member, or acquaintance. Although statistics vary country by country in the EU, between 80-90% of rapes outside of direct family are committed by nationals, not illegal immigrants.


Trumb has never won on public popularity. He has never achieved approval of greater than 50%. He is currently disfavored by the majority. Fair elections would have never elected Trumb. His current approval rating is 37.9% with a disapproval rating of 59.3%.

Tracking the Presidency - The Economist

Trumb was never elected by a 'landslide margin' as he claims. He is a self-promoting liar.

Trumb got into power because the electoral college system is not representative of the choices of US citizens. It is a 'bait and switch' system that elects the President on the basis of having 270 or more votes of 'elites', not those of about 340 million eligible voters (only about half of which are registered voters).

""Trumb got into power because the electoral college system is not representative of the choices of US citizens. It is a 'bait and switch' system that elects the President on the basis of having 270 or more votes of 'elites', not those of about 340 million eligible voters (only about half of which are registered voters).""

I'll start with your last inane reference.  Trump won the popular vote in 2024.    [glitter and pom poms]

[David64]

Brits think Trump is a senile idiot.  So do the people of Europe.

As for the rest of your nonsense, maybe take a break from GB News and stop your racist homophobic rants?

Tell me one reason we should care what you think ? You have nothing we can't do without or produce ourselves, but on the other hand you depend on us for 40% of your crude oil. Jealousy is a hell of a thing, innit ?

[EXETER]

""Trumb got into power because the electoral college system is not representative of the choices of US citizens. It is a 'bait and switch' system that elects the President on the basis of having 270 or more votes of 'elites', not those of about 340 million eligible voters (only about half of which are registered voters).""

I'll start with your last inane reference.  Trump won the popular vote in 2024.    [glitter and pom poms]

Yes, Trump got 49.8% of the Popular Vote in 2024 as compared to 48.3% for Harris.  That's still less than 50%. Winning the Popular Vote does not mean that someone is "popular".

[chr0naut]

""Trumb got into power because the electoral college system is not representative of the choices of US citizens. It is a 'bait and switch' system that elects the President on the basis of having 270 or more votes of 'elites', not those of about 340 million eligible voters (only about half of which are registered voters).""

I'll start with your last inane reference.  Trump won the popular vote in 2024.    [glitter and pom poms]

With 49.8% - between only two viable Presidential candidates?

Even the US definition of 'popular vote' is bait and switch to ensure that the elites get 'their' people in power.

"Government of the people, for the people, and by the people", what a joke. They've even got slogans so you don't have to think about the truth.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

You might wish this to be true but it isn't so . Even the people of Europe are behind Trump. Nobody wants to go back to DNC open migration and support for illegals while persecuting the citizens who built the countries. Sex perversions of the worst type forcing themselves on everyone including toddlers.    250,000 raped European women and concerned citizens love Trump.  

Paying desperate homeless people 2 dollars to vote blue. Massive voter fraud. Trump is fixing all of this and all sane people like it. Fair elections means Red Wave.

I could point you to genuine European polls and you'd only be pleased with Hungary, which is 13% higher than the USA. Poland is next highest in Europe. Israel use to be way up at 66%, but after "The Iran deal" it fell to 38%, or about 2 points behind the USA. 

I wont tell you the rest of Europe, because even "Far Right" Italy doesnt like him much.... but Orban's party has his back!

As for the rest, that's the soup of every hot button source of sensationalized paranoia in amalgamation. Can't stop Tecato Gusano, it's meant to eat your brain.

But what I can do is point out how LITTLE chance a red wave has right now. This is almost universally the point where the flow ebbs and Trump loses the trifecta. And he is so acutely aware of this inevitability he attempted to prevent it through aggressive redistricting, which likely still won't be enough to do anything. 

A VERY VERY RIGGED AND UNFAIR MIDTERM ELECTION sees a president with less than a 49% approval maintain the house with that close a majority, historically speaking. 

Actually anything below 50% isn't promising or expected. 
 

The 50% Rule: Since 1946, presidents with approval ratings below 50% have lost an average of roughly 37 seats in the House, according to Gallup.

[DennisR6]

Tell me one reason we should care what you think ? You have nothing we can't do without or produce ourselves, but on the other hand you depend on us for 40% of your crude oil. Jealousy is a hell of a thing, innit ?

Intelligence assets worth well over hundreds of billions for starters. Are you fully aware of how much intel we share and at what operational cost they absorb as part of our security pacts?
My guess is you do not. Well it is a massive amount of money and without them in this area we would be flying blind going into many situations.
As for your little crude oil comment, you should look into the pipeline infrastructure already being used at this moment. So if we cut them off they just simply flip a few switches, signed some letters of agreement and off they go and bye bye investment and crude revenue. They may pay a premium but in the end they will be just fine but we will see problems here as that will have a trickle affect and not one that helps.

[David64]

Intelligence assets worth well over hundreds of billions for starters. Are you fully aware of how much intel we share and at what operational cost they absorb as part of our security pacts?
My guess is you do not. Well it is a massive amount of money and without them in this area we would be flying blind going into many situations.
As for your little crude oil comment, you should look into the pipeline infrastructure already being used at this moment. So if we cut them off they just simply flip a few switches, signed some letters of agreement and off they go and bye bye investment and crude revenue. They may pay a premium but in the end they will be just fine but we will see problems here as that will have a trickle affect and not one that helps.

*shrug* Do it and let's see. 40% of their oil supply disappears. Billions of dollars disappear from their economy due to shut down of military bases. Weapons sales get halted and they can't threaten anyone with My Big Brother will kick your ass. Europe is far behind on NATO spending and come running to us for help.

I guess Russia or China will make up the difference.

[andy06shake]

Tell me one reason we should care what you think ? You have nothing we can't do without or produce ourselves, but on the other hand you depend on us for 40% of your crude oil. Jealousy is a hell of a thing, innit ?

 
Supplying a large share of someone's imports doesn't mean they depend on you for survival.

We can buy oil on the global markets from different suppliers.

And if we're talking dependence, the US also relies heavily on its allies for trade.

Never mind investment, intelligence, and military cooperation...

[BeyondKnowledge]

Some of you are comparing nonsensical statistics. 

You can't compare percentage of votes cast to percentages of poles asked of the population. 

That is not even comparing apples to oranges. More like oranges to rocks. 

How about someone come up with the percentage of votes in the last presidential election based on number of registered voters and not votes cast? That would be interesting to know. And for the poles, they are wrong most of the time as the questions are misleading and the samples are too small or biast. 

And what happened to those voting precincts that reported over 100% voting? I haven't heard anything about them in a while

[govshill2]

With 49.8% - between only two viable Presidential candidates?

Even the US definition of 'popular vote' is bait and switch to ensure that the elites get 'their' people in power.

"Government of the people, for the people, and by the people", what a joke. They've even got slogans so you don't have to think about the truth.

Well Professor, American Democrat Leaders are open to new legislation that would change all that. You should write a Law and submit it for Democrat Lawmaker review.