Donald Trump would win the US election if it was held today, a private equity grandee has said, adding that analysts had “missed” the scale of his following in America.
Obviously, I don’t know but this could be right yes. There is a significant – perhaps not significant enough etc – chunk of people who are out there going “The fuckers are trying what now?”
In a rational world with sensible politics few to none of us would be supporting Trump. Given what that permanent state is trying to do currently being against them does make sense. And will enough think that way?
When I consider that Trumps’ declaration that the Houthis are terrorists would have meant that US law would have halted all aid to them. And Bidens’ declaration means that they’re still fed by the US taxpayer, and the charities pay them taxes to do so, I’m not surprised that Americans would vote for him.
Still, I suppose this simply proves your point that the current policies of the US are idiotic.
I wonder who is running the US? It’s obviously someone who hates the country and the West generally. Dopey Joe can’t tie his shoelaces even after the CIA have told him what they are…
Just watched a clip of Biden on the news being questioned on Palestine. If I was a US voter, I’d be mortally embarrassed that this man was President.
And I’ve got Fishy Rishy!
Who’s counting the votes?
“I wonder who is running the US?”
Widely believed to be a Kenyan chap named Barry Soweto, aka Barack Obama…
The Donald can have as huge a following as he likes, the question is whether the Democrats will steal the election again like they did in 2020.
Probably take a lot more effort in a lot more places than 2020, given how woeful Pedo Joe is though.
I certainly ain’t taking bets.
Reminder that Europe is ruled by insanely corrupt incompetent studycunts who can’t be removed by voters:
Speaking on the same panel as Mr Rubenstein, European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde, who gave an eye roll as Mr Trump was mentioned, said: “The best defence, if that’s the way we want to look at it, is attack.
“To attack properly, you need to be strong at home. So being strong means having a strong, deep market, having a real single market.”
$2 a gallon gas, 1% inflation, 3% mortgages, energy independence, filling the strategic petroleum reserve instead of selling it to China, hundreds of thousands of fewer fentanyl deaths, no rape trees at the border, no human trafficking in the U.S.
Other than that…
It they held it today Trump would get the most votes. The more time goes on more people are added to that list. But that doesn’t mean he will win. Voters are irrelevant.
The question is will the banana republic voting system used within the US have adjusted enough to cater for the number of voters Trump will have. They didn’t last time and all the evidence you see was created in the last minute panic as they realised that despite all the fiddles they hadn’t done enough and increased their adjustments to the votes without adequate cover. I suspect they will be better prepared this time.
Grist: Barack Obama is the first former President in about a century to retain a home in DC after leaving office. Make of that what you will.
As I’ve pointed out on here previously in 2020 65.6 million postal votes were cast. Assume another few millions this time round to “fortify the process” in the deep blue fiefdoms of Philadelphia, Atlanta, Madison, Detroit (Observers? We don’t need no stinking Republican observers) etc and the electoral college will do the rest.
Russia and Zimbabwe can only look on in astonishment – as can Brazil where c120 million votes in the recent presidential run-off were counted on the same day as the election.
>In a rational world with sensible politics few to none of us would be supporting Trump.
Why not though? Trump’s politics are pretty sensible overall.
Is it because he’s not sufficiently schooled in lying that he can put up a ‘sophisticated’ facade – like Al Gore or John Kerry? Macron the ‘centrist’?
«In a rational world with sensible politics few to none of us would be supporting Trump. »
What are “sensible politics”? I’m too dim and lazy to get to grips with the minutiæ of US doings but I was firmly behind Trump when he stood for the first and second time because he seemd to annoy all the right people. If Wuhan could infect progressives (they’re all bats after all) with Trump Derangement Syndrome wouldn’t the world be a much happier place?
In a rational world with sensible politics few to none of us would be supporting Trump.
In a rational world with sensible politics, Trump wouldn’t be the Trump he is. He responds to the world as it is rather than responding to the world he would like it to be.
Why not though? Trump’s politics are pretty sensible overall.
It’s his ability to fall out with, and piss on, everyone, including those that might be his supporters. So that when he has to fill a cabinet it lacks reliable people of ability. Last time round he had significant issues with maintaining a stable cabinet and advisory group.
“In a rational world with sensible politics few to none of us would be supporting Trump”.
Tim, is that opinion based on reality or have you been watching Al Beeb / CNN again?
In a rational world with sensible politics, Trump wouldn’t be the Trump he is. He responds to the world as it is rather than responding to the world he would like it to be.
I was reflecting on that earlier on my morning walk after listening to the Spectator’s Americano podcast. CNN and other progressives brought Trump forward, it isn’t just that they ignored Flyover Country, Joe Sixpack and the like they actively sneered at them. Clinton’s deplorables comment wasn’t something new, it just summed what they thought for a long time.
In a similar vein I’ve pointed out to any number of Europhiles that they brought forward Farage and Brexit by sneering at and dismissing anyone who complained about about immigration and lack of resources as thick, racist bigots.
So that when he has to fill a cabinet it lacks reliable people of ability. Last time round he had significant issues with maintaining a stable cabinet and advisory group.
For a man who pisses everybody off Trump maintains an impressive level of support which would be even more emphatic if the 2024 election was purged of votes from the recently and not so recently deceased.
The current and likely future state of British (including those to the North and West) and European politics should tell you that reliable people of ability whether elected or merely appointed are as rare as hens teeth nowadays – and as for advisory groups!
It is noteworthy if rarely admitted that Ron DeSantis seems to have largely overcome this difficulty in Florida.
“So that when he has to fill a cabinet it lacks reliable people of ability. Last time round he had significant issues with maintaining a stable cabinet and advisory group.”
The Establishment candidates have exactly the same problem finding quality appointees, only it doesn’t matter for them because the people they put in place are not held to the same standards that Trumps picks were. The Blob looks after its own. Do you really think that a VP of the calibre of Kamala Harris would last 5 minutes if picked as Trumps VP? Every single gaff, mistake, f*ck-up etc etc would be broadcast to the world until she was forced out.
Basically anyone who the Blob doesn’t like will be manoeuvred out by whatever means necessary (and that usually means leaks about their failures and procedural attacks – see Dominic Raab etc etc), while those the Blob wants will have all their shortcomings hushed up.
So that when he has to fill a cabinet it lacks reliable people of ability. Last time round he had significant issues with maintaining a stable cabinet and advisory group.
At that level of politics, how many reliable people of ability are there? On recent showing, as rare as hens’ teeth. Why would anyone of ability want to be involved in politics?
I’m pretty sure that Trump will garner more of the popular vote than he did last time. I think he will decisively beat Biden in that regard.
But the US presidential election is run via the electoral college system, in which each state gets a set number of electoral votes based on population.
So it matters little that Trump might win 80% in a few states in which he won 51% last time. He still only gets that state’s set number of electoral votes.
To win, a candidate needs 270 electoral votes. War-gaming out the predictable popular-versus-electoral voting results, it seems unlikely at best that Trump can win the election.
Prepare for Biden (or some reasonable facsimile thereof) starting in 2025.