Donald Trump: How to lose friends and alienate people

[Dartzap]

Thought it was worth a comedy thread of its own, as we are officially beyond satire, and flying off into a bleak, but hysterical future.

Have you ever known of a blond, wild haired chap, who is fairly big in right-wing political circles, is known to be somewhat dodgy, popular for all the wrong reasons and could one day lead your nation? And that maybe, just maybe he might say something you agree with?

Turns out, Boris Johnson can say something sensible in the English language, a sad day for Latin lovers. I'm sure.


Indie

Boris Johnson has hit out at Donald Trump for his "ill-informed comments" calling for Muslims to be banned from the United States to ensure the country does not end up with "radicalised" no-go areas like London.

The Republican presidential front-runner defended his controversial idea for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" until authorities "can figure out" Muslim attitudes to the US by claiming police in cities like London and Paris were "afraid for their lives" because of large Muslim communities.

But Mr Johnson hit back in his typical style, saying: "The only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump.”

He described Mr Trump's remarks as "complete and utter nonsense" and invited Mr Trump to visit the capital to experience the work of UK police officers in local neighbourhoods across the city.

"As a city where more than 300 languages are spoken, London has a proud history of tolerance and diversity and to suggest there are areas where police officers cannot go because of radicalisation is simply ridiculous," the Mayor of London said.

"I would welcome the opportunity to show Mr Trump first hand some of the excellent work our police officers do every day in local neighbourhoods throughout our city.

"Crime has been falling steadily both in London and in New York - and the only reason I wouldn't go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump.”

So, who else has Trump fecked off?

Only David Hameron. A PM even make the slightest bit of noise about a Western Election is pretty rare by any stretch

Indie

David Cameron has condemned Donald Trump's call for a complete ban on Muslims entering the United States as "divisive, unhelpful and quite simply wrong".

The current front-runner to win the Republican presidential nomination caused uproar on Monday night by releasing a statement promising a "complete shutdown" of Muslim immigration to the US and later he said the ban should remain in place until authorities "can figure out" Muslim attitudes to the US.

His comments, which came in the wake of last week's terror attack in San Bernardino, California, have been denounced across the world, with the Barack Obama saying they breached American values and Muslim groups in the US describing his remarks as fascist.

Asked what the Prime Minister made of Mr Trump's comments, his spokeswoman said: "The Prime Minister completely disagrees with the comments made by Donald Trump, which are divisive, unhelpful and quite simply wrong."

Mr Cameron's spokeswoman declined to say whether he would be meeting Mr Trump and also refused to answer "hypothetical" questions over whether he might be blocked from entering the UK.

She added: "The Prime Minister has been very clear that, as we look at how we tackle extremism and this posonous ideology, what politicians need to do is look at ways they can bring communities together and make clear that these terrorists are not representative of Islam and indeed what they are doing is a perversion of Islam."

Just as icing on the cake (which tops even Nigel Farrage saying 'He's gone too far!", yes, seriously....) there is a public petition asking for Trump to be barred from entering the UK as he incites hatred. This would put him the in esteemed company of the Westboro Baptists, a small horde of Islamic preachers, and uh, Dog the Bounty Hunter. Its currently racked up 250,000 signatories, and may well end up being discussed fully in Parliament

Beeb

A petition calling for Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump to be barred from entering the UK has gathered more than 250,000 names, so MPs will have to consider debating it.

The petition went on Parliament's e-petition website on Tuesday.

It was posted in response to Mr Trump's call for a temporary halt on Muslims entering the United States.

Chancellor George Osborne criticised Mr Trump's comments but rejected calls for him to be banned from the UK.

And I thought Romney's foot-in-mouth world tour was a gold mine!

[Iroscato]

It's so sad to see brothers fight.

[Crazedwraith]

Nice bait and switch there.

It vexes me slightly that the result of the petition getting so many signatures is that they had to 'consider' debating it. What the hell does that mean? 'Oh well. I thought about it but naaaah' says Cameron?

It annoys me slightly more that we're getting involved in it at all. Treat the whole deal as beneath our notice. At least until they've actually decided who's running president.

[Channel72]

This is all great, except the only thing that matters is how Trump's insane remarks reflect his polling numbers. I really don't care what Trump says - he's just a clown whose shtick is to be politically incorrect and offensive in order to pander to a certain voting bloc. The real problem is that a huge number of people love him. That's what's really disturbing and depressing here.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... n-proposal

Almost two-thirds of likely 2016 Republican primary voters favor Donald Trump's call to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the U.S., while more than a third say it makes them more likely to vote for him.

Very, very sad.

Fortunately, I don't think these type of people constitute enough of the voting public to carry a general election, but it's still really, really sad nonetheless.

[Starglider]

Regardless of polling numbers, surely the Republican party would make some backroom deals to remove Trump, as they're not going to just throw away their chance at the presidency by allowing him to get the nomination.

[K. A. Pital]

Regardless of polling numbers, surely the Republican party would make some backroom deals to remove Trump, as they're not going to just throw away their chance at the presidency by allowing him to get the nomination.

Hope they do. And he wins. And makes America great again.

[Civil War Man]

Regardless of polling numbers, surely the Republican party would make some backroom deals to remove Trump, as they're not going to just throw away their chance at the presidency by allowing him to get the nomination.

Probably not. For one, it might be against their primary rules depending on the situation at the convention. Secondly, if, hypothetically, there's a clear majority for Trump going into the convention, and the party elite put together some backroom deal to shut him out, it would probably torpedo the GOP's chance at the presidency even more than allowing Trump as their nominee would, since it would likely result in a revolt against the party leadership and give Trump a clear incentive to make an independent run out of spite.

[jwl]

It's now been brought up at PMQs, with Osborne (standing in for cameron): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtcIYqld59Q 30:10-31:10 and 34:12-34:55 .

I do think his views need to be confronted, but I hope they don't go too far: if he wins we still need to have fairly good relations with the US for trade purposes.

[His Divine Shadow]

David Hameron

[His Divine Shadow]

Trump, when even Netanyahu thinks you've gone too far:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... muslim-ban

[jwl]

Trump, when even Netanyahu thinks you've gone too far:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... muslim-ban

Trump has now "postponed" his visit to Isreal until after he becomes president.

[Titan Uranus]

Regardless of polling numbers, surely the Republican party would make some backroom deals to remove Trump, as they're not going to just throw away their chance at the presidency by allowing him to get the nomination.

They will try, surely, but the question is; will they have enough power to do so?
The central party organizations have been terribly eroded recently, especially after the Citizens' United decision, and more importantly the leadership of both parties is subpar at best. In 2004 I would have agreed with you, but now I am not so sure.

[Welf]

The more I think about what Trump said, the less I am shocked and the more I am appalled by the hypocrisy of many who critic him.

Yes, it is horrible thing to ban people because of their religion. But is it really worse what others said? Most politicians (and voters) in Europe and America don't want any Syrian refugees at home, with countries like Poland refusing to accept any, with countries like Slovenia accepting only Christians, and countries like Britain and USA only taking a handful. So they refuse to let in those most in need for help, and Trump wants to do same, plus he wants to ban those least in need of protection.

Letting people in need freeze in cold: meh
Letting people in need freeze in cold + deny visas to businesspeople: WORST. THING. EVER.

Trump made his remarks after two terrorist attacks with countless deaths, committed by a refugees and an immigrant, others politicians made them before. This won't hurt Trump, because all the liberals who cry out now hated him before, and he just repeats what his supporters heard from him before, and from others in his party, too. It will rather help him because it backs his status as the only guy in his party who is says it as it is. Which, in fact, he is. Not that this makes him a good or decent person.

[Channel72]

The more I think about what Trump said, the less I am shocked and the more I am appalled by the hypocrisy of many who critic him.

Yes, it is horrible thing to ban people because of their religion. But is it really worse what others said? Most politicians (and voters) in Europe and America don't want any Syrian refugees at home, with countries like Poland refusing to accept any, with countries like Slovenia accepting only Christians, and countries like Britain and USA only taking a handful. So they refuse to let in those most in need for help, and Trump wants to do same, plus he wants to ban those least in need of protection.

Letting people in need freeze in cold: meh
Letting people in need freeze in cold + deny visas to businesspeople: WORST. THING. EVER.

Trump made his remarks after two terrorist attacks with countless deaths, committed by a refugees and an immigrant, others politicians made them before. This won't hurt Trump, because all the liberals who cry out now hated him before, and he just repeats what his supporters heard from him before, and from others in his party, too. It will rather help him because it backs his status as the only guy in his party who is says it as it is. Which, in fact, he is. Not that this makes him a good or decent person.

Trump takes it to a new level of insanity. The refugee crisis is one thing, Trump wants to ban ~1e9 people from coming into the US. This includes millions of Muslims from Indonesia, Africa, Europe, and elsewhere, not just refugees fleeing from Syria. It includes Persians and Shi'ite Muslims, who have no possible connection to the Islamist Jihadists.

Yeah, let's just ban them all. Let all the smart Muslim engineers and scientists go to the UK or elsewhere and contribute to some other economy. Cutting off the US economy/workforce from a pool of ~1 billion people is a fantastic idea. We'll sure show China that way!

[jwl]

I'm more worried about American Muslims being essentially banned from leaving the country in fear of not being let back in.

Also, the main point of Boris's (and Osborne's) comments is a response to Trump essentially slagging off the London police when talking about no-go zones, which is not hypocritical regardless of migration policy.

[SpottedKitty]

Something I don't think I've heard discussed much; after the dust clears from this, will people begin to consider the rest of the Clown Car to be less extreme, in comparison? The mind boggles...

[K. A. Pital]

The more I think about what Trump said, the less I am shocked and the more I am appalled by the hypocrisy of many who critic him.

The fact that national borders have become more and more impassable for people over the last century is something that comes under criticism from some of my own kind (radical left), but usually people put up with it because (1) it is the status quo (2) they often fall for government fearmongering about "immigrants stealing jobs" (3) labour market protection laws receive support even from the progressive left.

Trump is merely the logical completion of this fortress-lockdown trend in the US; the person who said "let's build up that wall".

This time everyone's shocked that he did it in a very discriminatory fashion by singling out a religion. There is something true in what you say: outsiders already are discriminated against. Borders are already very hard to cross if you are a Third Worlder. Or even a person from the Second World. You will encounter countless obstacles and discrimination will be a fact of life.

Still, Trump's blanket ban is over the top even by today's standards. I guess that's why people are reacting that way.

[Rogue 9]

Regardless of polling numbers, surely the Republican party would make some backroom deals to remove Trump, as they're not going to just throw away their chance at the presidency by allowing him to get the nomination.

There was reportedly some discussion of that at an RNC meeting intended to discuss what to do in case of a brokered convention. Ben Carson threatened to quit the party over it.