If I had the choice I'd prefer someone competent.

The trouble with change is that it is not always to the good. Trump was a poor businessman with a record of not paying suppliers, and a number of his businesses going bankrupt. Then a reality star - a job he was eventually fired from because of the various comments (some racist) made on twitter.

Nor is he an outsider, as a relatively wealthy person he is as much a part of the establishment as anybody else. Further look at things like his tax policies and who do you think will benefit most from those policies. Not the poorest - try the richest 1% - otherwise known as the establishment.

No, more like a gynocentric excessively PC society pandering to SJW's and every minority you can think of, and their government cabinet is half women and half men, what can possibly go wrong.

You could say the same about Britain.

You'd have to ask him.

Starting the process with a "why not, have a go" TIC attitude without actually expecting to win is perfectly acceptable (for many candidates I'm sure). I think that was Trump's mentality, you don't.
I suspect many of the aforementioned candidates of all countries have people tell them that their standing is madness to. It's what I'd say to anyone who isn't likely to get their deposit back in the UK.

Maybe, time will tell. Trump isn't Bush Jr.

I'd prefer someone who thinks things through rather than someone who gets seriously upset if his morning egg isn't on his favourite plate.

Shrub is a giant compared to trump. Al Qaeda had to fly planes into buildings to get his attention, with trump all they'll have to do is make a joke about him.

You are correct, my bad.

When it comes to control of one of the largest militaries on the planet one should be able to rely on a bit more than 'maybe'.

This is a man whose idea of international diplomacy is not so much to tickle the backside of the dragon - but to give it a kicking - not generally conducive to the health of most people.

How about a proven liar, with blood on her hands, who is bought and paid for by the likes of Soros, and was funded in her election campaign by of all places Saudi Arabia, and they all wanted something from her they were so confident she'd become POTUS, plus someone who was keen as mustard to start a war with Russia with the implementation of a no fly zone over Syria. As for Trump, he's a political outsider but as one of the 1%, he's seen how the system works from the inside.

Given Clinton's track record when in office it isn't her.

Unproven assumption, based on unproved conjecture.

i was about to reply to a couple of posts but then i saw the 9/11 conspiracy suggestion and realised it would be a waste of time

Once again, you are basing your view of Trump from what you may have seen of him via the biased media. You don't know the man, you have zero idea what he'll do when he is POTUS, but IMO he'll be better then Clinton would be, and America will also be better for it.

I remember the good old days when loads of us thought that the USA had 'bottomed out' when they elected G W B,
Who knew there was a whole lower layer waiting in the wings?

Trump was never going to not be the chosen candidate, he was by far the most well known name standing in the Republican election, and so from there with his confidence as it is, why wouldn't he have thought that he could have beaten Clinton?

He just has huge faith in himself, what other people think of him, I don't really think he cares too much, with him, it is all about winning, by any means necessary.

Why is Trump considered a bottom layer?

Why not wait until he is actually the President, and judge him then? What good does pre-judging someone do??

FFS!

Seriously I am basing my view of Trump on his own actions!

He is the one firing off tweets.
He is the one excusing sexist talk as 'locker room'

IMO He will go down as one of the worst Presidents in a generation, that is assuming he will actually make it as far as the next election, with his existing legal problems. He is thin skinned, shows poor judgement, his economic policies will help 1% of the richest Americans, but leave everyone else worse off. He will fail to bring any jobs, assuming that he brings back Manufacturing because to survive most manufacturing is now automated and only getting more so. Then just to cap it all will leave the US even more indebted than it is now.

I don't know, please, enlighten me.

What's so wrong with that? Are you actually implying that government is a mans job and calling women involved in politics "PC gone mad"?

And gynocentric? What?

Until he has had some tough decisions to make as President, why not give him a chance?

Why be so negative towards him even before he has got into office, what good does that do or achieve?

Because he gives us plenty of good reason to be negative.

He is an ignorant, racist, sexist fool. He is making the country a laughing stock but really it's not funny. All this tweeting/insulting other countries is undiplomatic and downright dangerous. I assumed he would be getting advice during this interim period - I'm sure he probably is but he's choosing to ignore it and building up a team of questionable people around him.

The negativity is 100% deserved.

putting Ben Carson forward for HUD secretary deserves all the criticism he can get by itself

this is a guy who when his name was being mentioned for HHS, a department he at least has a semblance of experience for, his spokesman said ;


but apparently he is capable of running a different department he has zero background in

He appoints a man who he considers is as bad as a paedophile as part of his cabinet

I just don't get how getting on his back from even before he has actually done something in office to justify doing so, helps the country move forward.

By all means complain about him when he has done something to warrant such complaints, but he is not in power yet, so being negative seems very unhelpful, as surely all Americans want what is best for their country don't they, and attacking their soon to be President, is just not the way to achieve this.

He has not made the tough decisions as a businessman - which is why so many of his companies have gone bankrupt. How on earth do you think he will make the tough decisions as a President.


He aspires to be the most powerful political leader on the planet, of course one should be tough. Not only that but get it wrong and a lot of people will pay the price - but none will be Donald Trump. One can be as tough as you can be on those who seek to lead us. At least as tough as Trump supporters are about Hilary Clinton - it sometimes looks as if Trump supporters are as thin skinned as Donald Trump - willing to dish it out, but moan when their person gets it.