Jump to content

SURVEY: Should Donald Trump get the Nobel Peace Prize?


Scott

SURVEY: Should Donald Trump receive the Nobel Peace Prize?  

378 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

Yes, but if , as you said that Trump was doing everything to undo what Obama had done, because he hates Black people , that must mean that everything that Obama did was for the benefit of Black people .

No not at all, that's an overly simplistic view of what I said. It seems there is a difference between English and American English comprehension here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, observer90210 said:

Why should he not get the price ?

 

He is no worse then his eminent predecessors at Office who each have their share of global havoc....

 He is infinitely worst in so many different ways . 

I would not even attempt to describe how, your reply is either ignorant or a troll. Suffice it to say that as McCain is contemplating his death, has chosen Obama to give the eulogy at his funeral and has requested that Trump is not invited.. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Basil B said:

No Trump hates Obama... as the most influential black person in the recent history and the first black POTUS of the USA.

There are many men who dress up in women's cloths in secret for kicks but seems Trump like to dress up in his dad's KKK uniform... 

Its no wonder Trump dresses up in a KKK uniform, it was the KKK that funded Trumps election campaign

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

Yes, but if , as you said that Trump was doing everything to undo what Obama had done, because he hates Black people , that must mean that everything that Obama did was for the benefit of Black people .

The point you are missing us that 45 hates black people but also one black person in particular gets his goat like no other. 45 seems willing to throw an entire nation under the bus in order to undo everything done by 44. Not being able to repeal the ACA has really gotten under his skin and he is now taking on another 44 semi-success.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is, if you Americans don’t want President Trump, I would have him as the leader of Britain in a heart beat...because May is absolutely rubbish. If you are a Leaver or Remainer, if she messes up Brexit, we will ALL suffer, Leavers and Remainers..so Donald Trump would wipe the floor with the ***holes in Brussels. 

In the words of DT....”Theresa May...’You’re Fired’, I am taking over!”

Edited by Scooby and Puppy
Misspell
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Scooby and Puppy said:

All I can say is, if you Americans don’t want President Trump, I would have him as the leader of Britain in a heart beat...because May is absolutely rubbish. If you are a Leaver or Remainer, if she messes up Brexit, we will ALL suffer, Leavers and Remainers..so Donald Trump would wipe the floor with the ***holes in Brussels. 

In the words of DT....”Theresa May...’You’re Fired’, I am taking over!”

And in the words of 100% of the British public fortunate enough to have more than 2 brain cells..."Scooby and Puppy, you can take your hero DT anywhere you like (maybe a fun trip in Moscow urinating on a bed - remind him of the good old days) but we would rather have Sponge Bob as Prime Minister to replace May than DT".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

And in the words of 100% of the British public fortunate enough to have more than 2 brain cells..."Scooby and Puppy, you can take your hero DT anywhere you like (maybe a fun trip in Moscow urinating on a bed - remind him of the good old days) but we would rather have Sponge Bob as Prime Minister to replace May than DT".

I can't stand May, but would rather commit to another 5 years of her than one of Trump.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, freebyrd said:

Hi sole role in office seems to be to undo everything that Obama did because he patently doesn't like black people.

 

One of the benefits of the Obama presidency is that one could be critical of it without the charge of racism being thrown at you, at least by rational people. There was a lot to like about Obama personally and a lot to not like about his presidency. Rational people are able to make the distinction between the two.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

One of the benefits of the Obama presidency is that one could be critical of it without the charge of racism being thrown at you, at least by rational people. There was a lot to like about Obama personally and a lot to not like about his presidency. Rational people are able to make the distinction between the two.

How much (if anything at all) would you put down to the fact that his hands were mostly tied by partisan politics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Slip said:

How much (if anything at all) would you put down to the fact that his hands were mostly tied by partisan politics?

 

That has never not been the case. You have to move the country forward despite those obstacles. What you cannot do is nothing and say you are doing nothing because those other guys won't let me, or you are so locked into a given outcome that you can't find common ground. Obama is famous for holding out and then trying to make political hay out of it at the election booth. That backfired on him in a big way as his party lost over a thousand seats both at the national level and the state level during his tenure.

 

The job of the US presidency is to use the power of persuasion to move the country forward. That can be through rational debate, personal charisma or being an outright <deleted>, but at the end of the day you need to get the job done. He did not.

 

I would mention that I liked him personally. Highly intelligent, charismatic, good sense of humor, scandal free as far as I know, kind. All wonderful characteristics one likes to see in any leader. An additional characteristic, Obama lacked, which is a necessity  in a US presidency is the willingness to fight. Not only with the other side of the aisle but with your own if necessary. He was a great spokesperson but a terrible closer. IMO

 

edit:  I would add regarding the partisan hold up you mentioned. His signatur piece of legislation was Obamacare, made during a period his party held the presidency and both chambers of Congress. It was and is an abomination as it was a love letter to a broken and larcenous private healthcare corporatocracy. He also ran interference for Wall Street crooks in exchange for theur loyalty to his party. 

Edited by lannarebirth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

That has never not been the case. You have to move the country forward despite those obstaces. What you cannot do is nothing and say you are doing nothing because those other guys won't let me, or you are so locked in to a given outcome that you can't find common ground. Obama is famous for holding out and then trying to make political hayout of it at the election booth. That backfired on him in a big way as his party lost over a thousand seats both at the national level and the state level.

 

The job of the US presidency is to use the power of persuasion to move the country forward. That can be through rational debate, personal charisma or being an outright <deleted>, but at the end of the day you need to get the job done. He did not.

 

I would mention that I liked him personally. Highly intelligent, charismatic, good sense of humor, scandal free as far as I know, kind. All wonderful characteristics one likes to see in any leader. An additional characteristic, Obama lacked, which is a necessity  in a US presidency is the willingness to fight. Not only with the other side of the aisle but with your own if necessary. He was a great spokesperson but a terrible closer. IMO

Thanks for your answer.  Surely he had no majority though so he had to govern by consensus or at least horse trading, at which he had limited success.  Trump doesn't seem to be governing that way at all, in fact he struggles to get legislation passed despite his majority in both houses.  I'm not trying to be a 'whataboutist' here, but to understand the dynamics of why Obama couldn't get most of his policies through and how you feel he is to blame for that in terms of his presidency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jcsmith said:

Mr. Nobel Peace nominee just violated the Iran deal with no justification at all for doing so. Iran did not violate the terms. He's heading for war almost inevitably at this point. 

yes... and paradoxically, one of Trump's major successes in foreign policy so far, a diplomatic opening with North Korea was the result of a multilateral effort led, moreover, under the auspices of the United Nations and in consultation with China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Slip said:

Thanks for your answer.  Surely he had no majority though so he had to govern by consensus or at least horse trading, at which he had limited success.  Trump doesn't seem to be governing that way at all, in fact he struggles to get legislation passed despite his majority in both houses.  I'm not trying to be a 'whataboutist' here, but to understand the dynamics of why Obama couldn't get most of his policies through and how you feel he is to blame for that in terms of his presidency.

 

There's not much he wants to get through that he in't getting through, except for immigration reform.  You have to remember that Trump isn't really a Republican, he's a huckster. Immigration reform isn't working because the Republicans want more illegals to suppress wages and the Democrats want more illegals as they are seen as a future constituency and a source of government funding. Trump's just playing to his base on the immigration issue. I don't think he cares personally one way or the other except for labor in his businesses.

 

You could absolutely flip that description I had of Obama with Trump. ALL fight with none of those personally redeeming characteristics.

Edited by lannarebirth
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

And in the words of 100% of the British public fortunate enough to have more than 2 brain cells..."Scooby and Puppy, you can take your hero DT anywhere you like (maybe a fun trip in Moscow urinating on a bed - remind him of the good old days) but we would rather have Sponge Bob as Prime Minister to replace May than DT".

If you read my message, I said ‘I would like...’

so thats my opinion, you are welcome to your opinion, as I am.. He made it to the highest office in america, if not the world. So I doubt whether he gives a hoot what you think..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scooby and Puppy said:

If you read my message, I said ‘I would like...’

so thats my opinion, you are welcome to your opinion, as I am.. He made it to the highest office in america, if not the world. So I doubt whether he gives a hoot what you think..

 

"He made it to the highest office in america, if not the world. "

 

Please.... would you mind to substantiate this   assertion?

Edited by Opl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

One of the benefits of the Obama presidency is that one could be critical of it without the charge of racism being thrown at you, at least by rational people. There was a lot to like about Obama personally and a lot to not like about his presidency. Rational people are able to make the distinction between the two.

Agreed, and of course Trump could never be described as rational.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see how a guy who divides the world and country should be nominated for the prize? If  Trump supporters think he should get it because of NK, you still don't get it. NK came this far because China and South Korea are working together. South Korea is sucking up to Trump so their economy won't be effected by sanctions, yet at the same time, they are using the US to protect themselves again NK's threats.

 

But all in all, everything is going down the right path. US prisoners are being release, NK is going to stop their nuclear program. But that was before Trumps threats made NK shoot two missiles over Japan, that was a reckless and dangerous move by Trump. I'm sure if any foreign missile flew over the US, that would be serious and the US would have retaliated heavily. This is one of the things people in the US did not give a damn about. Hence Trump don't deserve to the get the prize because he could have started a war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another monkey survey.
same as you ask me if I want to have a noble prize........
delete your survey. It's not worth to continue
Yep, its like we are Debating if the Moon is made of cheese.

Of course, a man who Brags out being a Sex Pest likes Neo-Nazis supports Alex Jones has pulled out of the Paris agreement and the Iran Deal and moved the Doomsday clock forward by Risking Nuclear war (to name a few) don't deserve A Nobel Peace Prize.



Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



 
One of the benefits of the Obama presidency is that one could be critical of it without the charge of racism being thrown at you, at least by rational people. There was a lot to like about Obama personally and a lot to not like about his presidency. Rational people are able to make the distinction between the two.


Rational people have left the building After Trump and Brexit I am sorry to say.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...