I too believe, Pete, we'll wake up tomorrow to a Trump precidency. I don't have any math or sience, it's just a feeling. And flawed as Trump might be he's still the lesser evil.
Hillary for sure, if she wins, will look at those deplorable Americans she despices (despiced already and now hate since they woted against her) and smile when she sends THEIR children off to wars she and her inner circle find necessary, or fun, or whatever.
No matter, it's just future deporables dying in her mind, no big loss. Just like ancient rulers threw cannon fodder at the enemy de jour without any thought to the actual people who were dying.
Hillary has NEVER seen a war she didn't want to send other peoples children to fight. Name ONE war she opposed during her time in power.
Normally I write such stories off as hoaxes, but go through all the links and some seriously disturbing things will make you wonder... Espacially some of the photos and comments to photos are.... unnerving.
But not until after you go through all the links and pictures. ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ I had more trouble figuring out whom to write-in than I'd anticipated. Should have thought it through before I went in I guess, but it was solid that my state is going for Trump, Hillary's got no shot here, and I figured I had a bunch of options for the write-in and it'd be no problem.
Then I had to decide on one. Shoulda thought that through a little better. Oh, well….
No Lee. "Normally I write such stories off as hoaxes…" but then I got curious and looked at somen of those links and they were.... disturbing to say the least.
https://i.sli.mg/ON22AY.png
Read the text on that tshirt and look at who liked it and follow that trail in the many other links provided. Sickening. And it's right out there so you can't deny it, unless you approve kiddy-fiddling your own self. Which, however much I don't agree with you on political matters, I do not think you'd be in any way OK with.
This isn't the first time you've come across stories on fairly vulgar web sites (the last batch was about Swedish immigrants). I'm willing to pass that off as coincidence, but, as for me, I just as soon not patronize those places. So, I'll not be bothering to look it over, seriously.
I was looking over the local evening TV offerings (local over-the-air broadcasts). There is virtually nothing on offer except election coverage. (Couple of old "B" movies on the dedicated "B" movie channels, but they're not even putting on their best stuff.) Seems to be the election is the designated subject of interest for the evening.
Quaere then: What happens if The Donald refuses to concede the election? Answer is: Nothing happens; we shrug him off, and all go on about our business and ignore him going forward. And everything else in the world goes forward normally.
Huh! They are coloring Texas blue in early voting. Due apparently to voters in San Antonio...:) See...voting does matter. Even if it doesn't hold into the night, it's still good.
Ooops, Hillary is now in second place in Florida. Trumps leading by about 918 votes. Sheesh, a nail biter. No, wait she's back in the lead...by 4,000 votes.
I think your source there is maybe a little over-eager to be first with the news. (NBC has both Florida and Texas still up in the air/too close to call.)
I happened to be watching that NBC page when it updated at 8:00 pm with the poll closings in a slew of states; Trump's jumped up 137 electoral votes to Hillary's 104. It was striking to watch, especially for an adamant #NeverTrump fella like me.
I'm still not worried; these are states Trump was on track to win easy.
The difference between what we're seeing here and what we expected to see is fairly simple. Trump didn't have anything of a ‘get out the vote’ program. Most folks expected that would sink him in the end (it was Obama's GOTV program that won him two elections).
Turns out Trump didn't need a ‘get out the vote’ program. His supporters were mad enough to get out all by themselves. Most folks didn't see that one coming. I didn't see it coming; I thought they'd bitch a lot and turnout would be down--turns out it's up instead. It's up for both parties, Democrats as well as Republicans. This may be a record setting voter turnout.
The Dow-Jones "Futures" market (presumably I don't have to explain that to anybody here) is down 700 points already tonight. It didn't drop that far after 09/11.
Politico has called Florida for Trump; I think they're using Associated Press predictions. (NBC is holding off, but Chuck Todd keeps telling his bosses it's over and Trump's got Florida).
And, by ‘predicting’ I mean that Chuck Todd has said that he considers that the most likely result tonight (out of more than just a couple of possibilities). That doesn't mean he's guessing it at over a 50% possibility, but he's guessing it as the most likely outcome out of several that he's worked up.
Well, it's gettin’ late and it's gonna get later. Right now it's looking to me like Trump's got the advantage (244 electoral votes to Hillary's 209). And, I don't know that there's enough electoral votes left out there for her to pull this off; she'd have to pretty much run the table.
I may try to get some zzz's and let them tell me ‘bout it in the morning.
I just pulled down an update of the numbers; Hillary's pulling out some comeback numbers in the few states still out there. My count makes it likely 270-268 Hillary wins. (Trump will contest the election of course, but it's better to be the winner in a contested election than the challenger.)
Yep, time for some zzzz's. Trump's currently up in both Pennsylvania and Michigan (only by a little, but it's gettin’ late). A win in either and he's our next President.
They've called the State of Maine for Hillary. But, Maine is semi-unique; it allocates its electoral votes proportionally (Kansas is the other state that does that.) Hillary gets only 3 out of the 4 electoral votes. That shoots down the chance that she could pull out a 270 to 268 win over Trump. Tie is the best she could hope for now (and the chances of that aren't good). And, if she gets a tie the Republican majorities in Congress get to decide, and they'll go for Trump.
Pennsylvania is 99% counted. Very surprising that it hasn't been called. John Podesta just appeared at Clinton HQ to send the crowd home. So no concession from Hillary tonight. Trump would have been crucified if he'd pulled a stunt like that.
A sign of things to come I would say. Dems spent a long time being upset in 2000. Hillary may well win the popular vote. It's gonna be 100 times more bitter this time.
It just gets more bizarre. Hillary conceded to Trump by phone within minutes of Podesta implying it wouldn't happen. Podesta must have known what was coming. Did the Dems fear that violence might break out, or could Hillary just not face them?
Trump trying to be conciliatory right now in his victory speech. How long will that last?
And now to more important things ... five minutes to opening of European stock markets ;-)
I had a feeling it would go this way. People are more pissed off than many realize. It's not just in the US, I feel it here too and have been for a while now. The "establishment" is out of sync with reality and the people is lashing out.
We're in for a ride next year with Marine Le Pen set to become President in France in May and Merkel being severely punished in Germany in August. Bet that.
Trump's still trailing in the popular vote total. Hillary's ahead of him by about a million votes. Assuming that holds, this'll make the second time since the year 2000 that the Republicans have won the Presidency with a minority of the vote (Dubya lost the popular vote to Al Gore in the year 2000).
(We'll probably hear it again this week, it's been said before by ‘establishment’ Republicans: The Republican Party may survive 4 years of a Hillary Clinton Presidency. It will not survive 4 years of President Trump.)
Hillary must think she's cursed or something. In 2008 she was "supposed" to be the nominee and Barack came out of basically nowhere and totally blindsided her. She gritted her teeth and went to work for him for 8 years. After that long wait she finally won the nomination only to loose to Trump when the victory fireworks were already set up and waiting to be lit. I almost feel a bit sorry for her.
US markets just opened. Here in Europe, stocks nosedive momentarily upon opening six hours ago, but bounced very quickly. Seems Europe has gotten used to Trump already, although some politicians are taking longer to adjust than the markets. Some nasty things being said. (Maybe because I'm watching the BBC, who are also still in disbelief).
Marcus, I agree. Nobody quite believed the same dissatisfaction would overtake the US as has beset Europe. This is the ultimate wake-up call.
I thought it was Catholic dogma that divorce was an objectively bad thing and not an ‘upside’, that it should be a ‘have to’ situation and not ‘get to’.
Pete: "Marcus, I agree. Nobody quite believed the same dissatisfaction would overtake the US as has beset Europe. This is the ultimate wake-up call."
I just wish that politicians would have realised this before. Then it needen't have come to this state.
The thing that makes my blood really boil is all that crap whenever a new "progressive" takes the spotlight that you're an "angry low educated white man" if you question any of it. Open borders, 79 different sexual identities, identity politics where I am a bad guy no matter what I do, etc.
I've really had it with this PC-crap and am prepared to burn the house down and see what I can make of the ashes if this shit continues. So I can totally understand Trump voters who do not genuinely buy into everything he says he'll do and who might have reservations on him and some of the stuff he's been upto
And while I'm white I'm neither poor or uneducated.
I'm just sick and tired of being part of the real backbone of the economy that makes our society function and only get scorn in return from "artists" and politicians and media figures who actually do not add much value when compared to the very real value me and mine bring in. They live off of us and deride us at every chance they get. F*ck that! No more.
I am dressed in black today. It seemed appropriate.
It looks like the GOP will control the Executive branch and the Legislative branch. It has been said that things only get done when one party controls both. Well, I guess we will see what gets done now. Some people may not like to reap what they have sown.
I know. But I think this was an unusual time. As both Petes and you have remarked, there is a lot of anger out there. People don't always think clearly when they are angry. She should know that.
Lynnette: "I know. But I think this was an unusual time. As both Petes and you have remarked, there is a lot of anger out there. People don't always think clearly when they are angry. She should know that."
She's deeply connected to and basically joined at the hip with what they're angry about. I don't think she could have done much different to change this outcome really. It's not Hillary that failed, it's Trump who triumphed.
That said, I anticipate that some portion of his followers, the "true believers" if you will, are in for some serious dissapointment when they realise he won't be able (or maybe even willing) to deliver what they think is coming.
[Lynnette]: "I am dressed in black today. It seemed appropriate."
Well you can console yourself that Minnesota went for Hillary. Although it looks like it was the Twin Cities that barely swung it. And that was with an 80% turnout in those precincts (which sounds a tad unbelievable ... you sure those city folks know how to do an honest count? ;-)
Blame those Wisconsinian Cheeseheads. Good thing Lee turned out not be one of 'em, eh?
I see the MSM are showing Californian college teens demonstrating against Trump already. First thing that occurred to me when Hillary didn't show up to concede defeat last night was whether it was for fear of real violence. Funny, they never showed the Bernie supporters demonstrating against Hillary, even at the DNC. The tragedy is if they had, they mightn't have missed the Bigger Picture so monumentally.
The most worried and most regretful person in the world right now might be Glenn Beck. He put all his pennies on the wrong pony and now he's got no friends at all. It's not like he'll get a job on CNN. Poor Glenn. Out in the cold for realz. LOL!
Pete: "Well you can console yourself that Minnesota went for Hillary."
Is that really certain though? NYT still has it "leaning for Hillary" but I read that the later votes tallied are out in Trumpland and that the major population centers who favoured Hillary are already counted. So it might yet swing.
Also some theories were put too death in this cnclusion of the elections. I come to think of the one put forth by as diverse people as Michael Moore and Lee C where Trump didn't actually want to win, but merely ran as a strategy in order to lauch a right-of-Fox media empire.
Look at the efforts that man put into his campaign the last week. 4 rallies this day, 5 rallies that day, several states every day meeting voters and promoting his cause. Out-rallying Hillary 10 to 1 really. Looks to me like a man who REALLY wanted to win.
So maybe Hillary should say something before things get even worse? The BBC have been flashing up "Hillary Clinton expected to make speech shortly" on the news ticker for hours now. She must be having one helluva headache if she doesn't show up by east coast midday! The right wing UK press is suggesting she was too upset to concede in public last night.
"Looks to me like a man who REALLY wanted to win."
You misunderstand the theory. At least, you misunderstand my theory; I don't know what Michael Moore believes; I don't pay much attention to him. What I said was that I thought Trump ran for President intending to enhance his ‘brand’ and that he was as surprised as anybody else (maybe more surprised than most) when his campaign caught fire with the angry aged white voters. I didn't say he didn't want to win--I said that he didn't start out expecting to win, or even actually trying to win; he was instead intent on pumping up his public ‘brand’. And be damned if he'd not stumbled into a goldmine.
First of all white men too have a say on how the countries THEY built are handled. They collectively built almost ALL the wellfare in modern western states. (Really they should be the only ones qualified to vote - not just whites but actual contributors)
Second: white women seem to be catching up on the message, finally, and they too went in as a majority for Trump.
That YOU are a ethno-masochist cuckold ol' bastard with no children doesn't mean YOU have the right to destroy the future for the rest of our people.
First thing that's gonna happen is, Paul Ryan's not gonna pay for Trump's wall (nor will the Mexicans); hence, no wall. Second thing is that Paul Ryan's not gonna pay for Trump's massive public works projects (don't know if that'll kill the Trump stimulus plan or if they'll just run up the deficit to the crash point). I give it maybe six months before the economic downturn sets in--probably not a crash, more a down slope. We'll see how that goes over with the angry old white folks. Trump might be able to instigate his ban on Muslims; that'll make ‘em happy; but that's a cosmetic measure anyway and doesn't make any real difference domestically. And, he might be able to help kill ObamaCare (although the Republicans might balk at actually doing that considering they never intended to have to go through with it; they have no replacement plan).
Life is gonna get interesting in Washington DC. All those folks who wanted radical disruptive change--they gonna see some. And then the angry old white folks will figure out they actually had it pretty good before they went all disruptive. Be too late by then though.
But, we'll survive. Probably finish off the Republican Party for good, but the country will survive.
I have absolutely no problem with pissing off bigoted fascists whose politics are primarily racially based. I object to bigotry as a matter of course. So, doesn't bother me at all that I piss you off. You might as well just get used to that idea. Gettin’ all wired up just gets you all wired up. Doesn't bother me a bit.
Why don't you go live in inner city Baltimore then Lee, if you love diversity so much? No because you're just like them other liberals who always want to force "divercity" on other peoples' children, aren't you?
LOL, Marcus. Lee's one of them angry white guys that think angry white guys are bad only when they are of the opposite political persuasion. I've seen lots of angry old white Democratic guys on the MSM today complaining about "voter suppression". Remember how it was supposed to be only the angry old white Trump guys that were complaining about election rigging? Even the BBC commentator last night, as the tide looked to be turning, quipped that "Trump wasn't complaining about fraud now". If he'd said that about Hillary he'd be joining the dole queue today. Mean time, let's check out some of those ignorant white bigots.
Nor, for that matter, have I complained about ‘voter suppression’, at least not in this election. (There are organized efforts among the right-wingers to suppress voting among those groups they think likely to vote for Democrats, but those suppression efforts had little effect on this election.)
Ok, just allowing myself a tiny bit of glee. Back to serious business. Just in case the Euroweenies get too cocky, I sense a flock of black swans on the horizon?
I listened to Obama's speech. It was good, and very gracious. I will miss his intelligent discourse.
I rather liked this quote from Alec Baldwin:
"I think the thing to focus on now is our families. To love those that were put in our lives to care for. Also our respective health, work and faith. The American political system is broken. Walk away from it for a while. As Coriolanus says, 'There is a world elsewhere.'"
"There is a world elsewhere." Yes, that quote within a quote is particularly apt.
I expect what'll happen now is that Trump will work with the Republican Congrassional majorities to promote ‘business friendly’ policies. Then those angry old white folks, the ones who voted for Trump will be treated to a rude introduction to reality that it is big business who's been accumulating all the wealth lately. They're mostly mad at their diminishing financial prospects. This'll make it worse. They'll not be able to overlook that much longer I don't reckon.
There was a reason that the founding fathers attempted to put in place checks and balances. It was to prevent one person from gathering too much power. One hopes that those checks and balances will reign in Trump's more radical, and expensive, ideas.
Two years until the midterm election. That will be his first report card.
Minnesota went for Clinton (47%) to Trump's (45%). Most of the state is colored red, though. It was the Twin Cities, and up around the Duluth area, that put her ahead. My county went for Trump by a 10% margin.
The insurance premium spike issue is really pissing people off. They'll lash out at anyone.
First of all white men too have a say on how the countries THEY built are handled.
But, Marcus, that's what you don't understand. The United States was not just built by white men. It is truly a melting pot with a rainbow of colors. Nor was it just men who contributed. Women have always been a strong source of our country's strength.
Lynnette: "But, Marcus, that's what you don't understand. The United States was not just built by white men. It is truly a melting pot with a rainbow of colors. Nor was it just men who contributed. Women have always been a strong source of our country's strength."
I understand it all too well. Yes of course women have participated. And some people of coluor too. But by and large ALL progress from the internal combustion engine to the Internet and everything in between such as space travel are inventions of the WHITE MAN.
Now, that's not to say white men who didn't excell and invent new technology should be put on a pedistal and hailed to just on account of being white and male. But the recent trend of deriding and ridiculing and scorning white men for being white and male (and even worse middle age), well you do that at your peril and you reap the whirlwinhd. So now, reap it!
I was about to ask the same thing. There wouldn't have been any white men if it hadn't been for black people, seeing as we were all black not too long ago. Pretty much all scientific progress for several centuries in medieval times was due to "brown" Muslims. Arguably the European Renaissance, Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment wouldn't have happened without them. Without that, Marcus's white Europeans wouldn't have been in the position to invent the car or the Internet. I wouldn't be taking too much credit for mere happenstance.
(On the other hand, I'd argue for Christian rationalism as an important factor ... but then I would, wouldn't I).
"Anti-Trump protests in at least seven cities, from California to New York."
There was similar for Bush. Capital-D Democrats seem to take it harder when their guy (or gal) loses. But I expect they'll be mostly pampered college kids -- they always seem to have the most tenuous grasp of democratic ideals. They'll get distracted/bored soon enough.
In spite of record setting early voting rates, total turnout for this election may come in at a rate (percentage of available voters) that is lower than any election since 2004. Vox The early story was all about how there'd be record turnouts. Apparently those numbers don't hold up to a clear-eyed look. The Democrats didn't show up on election day. Low turnout is traditionally correlated with Republicans doing well.
But the recent trend of deriding and ridiculing and scorning white men for being white and male (and even worse middle age), well you do that at your peril and you reap the whirlwinhd. So now, reap it!
But is that really what elected Donald Trump? People I have spoken with, who voted for Trump, seemed to be looking for someone who would shake up the status quo.
Blame the MSM. First they gave Trump more publicity then any amount of money could buy. Then they convinced half the population (as well as themselves) that the mere idea of a Trump victory was utterly, outrageously, unthinkably farfetched. By the time it got to a Tuesday morning in November it probably seemed unnecessary to queue for hours like those nasty bigoted old white male Trump-supportin' no-hopers.
But I expect they'll be mostly pampered college kids -- they always seem to have the most tenuous grasp of democratic ideals.
They have been interviewing various people in the protests, and what I am seeing are people who are really concerned about Trump's apparent bigotry and hate filled rhetoric during the campaign. They don't feel that he represents them or their values. One of the people immigrated here from Argentina 29 years ago and said that he wanted to get away from a demagogue. He didn't expect to see the same here.
I understand their feelings. It is now up to Trump to show us that he can be a bigger person than what he was during the campaign. He needs to live up to the office he holds.
In spite of record setting early voting rates, total turnout for this election may come in at a rate (percentage of available voters) that is lower than any election since 2004.
They looked at the numbers here in Minnesota and that holds true here.
"People I have spoken with, who voted for Trump, seemed to be looking for someone who would shake up the status quo."
Exactly. (My MSM comment was in response to Lee about voter turnout). That's what the MSM missed. It wasn't that people generally supported Trump's more crass pronouncements. It was more anti-establishment, anti-status-quo than pro-Trump. Trump will pass, but the sentiment behind his election will persist until the divisions -- at least the economic ones -- are addressed. The last century has seen a swing from unfettered capitalism to the rise of the labour movements, to the relatively equal sharing of post-war prosperity, to the heartlessness of neo-conservatism and the hijacking of the left by social extremists. Lots of Trumpsters seem to hate the Republican status quo as much as the Democrat one.
Hmmm... they are interviewing some of those angry old white men, who as one said aren't really angry, just fed up. Many also talked about jobs that have disappeared and implied that their votes were strictly from an economic standpoint. They thought Trump, being a businessman, could help with that.
"I understand their feelings. It is now up to Trump to show us that he can be a bigger person than what he was during the campaign."
The Trump voters are probably managing to contain their feelings about a bit of crass language, in favour of a chance for economic betterment. I'm not suggesting Trump is likely to deliver on his rhetorical promises, just that there is a voting cohort who don't have the luxury of being all upset about Trump's crude language.
They probably also recognised the hypocrisy of the MSM banging on about Trump's bad language and giving Hillary a free pass for her "basket of deplorables" speech. At least when Romney accused 49% of the population of being no-good Welfare dependants four years ago, it had to be secretly filmed at a speech to millionaires. Hillary came right out and said similar things in the full glare of national TV. It was a sign of how utterly out of touch she was, even as the supposed voice of political experience.
I think my concerns, besides Trump's hate rhetoric, which I don't agree with at all, are for things like the ACA. No, it is not perfect and its current form is causing stress in the insurance industry. But to totally scrap it without something to replace it leaves people with serious health care issues again out in the cold.
I'd say the chances of Trump scrapping the ACA with no replacement are nil. The chances of Trump doing most of the things he's talked about are probably slim, without at least a great deal of watering down. Just like Obama continued multiple Bush policies, failed to match his own campaign rhetoric (e.g. closing Gitmo?), and probably deported as many illegals as Trump is ever going to.
Nobody knows what Trump is going to do, other than that he has no interest in learning what he needs to know to govern effectively (we do know that much--tiger doesn't change its stripes suddenly at the age of seventy years). He has the attention span of a ten-year-old with ADD and he will follow his whims.
It's gonna be just fine. He's gonna pick a great team, build a great wall and make great deals. Just for you.
In the future when people live on Mars they're going to have History Class where they look in telescopes at Earth and the teacher will be like: "There's the Great Barrier reef, and up north of it is the Great Wall of China, and look over there at the Americas, here we can see the Great Wall of Trump very clearly".
I see Minnesota did go to Hillary. That puts her at 228. If we assume Arizona and Michigan for Trump and New Hampshire for Hillary (as NYT:s latest estimates suggest) then the final result will be 232 - 306. Seems like Trump could have lost Florida even, and still won.
Man there must be really, really many of them there angry, old, uneducated men in America. The whole country just full of 'em.
No Lee, it's just an argument to back why I'm so f-ing sick and tired of everything always being the fault of that "white man". That was how that discussion started.
You can't have missed that the #1 target those identity politics SJW:s always attack (and are allowed to attack with impunity) are "angry white men" throw in "heterosexual, low-educated and middle aged" for good measure and you get the ultimate effigy to pour scorn on.
Now call me crazy, but fact is a lot of what makes our societies function is the hard labor of men who are white and do not bugger other men up the rectum and who might not have an advanced degree but have professionalism in their trade.
You call them evil and deplorable and whatnot and sooner or later they'll start fighting back.
"No Lee, it's just an argument to back why I'm so f-ing sick and tired of everything always being the fault of that "white man". That was how that discussion started."
No, that is definitely not how that discussion started. The discussion was about Trump, and who were his ‘base’ of supporters. Trump is not everything. Trump is merely Trump. And besides, I've been referring to his base supporters as ‘white folks’.
Damn, papers and magazines and blogs are all full of people trying to predict Trump; which way will he go; what will he do. Can't predict Trump; there's not enough evidence in. (What he said on the stump is not evidence. He just said whatever came into his head. He could change his position in the middle of a sentence.) Thing people ought to be considering is what to do in spite of Trump or in case of Trump, as the case may be.
Wanna write speculative pieces it'd be better to consider what's gonna happen when Trump doesn't deliver those factory jobs he's promised (it can be safely predicted he's not gonna do that; that ain't never gonna happen). What will his supporters turn to when it becomes apparent there's no salvation in Trump? That might be a reasonable line of inquiry and speculation.
Well, the damn papers, magazines and blogs are also full of Republicans and right-wingers who're suddenly full of acceptance for Trump's brand of politics (whatever that is; they'll be in favor of it soon as they find out what it is they need to be in favor of). A fair percentage of those #NeverTrump people have seen the light. And the light is orange.
"Russia’s deputy foreign minister said Thursday that officials from his government were in contact with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, contradicting pledges from the president-elect that he had not interacted with the Kremlin….’" Politico.com
I've been listening to Radio-Right-Wing which runs a five minute FoxNews segment on the half-hour and a ten minute segment (including a brief local weather report) on the hour. So far they're not interested in reporting any rumors of Kremlin contacts with Trump's campaign. Not a peep.
It's a good thing the new US president is speaking to the Russians and trying to come to some common grounds. I'm sure Donald won't be selling ya'll out to Putin, he just wants to make a great deal for everyone. Russkie and Merkin alike. About time that happened.
Should Putin try and take too much advantage of the situation (which he will not, he's too smart for that) Donald will simply grab him by the p*ssy and show him who'se the real boss. And Putin knows that. So he will be friendly.
"I'm sure they're all individually running around trying to explain how THEY PERSONALLY were not on board with this apparent consensus."
Seein’ as how that headline is some 16 months old, I'd bet agin that proposition. Odds are they're not still fielding questions ‘bout last July's predictions. Been news since then.
Probably not. What with the price of oil bein’ down, Putin would be hard pressed to come up with cash enough for more than maybe Finland and the Baltic States. Maybe get Sweden thrown in for good measure, but I don't know if Putin can afford Sweden.
Wanna write speculative pieces it'd be better to consider what's gonna happen when Trump doesn't deliver those factory jobs he's promised (it can be safely predicted he's not gonna do that; that ain't never gonna happen).
Indeed. For angry, old, white men, they were pretty gullible in thinking that he really could make a difference in that regard.
There were protests here in Minnesota tonight against Trump. Social media has struck again. In some respects I have to feel a little sorry for him. I have the feeling that he's like the emperor with no clothes, he has bought into his belief of his "greatness". It must be a bit of a shock to see so many people out in the streets protesting against him. He is also very much like Jesse Ventura before him, very thin skinned. I doubt he will be conciliatory towards the people protesting. And that could be a very big mistake. While they will eventually calm down and go home, those people who believe that Trump is a racist, and that he doesn't represent them, are the future of this country. Those angry, white men are set to become a minority. Lee may very well be right, Trump may be the death of the Republican party as we have known it. People will now associated Trump with it.
Hmmm...they seem to have attracted some of the anarchists and the black lives matter people to the protests in California. They could be a problem for police.
"…they were pretty gullible in thinking that he really could make a difference in that regard."
Quite a fair percentage of them never did believe that, don't believe it now. They're not going to be disappointed by his failure to turn back the clock. (‘Course, there are others that will be disappointed, but how much of each. That's another question for another time?)
You don't seem to think I's serious, but I was. I grew up among these Trump people; I live amongst them now. This is the old white folks' equivalent, especially old rural white folks' equivalent, of black city folks burning down their own commercial districts when they get sufficiently pissed off. Doesn't make objective sense, but it keeps on happenin’ anyway. Lotta these folks voted for Trump not because they think he's gonna fix things, but because they think he's gonna break the things that are still left unbroken. This is ‘burn the sucker down’ time for them.
You may think I'm being dramatic, but I'm not. This is real; this is the nihilism of the previously privileged in action. They will come to regret it, and then they will deny it happened, but that's where we are, their coming denials notwithstanding.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ "Trump may also find that living in a fish bowl is going to be rather uncomfortable."
Might, but he's a narcissist; he may instead enjoy the attention. (I think he's fairly used to tuning out criticisms he can't silence.)
One of the things I'm wondering is what the hell will be Trump's relationship with a Republican Congress. I read that the House ‘Freedom Caucus’ has decided not challenge Paul Ryan for Speaker of the House (probably because they have no one to propose as his replacement). However, I also read that Steve Bannon, he of Brietbart fame and CEO of the Trump Campaign and possible for Trump's Chief of Staff in the White House, Bannon has insisted there will be no forgiveness for Ryan. Essentially, they expect Ryan to give it up and become Trump's puppy in the House. Ryan expects to run for President, figured to do it in 2020 although that plan might or might not be on hold just now. Ryan's gonna expect Trump to sign what they send over.
I got a feeling they may come to blows, figuratively speaking.
To be fair the Democrats have some hard work ahead too. Obama is leaving, Clinton is leaving a void much sooner than the party had expected, do they have anyone in the pipeline really? Also maybe some soul-searching to do.
They've got a couple, but only a couple, of genuine, known presidential prospects. Their bench is thin. (Elizabeth Warren is too old to be a genuine prospect four years down the line.) But, they've got plenty of time to identify more prospects. They've got the four years.
Not so much. When they come out of shock they'll realize that they'd already identified the problem of their being out of touch with the angry old white folks. Bernie Sanders showed them that (although much was made of Bernie having the millenials; it was notable that his coalition included white folks almost exclusively, including those who'd have once been union folks if there were private sector unions still functioning anymore). They just thought they'd have another cycle to address that problem before it bit ‘em; they didn't. Hillary's get-out-the-vote operation wasn't as good as what she paid for it. That may have been a surprise, but that doesn't require much in the way of soul-searching. Trump's folks turned themselves out without much in the way of a Trump get-out-the-vote operation, which was definitely a surprise, but doesn't require much soul-searching either.
The Democrats time will come later, after the Republicans break up and they have to try to hold on to their left-wing whilst trying to absorb those elements of the old Republican coalition that they can co-opt (elements which will be antithetical to the Democrats' left-wing). This'll be a hard time for them.
Let's face it. Trump's economic policies are as bogus as are Paul Ryan's, what Trump's got in mind won't work. But, what Ryan's got in mind won't work either. What Hillary had in mind was never gonna happen. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell were gonna see to that. So, we'll have an economic situation develop rather faster now than would have been the case under a Clinton administration (which would have been at loggerheads with the Republicans and therefore would have gotten very little if anything done). Clinton vs the Republicans would have promised another four years of muddling along stalemated, and probably have put off the reckoning for most of that four years, maybe all of it. But, she wasn't gonna get much of anything done.
Now the world will have to get along without ‘American Leadership’ for the next four years. They may appreciate that in some places--certainly in Moscow and Bejing that'll go over well, may lots of places in Europe too.
At best Ryan (with McConnell in tow) and Trump will freeze things up and maybe, just maybe, they'll manage to muddle along for four years without getting anything done either, and thus they'll avoid the consequences and the backlash from implementing their preferred policies. But, I don't think they'll be that lucky.
But, they've got plenty of time to identify more prospects. They've got the four years.
Funny, but until Marcus mentioned it I never thought much about it. If I had to pick someone, I would pick Amy Klobuchar. I have always liked her. She may be able to succeed where Hillary Clinton did not. That is, break that highest glass ceiling.
At best Ryan (with McConnell in tow) and Trump will freeze things up and maybe, just maybe, they'll manage to muddle along for four years without getting anything done either, and thus they'll avoid the consequences and the backlash from implementing their preferred policies.
They have two years. In two years they will get a mid-term report card.
Lee: "Not so much. When they come out of shock they'll realize that they'd already identified the problem of their being out of touch with the angry old white folks."
If they too stick with the "old angry white folks" in their analysis they're starting in the wrong place and are bound to fail. Trump brought out way more than those.
Also, I suspect you don't quite yet understand how hard it is to bring someone who's fuming because he or she has been named "deplorable" back. That's one thing I have seen right here at home. People who take a stance because they are genuinely worried about the development of their society and get called bad names become die-hards who are not easily swayed back from their newfound position.
I haven't seen it mentioned yet in the aftermath of the election but I believe myself that the "deplorable" comment was of genuine importance here, maybe even to the point of actually deciding the outcome. Speaking like that to people from a position of great privilige and power can REALLY piss people off.
"She may be able to succeed where Hillary Clinton did not. That is, break that highest glass ceiling."
While that would be an accomplishment in its own it can never be the basis for a campaign. It will never be overriding factor for more than quite a small percentage of people to see that ceiling broken (not that I would mind it broken, just stating facts here). It could be a matter of some importance I guess but it won't be at the top of the list of people's priorities. So she'd better have a solid political program first and let the gender issue work for itself. Probably best not to even mention it. Barack never ran as a black man for instance - he ran on a political vision.
Wall Street Journal's Peggy Nonan (long time staunch Republican, early Trump convert, just after he clinched the nomination) tells us what Trump must do (gotta go through Google to get there).
Turns out what he must do is surrender control of his administration to those wise and learned ‘Establishment’ Republicans whom he just whupped all through the primaries.
"They have two years. In two years they will get a mid-term report card."
Even if the Republicans do poorly in the mid-terms (no reason they should do poorly in the mid-terms; that's when the older whiter voter usually outnumbers the Democratic base), Trump is unlikely to take that as a reflection on him.
"I haven't seen it mentioned yet in the aftermath of the election but I believe myself that the "deplorable" comment was of genuine importance here…"
I don't think it mattered. The people who thought it actually applied to them (mostly they were correct), they were already firmly committed to Trump. They got really pissed off ‘bout it, but it didn't piss of people who didn't already think it applied to them and who weren't already Trumpkins.
"…until Marcus mentioned it I never thought much about it. If I had to pick someone, I would pick Amy Klobuchar."
I had thought about it. I had a list of about five. Amy Klobuchar would make six--she's got a shot I think. Another female would be Kirsten Gillibrand (Senator from New York).
"f they too stick with the ‘old angry white folks’ in their analysis they're starting in the wrong place and are bound to fail. Trump brought out way more than those."
Trump is a demagogue and brought out authoritarians of all colors and fascists and racists of all ages. Add those to the angry white folks and he had enough of a vote there to beat Hillary in what turns out to be a low-turnout election. (With a little help from the FBI and the Russians--odd batch of allies there, but there they were.)
Lee: "They got really pissed off ‘bout it, but it didn't piss of people who didn't already think it applied to them and who weren't already Trumpkins."
Prolly wrong right there. Lots of people who didn't see themselves as deplorable (few actually were) and who were't already in line for Trump would have reacted to that statement, being uttered in the arena it was uttered.
You obviously need schooling in the new politics of today because the old politics where you think you're so knowledgable no longer applies. I TOLD you Trump would win, and you were pretty snarky about it up until it was a fact. Why won't you even attempt to listen to me when I explain why, and why this new trend is not easily reversible?
I could have told you Brexit would happen, I told you Trump would win. Now I tell you that in May Marine Le Pen becomes the new President of France and next August Merkel will have to resign after dismal election results. And all the forces who oppose this still seem to somehow not get the picture, they still think they can shame people into the fold. Sorry, that's over and done with. Finito.
The thing is Trump isn't really a "new thing" or a "novelty" as many still seem to believe. He's a catalyst. He came along at just the right time to tap into a movement that had already begun growing. Granted, he was just the right man against just the right opponent at just the right point in time to really speed things up. But all he did was give the pendulum, which was already in motion, a great push. He sped things up is all. We were heading in this direction with or without him, but now it'll go faster.
"Why won't you even attempt to listen to me when I explain why, and why this new trend is not easily reversible?"
Because you're an admitted bigot and while I don't know if your economic principles are consistent with fascism (and therefore I do not call you a fascist yourself) you are nevertheless way too happy to support fascists across the board. What we've got in America is a white middle class that's found that there is no middle class in this country anymore (at least, that's not the trend; there is a middle class who've held on but their prospects are increasingly grim). Our problem is with the economic model. Your problem is ethnic. You don't understand our problem. You think your problem applies here. It doesn't. The only similarity is that both problems tend to give rise to demagogues--but the demagogues are the manifestations, not the problem itself.
Both measles and influenza can cause a fever. But they are not the same problem.
You are correct when you say the problem is not easily reversible, but that's by coincidence. You didn't get that right by diagnosing the problem correctly. You had a 50/50 chance of gettin’ it right (easily solvable or not easily solvable) and you guessed it right.
"I could have told you Brexit would happen, I told you Trump would win."
You are merely rooting for your side to win. Hillary would have won if Comey hadn't reopened that investigation without cause, and made that public against all DoJ protocols. (Doesn't mean Hillary didn't screw up her campaign some too, or that it wasn't a really, really bad idea to have used a private e-mail server, especially when the knock on her was that she was ‘secretive’ already).
Ya got lucky on the Trump call--nobody could have guessed that Comey would have weighed in there.
Lee: "Our problem is with the economic model. Your problem is ethnic. You don't understand our problem. You think your problem applies here. It doesn't."
My problem has never been of ethnicity but rather about citizenship. And in citizenship I demand assimilation, not integration. This is different from the USA where integration probably is the main thing.
Yes, I am less tolerany of so called "multi-culturalism" than most Americans are, or seem to be. This has historic reasons and is a result of how our different societies were started, or what they "mean".
You're used to a melting pot of different cultures, so multi-culti might be OK for you. I am a descendant of a (globally) very small culture but one I love and would like to preserve so I demand assimilation from immigrants and for that to work at all the numbers have to be very limited.
But that's a seperate discussion.
I understand YOUR problems very well indeed. Goood enough to call your elections results which you obviously were not able to do, and which seems to have shocked a lot of your fellow liberal-leftie cohorts into protests and riots. (WTF they think they're supposed to accomplish is beyond me - seems like grown children who got their christmas presents stolen from them, or something)
There's an old story from out of the south ‘bout how the rich guys conspired to collect all the bisquits at the the church social meeting and share them among themselves, so they gathered them all up and left just one sittin’ on the table. And when they saw the hillbilly from the shack up on the mountain moving down the banquet line, one of them nudged him and said, "See that darkie over there? He's wantin’ to try to get your bisquit."
We got an ‘immigrant problem’ only because the rich guys need a scapegoat, a diversion. Not ‘cause the immigrants are tryin’ to get the last bisquit.
Comey mattered way less than "deplorables". 100% certain of that. You oppose that you don't even know your own fellow citizens Lee. That's why I'm telling you you need schooling. Be nice and I'll school you even. Make you into a political superstar down at the bar&grill where you'll be able to call things ahead of others and watch your predictions come true. Just ask Lee and I'll tutor you.
"The thing is Trump isn't really a "new thing" or a "novelty" as many still seem to believe. He's a catalyst."
You got the part about not being new correct. He's the modern day equivalent of Huey Long, Father Conklin, and, to a lesser extent, Joe McCarthy. But, he's not the catalyst--that's where you got it wrong. He's the result; he's the demagogue who comes along and makes the promises to folks who want somebody to promise them he'll make it all better, ‘cause they can't see how to fix things. (We got more hispanics slippin’ back across the border to Mexico than are coming north these days, and those fools want to build a wall.)
Hmmm… Let's think on that again. What she said was that ‘half’ of Trumps supporters were ‘deplorables’. She reversed herself on that almost immediately--not half. That's more than there were--but there still were some.
Whadda ya wanna call it 10% may 25%? You really think whatever she said, anything she did or did not say, was gonna get her that last 10% maybe 25% of the Trump people who are out and out racists? (Yeah, we still got ’em.) You really think you can sell that one to anybody ain't already committed to that stupidity?
Lee: "We got an ‘immigrant problem’ only because the rich guys need a scapegoat, a diversion. Not ‘cause the immigrants are tryin’ to get the last bisquit."
Well that'd be all good and well if yoou didn't have a severe crime problem related to immigrants and if illegal immigrants weren't used to push wages down (which I admit you sorta adressed).
What about the recent murder by machete in Houston Texas by a MS13 gangmember who had been twice deported before? You're gonna tell the family of the chopped to death victim that it was A-OK for that lowlife criminal to bounce back and forth across the border with impunity only to end up hacking a human to death by machete?
Or are you gonna get on board the Tump Train and BUILD THAT WALL?
Lee: "Hmmm… Let's think on that again. What she said was that ‘half’ of Trumps supporters were ‘deplorables’. She reversed herself on that almost immediately--not half. That's more than there were--but there still were some."
Doesn't matter at all, and you should know that. She said it and people absorbed it. Like: she's a multimillionaire talking at a HBTQ-rally and calling folks who are for Trump "deplorables".
Those folks won't ask themselves was that me or was that my neighbor or was it both? They're slighted. And you can never get them back.
"Well that'd be all good and well if yoou didn't have a severe crime problem related to immigrants."
Actually, we don't. The severe crime rate is actually lower among immigrants than it is among the native born. (This remains true even if one filters for only hispanic immigrants.) A lot of the Trumpkins insist this cannot be true because the immigrants they're ranting about are ‘illegal’ in the first place. But, it is not a crime to come across the border without permission. (If you've been picked up here, and been to court already and been ordered sent back and then come back a second time that's a crime--there's an actual law against that and a punishment prescribed for it, but the ‘first offense’ entry into the United States is not a criminal matter. Surprises the hell outta most right-wingers and Trumpkins, but it is true.)
"Doesn't matter at all, and you should know that. She said it and people absorbed it."
YOU absorbed it. But, then, you're a bigot. You're one of the people she was talkin’ ‘bout. Of course you're pissed. Most of them are. The rest don't really listen to Radio-Right-Wing enough--even though they were really, really tryin’ hard to make everybody else take that personal too.
Three steps to Google up the Radio-Right-Wing spin on that? Damn boy, ya'll gotta get that down to two steps max. You'll never make it go mainstream otherwise.
Actually, that ‘deplorables’ thing is kinda like Benghazi. It means a lot to right-wingers and now to Trumpkins, but they never got it to catch on mainstream. (Eight friggin’ congressional committees and they still couldn't take it mainstream.)
It's gonna be a GREAT wall! The greatest one since the chinese wall. And yes it's gonna happen Lee. It WILL be built.
Again I get to school you and tell you what's gonna happen. So here:
Trump's probably gonna trade his wall with house GOP menbers who are more concerned about NAFTA and TPP so he'll sell his voters out on trade but they won't even notice since he'll build that wall. And the Reps in congress will suck it up and accept that wall as long as NAFTA and TPP remains in place.
That's how this plays out. Restrictions on movements of people but a free reign on movements of goods and money.
Ladders are too cheap. So, Ryan ain't gonna give ‘im the money for the wall--they've looked at that appropriation before and it don't get them enough in campaign contributions. Just don't. Still don't.
And, no free trade, TPP is gonna die, be dead in the first 100 days, even Ryan and McConnell will have given up on it. Maybe even NAFTA, although he'll have to sell that one to a dubious set of Congressional Republicans.
Marcus: Nafta - remains + TPP (in question) + wall = VERY GREAT WALL.
Now again we have a chance to see who'se right. And since I've been crushing, reallb demolishing LEE C lately I would assume most folks with braincells left in their skulls would tend to listen to me.
"You might not know it yet but he [Ryan] is dead in tge waters."
Your problem is that you don't manage to absorb stuff unless it comes from one of your favored, appropriately slanted sources.
"I also read that Steve Bannon, he of Brietbart fame and CEO of the Trump Campaign and possible for Trump's Chief of Staff in the White House, Bannon has insisted there will be no forgiveness for Ryan." Lee C. @ Fri Nov 11, 06:13:00 am ↑↑
You might want to get over that problem before you presume to try to lecture me on American politics.
On the bright side, we do know where you've been gettin’ your information. You are still following along in full-Brietbart mode. So, we can discount it appropriately.
Trump won with fewer votes (overall) than Romney got when he lost in 2012 (David Plouffe in the NYT) That's how far down the turnout was this election.
May wanna check with Trump's people on that one. Trump spokesman, Newt Gingrich (who's being talked up for Secretary of State--Oh my God!) has already admitted that noise was just a good ‘campaign device’. (Link) How long did that take?
By the way, Chris Christie, who was leading The Donald's transition team, is out and Veep Mike Pence has taken over that job. (Major mistake there--can't fire Pence if he too is unable to handle it--need to give that job to somebody you can blame and then fire if Trump's not ready to take the reins come January--which he likely will not be. Major mistake there. Not a good sign he's making major mistakes already. Better damn well hope his luck holds and Pence can pull it off.)
Tweet from Margarita Simonyan, head of the propaganda channel RT:
""If Trump recognizes Crimea as ours, lifts sanctions, makes a deal with us on Syria and frees [Julian] Assange, I will retire. Because the world will be beautiful." LSM Viewpoint
So she'd better have a solid political program first and let the gender issue work for itself.
I like her, not because she is a woman, but because she seems to have a solid track record as a Senator. I only mentioned the glass ceiling thing because she does happen to be a woman.
The people who thought it actually applied to them (mostly they were correct), they were already firmly committed to Trump.
I just read that the KKK is planning a parade in Trump's honor. Just what a future president wants to hear, I'm sure.
There have already been a number of incidents in schools with kids yelling "build the wall" or marching down the halls with "white power" signs.
While Trump may think his campaign tactics were perfectly okay, since he won and all, other people find them, well, deplorable. There are quite a few people out here who do not want a leader who espouses racism. One can only hope that he grows up and matures in office.
. (WTF they think they're supposed to accomplish is beyond me - seems like grown children who got their christmas presents stolen from them, or something)
If you are of the belief that they are not all bought and paid for, but that there actually are real everyday Americans out there marching, I would suggest that they are venting their fear that they have woken up to find themselves living in an America they don't know. An America that finds it okay to denigrate people for ones own personal gain. An America that is not inclusive of all. A lot are young people, and marching is an activity they understand. An older person's venting comes more in the form of giving interviews on TV, if one is of some renown, or typing in a blog's comments section, if one is not.
Protests are not new to America. As long as they are not violent it is a person's right to vent their anger. Hopefully it will blow over and they will eventually go home. But it is the weekend and some people have a lot of time on their hands.
Btw, Hillary won the popular vote. Like the Gore vs Bush election there are those out there who feel cheated.
"There are other ways to build a wall besides bricks and mortar."
The Berlin Wall was mostly concrete as is Israel's wall, and the neighborhood walls in Baghdad. If they're made of wood or wire though they're generally called ‘fences’ rather than walls. Although, I believe you're implying that there's going to be an imaginary wall, a make-believe, pretend wall. That would not surprise me.
Listening to Radio-Right-Wing this morning. Opening show (local show) has, as its theme for the day, breathless hysterics about supposed physical attacks, shootings and beatings, on Trump supporters on the streets of the cities of the Mid-West. Right here in the Great American Midwest where Trump supporters dominate they're now not safe on the streets on account of wild-eyed liberals are hunting them down. And it's being said that the Secret Service has told Donald the Great that he must wear a bullet-proof vest at all times. We must all pray for Trump's safety I'm being told, plus, of course, keeping an eye out for those crazy, violent liberals who're hunting Trump supporters on the streets of our great nation.
Although, I believe you're implying that there's going to be an imaginary wall, a make-believe, pretend wall. That would not surprise me.
Something along the lines of drone surveillance, perhaps. There are portions of fencing and such in places. Multiple hurdles to building an actual wall exist, not least of which are environmental and private property issues.
I've heard Trump's people refer to it as a ‘virtual’ wall, like virtual reality. They can show you a computer generated picture of a wall, and that'll have to be good ‘nuff, ‘cause there ain't gonna be no real wall in the real world. (And, considering that net immigration across the Mexican border has been negative for several years now, that may indeed be good ‘nuff.)
OK so it's Saturday and I'm off from work and I'm off tomorrow too so I decide to roll lunch and dinner into one and go down to this local pizza parlour and get a pie and some beers, right.
So I go there and I bring the newest edition of Time Magazine because I subscribe to it and I think it's gonna get me a kinda cool, worldly look amongst the other heavy drinkers down at Slottstadens Pizzeria, right?
No but to be honest I do subscribe to Time and I do like it because of its level and fair reporting of global current events. LOL! JK.
No but to be honest I actually DO read that crap for entertaiment value. So while I'm chomping down my Calzone (extra cheese) and gulping beers one afther the other I come across this smallish article about Lebanon.
Says they have a new President too. Just recently elected. Much like the Glorious Leader Donald J Trump is about to become King in the USA this dude's gonna rule Lebanon. Anyhwo dude's name's Michel Aoun and supposedly he's a Maronite Christian.
Then I had to ask myself: what the hell is one of those? OK so I get he's supposedly a Christian of some sort even if his name sound froggy and his face looks araby, but I say OK a Christian's still a Christian. But WTF is this whole "Maronite" deal about?
Anyone who knows? I'm looking for very specific and detailed information on what constitutes a Maronite here. Some help please?
News? We have to wait until Jan-20 Inauguration day, Lee. Then the great earth-moving machines will roar up their diesel fuelled engines at 00:01 and get to work on the foundations of the Greatest Wall ever built. Just gotta toss that failure Obama, who will have no legacy, out of the White House first. And that apparently takes until Jan-20 for some strange reason.
So until then we have ample time to really get into the question of: "what is a Maronite"?
It's a religious designation. It's a sect, or a denomination, or whatever it is they call affiliated Catholic sects. I'm sure there's a special Catholic word to express that relationship, but, since neither of us is Catholic, I don't reckon it much matters. One correct answer is that ‘Maronite’ is a religious designation.
We must all pray for Trump's safety I'm being told, plus, of course, keeping an eye out for those crazy, violent liberals who're hunting Trump supporters on the streets of our great nation.
I'm looking for very specific and detailed information on what constitutes a Maronite here. Some help please?
Ahhh, the old Maronite distraction ploy. Worked so well in the past. But we really need Petes as well as Lee C to help really get it going. lol!
Nope, I think he's out studying that rather large Moon we have going on around about now. (It was beautiful last night, btw.) Should be even more spectacular on Monday.
Then the great earth-moving machines will roar up their diesel fuelled engines at 00:01 and get to work on the foundations of the Greatest Wall ever built.
just get out the ladders and shovels, boys. No worries.
"So, we don't have listen to you bluster ‘bout Trump's wall until at least January then?"
Well, I might on occasion mention the GREATNESS of it all, but really - no - we don't need to talk about the inevitable Wall before it's built.
Well, we might debate it during construction when I will surely tell you about the great builder Trump and how he'll build his Great Wall on time and under budget - as he was wont to do in his building business previously.
But up until Jan-20 when the engines start to roar we can talk about other stuff I guess.
Lynnette: "We can even give the wall a name. He said it might be named after him. We could call it Trump's Folly. Has a nice Old English ring to it."
No, it's gonna be "The Great Wall of Trump"
Nothing else.
Other suggestions were "the great white wall", but that was deemed (too) racist, and "the deplorable wall" but that just had a sad sounding name for such a great thing, and "The Wall" plain and simple but that would crowd out the Berlin wall in history. So none of 'em really worked out.
I hear they're now even shooting at eachother. The anti Trump protesters that is. They went from protesting in no-Trump areas, to vandalising in no-Trump areas and now they're shooting one another? Seems really dumb to me, but what do I know. Libruls gonna be be libruls I guess.
Also it brings about the importance of the 2:d amendment. That sane folks should be ready and armed in case undemocratic hordes like the ones we are seeing now should pop up and tresspass into honest folks lives. Then you need to be ready and able to just gun 'em down.
310 comments:
1 – 200 of 310 Newer› Newest»Preznit Trump ate my hamster!
Lol!
We'll see. Your hamster may yet be safe.
I too believe, Pete, we'll wake up tomorrow to a Trump precidency. I don't have any math or sience, it's just a feeling. And flawed as Trump might be he's still the lesser evil.
Hillary for sure, if she wins, will look at those deplorable Americans she despices (despiced already and now hate since they woted against her) and smile when she sends THEIR children off to wars she and her inner circle find necessary, or fun, or whatever.
No matter, it's just future deporables dying in her mind, no big loss. Just like ancient rulers threw cannon fodder at the enemy de jour without any thought to the actual people who were dying.
Hillary has NEVER seen a war she didn't want to send other peoples children to fight. Name ONE war she opposed during her time in power.
That's one psycho bitch right there.
Detailed poll in Florida calls it safely Trump:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/Trafalgar_FL_November_2016.pdf
He needa Ohio too and they're about even. Then the fight for the rest of the swing states can begin.
Paedofile sex ring in Washington?:
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5bpa7c/breaking_from_the_anon_who_brought_you_the_laura/
Normally I write such stories off as hoaxes, but go through all the links and some seriously disturbing things will make you wonder... Espacially some of the photos and comments to photos are.... unnerving.
"Normally I write such stories off as hoaxes…"
But not until after you go through all the links and pictures.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
I had more trouble figuring out whom to write-in than I'd anticipated. Should have thought it through before I went in I guess, but it was solid that my state is going for Trump, Hillary's got no shot here, and I figured I had a bunch of options for the write-in and it'd be no problem.
Then I had to decide on one. Shoulda thought that through a little better. Oh, well….
No Lee. "Normally I write such stories off as hoaxes…" but then I got curious and looked at somen of those links and they were.... disturbing to say the least.
https://i.sli.mg/ON22AY.png
Read the text on that tshirt and look at who liked it and follow that trail in the many other links provided. Sickening. And it's right out there so you can't deny it, unless you approve kiddy-fiddling your own self. Which, however much I don't agree with you on political matters, I do not think you'd be in any way OK with.
So look it over. Seriously.
This isn't the first time you've come across stories on fairly vulgar web sites (the last batch was about Swedish immigrants). I'm willing to pass that off as coincidence, but, as for me, I just as soon not patronize those places. So, I'll not be bothering to look it over, seriously.
@ Lynnette,
I was looking over the local evening TV offerings (local over-the-air broadcasts). There is virtually nothing on offer except election coverage. (Couple of old "B" movies on the dedicated "B" movie channels, but they're not even putting on their best stuff.) Seems to be the election is the designated subject of interest for the evening.
Quaere then: What happens if The Donald refuses to concede the election? Answer is: Nothing happens; we shrug him off, and all go on about our business and ignore him going forward. And everything else in the world goes forward normally.
Detailed poll in Florida calls it safely Trump:
Now, at 7:15, Florida is very close, with Hillary having a slight lead.
Huh! They are coloring Texas blue in early voting. Due apparently to voters in San Antonio...:) See...voting does matter. Even if it doesn't hold into the night, it's still good.
Ooops, Hillary is now in second place in Florida. Trumps leading by about 918 votes. Sheesh, a nail biter. No, wait she's back in the lead...by 4,000 votes.
Seems to be the election is the designated subject of interest for the evening.
It is for me! :)
Electoral votes right now stand at 68 for Clinton and 48 for Trump.
I think your source there is maybe a little over-eager to be first with the news. (NBC has both Florida and Texas still up in the air/too close to call.)
For sane and reasonably conservative updates on who's got which states, here's NBC's state-by-state.
,
I happened to be watching that NBC page when it updated at 8:00 pm with the poll closings in a slew of states; Trump's jumped up 137 electoral votes to Hillary's 104. It was striking to watch, especially for an adamant #NeverTrump fella like me.
I'm still not worried; these are states Trump was on track to win easy.
It looks like Trump is in the lead in Florida and Michigan. Not what I like to see.
CNN is predicting that the Republicans will remain in control of the House.
"CNN is predicting that the Republicans will remain in control of the House."
I think that was a foregone conclusion.
The difference between what we're seeing here and what we expected to see is fairly simple. Trump didn't have anything of a ‘get out the vote’ program. Most folks expected that would sink him in the end (it was Obama's GOTV program that won him two elections).
Turns out Trump didn't need a ‘get out the vote’ program. His supporters were mad enough to get out all by themselves. Most folks didn't see that one coming. I didn't see it coming; I thought they'd bitch a lot and turnout would be down--turns out it's up instead. It's up for both parties, Democrats as well as Republicans. This may be a record setting voter turnout.
Gonna be a long night.
The Dow-Jones "Futures" market (presumably I don't have to explain that to anybody here) is down 700 points already tonight. It didn't drop that far after 09/11.
Politico has called Florida for Trump; I think they're using Associated Press predictions. (NBC is holding off, but Chuck Todd keeps telling his bosses it's over and Trump's got Florida).
"NBC is holding off, but Chuck Todd keeps telling his bosses it's over…"
Over in Florida I mean. Todd isn't calling the election for Trump just yet.
Associate Press has called North Carolina for Trump.
And, NBC finally called Florida for Trump.
Iowa goes to Trump (NBC projection). Trump's at 244; he only needs 270.
Oh Lord!
Chuck Todd just went through the numbers; he's predicting it to come in 269 to 269 with recounts being asked for in at least a couple of places.
It may not be over tonight. It may not be over tomorrow.
And, by ‘predicting’ I mean that Chuck Todd has said that he considers that the most likely result tonight (out of more than just a couple of possibilities). That doesn't mean he's guessing it at over a 50% possibility, but he's guessing it as the most likely outcome out of several that he's worked up.
I took a nap. I couldn't watch. Now I'm awake and it still looks bad. *sigh*
So many people oppose what he stands for. This isn't good for us, it isn't good for the world
Well, it's gettin’ late and it's gonna get later. Right now it's looking to me like Trump's got the advantage (244 electoral votes to Hillary's 209). And, I don't know that there's enough electoral votes left out there for her to pull this off; she'd have to pretty much run the table.
I may try to get some zzz's and let them tell me ‘bout it in the morning.
It looks like Minnesota is at 48% Clinton to 43% Trump. That is due to the major population centers going for Clinton.
I'm going to bed to. I will probably be depressed in the morning. It's just sad.
Wait a minute.
I just pulled down an update of the numbers; Hillary's pulling out some comeback numbers in the few states still out there. My count makes it likely 270-268 Hillary wins. (Trump will contest the election of course, but it's better to be the winner in a contested election than the challenger.)
Nevada just called for Hillary. 215 -- 244.
Pennsylvania's looking like a coin flip though--that shoots my 270--268 theory in the foot.
Yep, time for some zzzz's. Trump's currently up in both Pennsylvania and Michigan (only by a little, but it's gettin’ late). A win in either and he's our next President.
They've called the State of Maine for Hillary. But, Maine is semi-unique; it allocates its electoral votes proportionally (Kansas is the other state that does that.) Hillary gets only 3 out of the 4 electoral votes. That shoots down the chance that she could pull out a 270 to 268 win over Trump. Tie is the best she could hope for now (and the chances of that aren't good). And, if she gets a tie the Republican majorities in Congress get to decide, and they'll go for Trump.
In other words, it's over. Trump wins.
Pennsylvania is 99% counted. Very surprising that it hasn't been called. John Podesta just appeared at Clinton HQ to send the crowd home. So no concession from Hillary tonight. Trump would have been crucified if he'd pulled a stunt like that.
A sign of things to come I would say. Dems spent a long time being upset in 2000. Hillary may well win the popular vote. It's gonna be 100 times more bitter this time.
It just gets more bizarre. Hillary conceded to Trump by phone within minutes of Podesta implying it wouldn't happen. Podesta must have known what was coming. Did the Dems fear that violence might break out, or could Hillary just not face them?
Trump trying to be conciliatory right now in his victory speech. How long will that last?
And now to more important things ... five minutes to opening of European stock markets ;-)
[Lee]: "...it was solid that my state is going for Trump, Hillary's got no shot here"
Well at least we finally resolved yer a Hoosier, not a Cheesehead. ;-)
I had a feeling it would go this way. People are more pissed off than many realize. It's not just in the US, I feel it here too and have been for a while now. The "establishment" is out of sync with reality and the people is lashing out.
We're in for a ride next year with Marine Le Pen set to become President in France in May and Merkel being severely punished in Germany in August. Bet that.
Trump's still trailing in the popular vote total. Hillary's ahead of him by about a million votes. Assuming that holds, this'll make the second time since the year 2000 that the Republicans have won the Presidency with a minority of the vote (Dubya lost the popular vote to Al Gore in the year 2000).
(We'll probably hear it again this week, it's been said before by ‘establishment’ Republicans: The Republican Party may survive 4 years of a Hillary Clinton Presidency. It will not survive 4 years of President Trump.)
Hillary must think she's cursed or something. In 2008 she was "supposed" to be the nominee and Barack came out of basically nowhere and totally blindsided her. She gritted her teeth and went to work for him for 8 years. After that long wait she finally won the nomination only to loose to Trump when the victory fireworks were already set up and waiting to be lit. I almost feel a bit sorry for her.
lose, not loose. I know that.
US markets just opened. Here in Europe, stocks nosedive momentarily upon opening six hours ago, but bounced very quickly. Seems Europe has gotten used to Trump already, although some politicians are taking longer to adjust than the markets. Some nasty things being said. (Maybe because I'm watching the BBC, who are also still in disbelief).
Marcus, I agree. Nobody quite believed the same dissatisfaction would overtake the US as has beset Europe. This is the ultimate wake-up call.
[Marcus]: "Hillary must think she's cursed or something."
True, but hey! -- on the up side she finally gets to divorce Bill now that she no longer has any use for him.
"lose, not loose. I know that."
Puts you ahead of 90% of native speakers ;-)
I thought it was Catholic dogma that divorce was an objectively bad thing and not an ‘upside’, that it should be a ‘have to’ situation and not ‘get to’.
Pete: "Marcus, I agree. Nobody quite believed the same dissatisfaction would overtake the US as has beset Europe. This is the ultimate wake-up call."
I just wish that politicians would have realised this before. Then it needen't have come to this state.
The thing that makes my blood really boil is all that crap whenever a new "progressive" takes the spotlight that you're an "angry low educated white man" if you question any of it. Open borders, 79 different sexual identities, identity politics where I am a bad guy no matter what I do, etc.
I've really had it with this PC-crap and am prepared to burn the house down and see what I can make of the ashes if this shit continues. So I can totally understand Trump voters who do not genuinely buy into everything he says he'll do and who might have reservations on him and some of the stuff he's been upto
And while I'm white I'm neither poor or uneducated.
I'm just sick and tired of being part of the real backbone of the economy that makes our society function and only get scorn in return from "artists" and politicians and media figures who actually do not add much value when compared to the very real value me and mine bring in. They live off of us and deride us at every chance they get. F*ck that! No more.
MEGA!
I am dressed in black today. It seemed appropriate.
It looks like the GOP will control the Executive branch and the Legislative branch. It has been said that things only get done when one party controls both. Well, I guess we will see what gets done now. Some people may not like to reap what they have sown.
I almost feel a bit sorry for her.
I know. But I think this was an unusual time. As both Petes and you have remarked, there is a lot of anger out there. People don't always think clearly when they are angry. She should know that.
Back later to finish reading the comments...
What clinched it for Trump:
53% among white women. (that gives me hope!)
29% among Latinos. (an unexpectedly large percentage)
Lynnette: "I know. But I think this was an unusual time. As both Petes and you have remarked, there is a lot of anger out there. People don't always think clearly when they are angry. She should know that."
She's deeply connected to and basically joined at the hip with what they're angry about. I don't think she could have done much different to change this outcome really. It's not Hillary that failed, it's Trump who triumphed.
That said, I anticipate that some portion of his followers, the "true believers" if you will, are in for some serious dissapointment when they realise he won't be able (or maybe even willing) to deliver what they think is coming.
[Lynnette]: "I am dressed in black today. It seemed appropriate."
Well you can console yourself that Minnesota went for Hillary. Although it looks like it was the Twin Cities that barely swung it. And that was with an 80% turnout in those precincts (which sounds a tad unbelievable ... you sure those city folks know how to do an honest count? ;-)
Blame those Wisconsinian Cheeseheads. Good thing Lee turned out not be one of 'em, eh?
I see the MSM are showing Californian college teens demonstrating against Trump already. First thing that occurred to me when Hillary didn't show up to concede defeat last night was whether it was for fear of real violence. Funny, they never showed the Bernie supporters demonstrating against Hillary, even at the DNC. The tragedy is if they had, they mightn't have missed the Bigger Picture so monumentally.
The most worried and most regretful person in the world right now might be Glenn Beck. He put all his pennies on the wrong pony and now he's got no friends at all. It's not like he'll get a job on CNN. Poor Glenn. Out in the cold for realz. LOL!
Pete: "Well you can console yourself that Minnesota went for Hillary."
Is that really certain though? NYT still has it "leaning for Hillary" but I read that the later votes tallied are out in Trumpland and that the major population centers who favoured Hillary are already counted. So it might yet swing.
Also some theories were put too death in this cnclusion of the elections. I come to think of the one put forth by as diverse people as Michael Moore and Lee C where Trump didn't actually want to win, but merely ran as a strategy in order to lauch a right-of-Fox media empire.
Look at the efforts that man put into his campaign the last week. 4 rallies this day, 5 rallies that day, several states every day meeting voters and promoting his cause. Out-rallying Hillary 10 to 1 really. Looks to me like a man who REALLY wanted to win.
So maybe Hillary should say something before things get even worse? The BBC have been flashing up "Hillary Clinton expected to make speech shortly" on the news ticker for hours now. She must be having one helluva headache if she doesn't show up by east coast midday! The right wing UK press is suggesting she was too upset to concede in public last night.
Tim Kaine on stage now, presumably with Hillary in tow.
Hillary clearly hurting, but helped by the partisan New York crowd. Seems like a very gracious and conciliatory defeat speech from her.
"Looks to me like a man who REALLY wanted to win."
You misunderstand the theory. At least, you misunderstand my theory; I don't know what Michael Moore believes; I don't pay much attention to him.
What I said was that I thought Trump ran for President intending to enhance his ‘brand’ and that he was as surprised as anybody else (maybe more surprised than most) when his campaign caught fire with the angry aged white voters. I didn't say he didn't want to win--I said that he didn't start out expecting to win, or even actually trying to win; he was instead intent on pumping up his public ‘brand’. And be damned if he'd not stumbled into a goldmine.
Lee:
" caught fire with the angry aged white voters. "
FUCK YOU for that Lee!!!!
First of all white men too have a say on how the countries THEY built are handled. They collectively built almost ALL the wellfare in modern western states. (Really they should be the only ones qualified to vote - not just whites but actual contributors)
Second: white women seem to be catching up on the message, finally, and they too went in as a majority for Trump.
That YOU are a ethno-masochist cuckold ol' bastard with no children doesn't mean YOU have the right to destroy the future for the rest of our people.
First thing that's gonna happen is, Paul Ryan's not gonna pay for Trump's wall (nor will the Mexicans); hence, no wall. Second thing is that Paul Ryan's not gonna pay for Trump's massive public works projects (don't know if that'll kill the Trump stimulus plan or if they'll just run up the deficit to the crash point).
I give it maybe six months before the economic downturn sets in--probably not a crash, more a down slope. We'll see how that goes over with the angry old white folks.
Trump might be able to instigate his ban on Muslims; that'll make ‘em happy; but that's a cosmetic measure anyway and doesn't make any real difference domestically.
And, he might be able to help kill ObamaCare (although the Republicans might balk at actually doing that considering they never intended to have to go through with it; they have no replacement plan).
Life is gonna get interesting in Washington DC. All those folks who wanted radical disruptive change--they gonna see some. And then the angry old white folks will figure out they actually had it pretty good before they went all disruptive. Be too late by then though.
But, we'll survive. Probably finish off the Republican Party for good, but the country will survive.
"FUCK YOU for that Lee!"
I have absolutely no problem with pissing off bigoted fascists whose politics are primarily racially based. I object to bigotry as a matter of course. So, doesn't bother me at all that I piss you off. You might as well just get used to that idea. Gettin’ all wired up just gets you all wired up. Doesn't bother me a bit.
Why don't you go live in inner city Baltimore then Lee, if you love diversity so much? No because you're just like them other liberals who always want to force "divercity" on other peoples' children, aren't you?
NIMBY-MTF:er
Yeah, I called ya that!
"Yeah, I called ya that!"
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that it matters what you call me.
"FUCK YOU for that Lee!"
LOL, Marcus. Lee's one of them angry white guys that think angry white guys are bad only when they are of the opposite political persuasion. I've seen lots of angry old white Democratic guys on the MSM today complaining about "voter suppression". Remember how it was supposed to be only the angry old white Trump guys that were complaining about election rigging? Even the BBC commentator last night, as the tide looked to be turning, quipped that "Trump wasn't complaining about fraud now". If he'd said that about Hillary he'd be joining the dole queue today. Mean time, let's check out some of those ignorant white bigots.
Nope. I couldn't care less. You are OUT, we are IN. Sayonara bieach!
I've never been a Democrat, much less an angry one; I have been a Republican when I was younger.
Nor, for that matter, have I complained about ‘voter suppression’, at least not in this election. (There are organized efforts among the right-wingers to suppress voting among those groups they think likely to vote for Democrats, but those suppression efforts had little effect on this election.)
Your enemy Petes is not quite so easy for you to see as you suppose.
Ok, just allowing myself a tiny bit of glee. Back to serious business. Just in case the Euroweenies get too cocky, I sense a flock of black swans on the horizon?
Check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8bqWbJkTf8
We're not gonna put up with this for long. Gonna be a revolution here too.
MEGA!
That Europeans could go for nativist, right-winger parties is no surprise; happens cyclically. Those hardly qualify as black swan events.
"You are OUT, we are IN. Sayonara bieach!"
Actually, I'm not out; I'm still here. You forget; Clinton actually won the majority vote. Trump is gonna be another minority President.
I listened to Obama's speech. It was good, and very gracious. I will miss his intelligent discourse.
I rather liked this quote from Alec Baldwin:
"I think the thing to focus on now is our families. To love those that were put in our lives to care for. Also our respective health, work and faith. The American political system is broken. Walk away from it for a while. As Coriolanus says, 'There is a world elsewhere.'"
"There is a world elsewhere." Yes, that quote within a quote is particularly apt.
I expect what'll happen now is that Trump will work with the Republican Congrassional majorities to promote ‘business friendly’ policies. Then those angry old white folks, the ones who voted for Trump will be treated to a rude introduction to reality that it is big business who's been accumulating all the wealth lately. They're mostly mad at their diminishing financial prospects. This'll make it worse. They'll not be able to overlook that much longer I don't reckon.
First thing that's gonna happen is,...
There was a reason that the founding fathers attempted to put in place checks and balances. It was to prevent one person from gathering too much power. One hopes that those checks and balances will reign in Trump's more radical, and expensive, ideas.
Two years until the midterm election. That will be his first report card.
Just in case the Euroweenies get too cocky, I sense a flock of black swans on the horizon?
Or is it chickens coming home to roost?
Tough times everywhere, I'm thinking.
Minnesota went for Clinton (47%) to Trump's (45%). Most of the state is colored red, though. It was the Twin Cities, and up around the Duluth area, that put her ahead. My county went for Trump by a 10% margin.
The insurance premium spike issue is really pissing people off. They'll lash out at anyone.
First of all white men too have a say on how the countries THEY built are handled.
But, Marcus, that's what you don't understand. The United States was not just built by white men. It is truly a melting pot with a rainbow of colors. Nor was it just men who contributed. Women have always been a strong source of our country's strength.
Ya know, this was close enough that do I think FBI Director Comey turned it. She was on a positive roll until he re-opened that can of worms.
Lynnette: "But, Marcus, that's what you don't understand. The United States was not just built by white men. It is truly a melting pot with a rainbow of colors. Nor was it just men who contributed. Women have always been a strong source of our country's strength."
I understand it all too well. Yes of course women have participated. And some people of coluor too. But by and large ALL progress from the internal combustion engine to the Internet and everything in between such as space travel are inventions of the WHITE MAN.
Now, that's not to say white men who didn't excell and invent new technology should be put on a pedistal and hailed to just on account of being white and male. But the recent trend of deriding and ridiculing and scorning white men for being white and male (and even worse middle age), well you do that at your peril and you reap the whirlwinhd. So now, reap it!
"ALL progress…are inventions of the WHITE MAN."
Is this supposed to be the result of some inherent superiority of the ‘WHITE MAN’?
Anti-Trump protests in at least seven cities, from California to New York.
I was about to ask the same thing. There wouldn't have been any white men if it hadn't been for black people, seeing as we were all black not too long ago. Pretty much all scientific progress for several centuries in medieval times was due to "brown" Muslims. Arguably the European Renaissance, Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment wouldn't have happened without them. Without that, Marcus's white Europeans wouldn't have been in the position to invent the car or the Internet. I wouldn't be taking too much credit for mere happenstance.
(On the other hand, I'd argue for Christian rationalism as an important factor ... but then I would, wouldn't I).
"Anti-Trump protests in at least seven cities, from California to New York."
Too late now. The time for anti-Trump protests was before the election. But, I suppose they've got the right to be too late.
"Anti-Trump protests in at least seven cities, from California to New York."
There was similar for Bush. Capital-D Democrats seem to take it harder when their guy (or gal) loses. But I expect they'll be mostly pampered college kids -- they always seem to have the most tenuous grasp of democratic ideals. They'll get distracted/bored soon enough.
In spite of record setting early voting rates, total turnout for this election may come in at a rate (percentage of available voters) that is lower than any election since 2004. Vox The early story was all about how there'd be record turnouts. Apparently those numbers don't hold up to a clear-eyed look. The Democrats didn't show up on election day. Low turnout is traditionally correlated with Republicans doing well.
But the recent trend of deriding and ridiculing and scorning white men for being white and male (and even worse middle age), well you do that at your peril and you reap the whirlwinhd. So now, reap it!
But is that really what elected Donald Trump? People I have spoken with, who voted for Trump, seemed to be looking for someone who would shake up the status quo.
Blame the MSM. First they gave Trump more publicity then any amount of money could buy. Then they convinced half the population (as well as themselves) that the mere idea of a Trump victory was utterly, outrageously, unthinkably farfetched. By the time it got to a Tuesday morning in November it probably seemed unnecessary to queue for hours like those nasty bigoted old white male Trump-supportin' no-hopers.
But I expect they'll be mostly pampered college kids -- they always seem to have the most tenuous grasp of democratic ideals.
They have been interviewing various people in the protests, and what I am seeing are people who are really concerned about Trump's apparent bigotry and hate filled rhetoric during the campaign. They don't feel that he represents them or their values. One of the people immigrated here from Argentina 29 years ago and said that he wanted to get away from a demagogue. He didn't expect to see the same here.
I understand their feelings. It is now up to Trump to show us that he can be a bigger person than what he was during the campaign. He needs to live up to the office he holds.
In spite of record setting early voting rates, total turnout for this election may come in at a rate (percentage of available voters) that is lower than any election since 2004.
They looked at the numbers here in Minnesota and that holds true here.
"People I have spoken with, who voted for Trump, seemed to be looking for someone who would shake up the status quo."
Exactly. (My MSM comment was in response to Lee about voter turnout). That's what the MSM missed. It wasn't that people generally supported Trump's more crass pronouncements. It was more anti-establishment, anti-status-quo than pro-Trump. Trump will pass, but the sentiment behind his election will persist until the divisions -- at least the economic ones -- are addressed. The last century has seen a swing from unfettered capitalism to the rise of the labour movements, to the relatively equal sharing of post-war prosperity, to the heartlessness of neo-conservatism and the hijacking of the left by social extremists. Lots of Trumpsters seem to hate the Republican status quo as much as the Democrat one.
Hmmm... they are interviewing some of those angry old white men, who as one said aren't really angry, just fed up. Many also talked about jobs that have disappeared and implied that their votes were strictly from an economic standpoint. They thought Trump, being a businessman, could help with that.
Lots of Trumpsters seem to hate the Republican status quo as much as the Democrat one.
Yes. One person said exactly that to me when I asked her reasoning for supporting Trump.
"I understand their feelings. It is now up to Trump to show us that he can be a bigger person than what he was during the campaign."
The Trump voters are probably managing to contain their feelings about a bit of crass language, in favour of a chance for economic betterment. I'm not suggesting Trump is likely to deliver on his rhetorical promises, just that there is a voting cohort who don't have the luxury of being all upset about Trump's crude language.
They probably also recognised the hypocrisy of the MSM banging on about Trump's bad language and giving Hillary a free pass for her "basket of deplorables" speech. At least when Romney accused 49% of the population of being no-good Welfare dependants four years ago, it had to be secretly filmed at a speech to millionaires. Hillary came right out and said similar things in the full glare of national TV. It was a sign of how utterly out of touch she was, even as the supposed voice of political experience.
I think my concerns, besides Trump's hate rhetoric, which I don't agree with at all, are for things like the ACA. No, it is not perfect and its current form is causing stress in the insurance industry. But to totally scrap it without something to replace it leaves people with serious health care issues again out in the cold.
Okay, some of the California protesters are a little on the far left wing nutty side.
:-)
I'd say the chances of Trump scrapping the ACA with no replacement are nil. The chances of Trump doing most of the things he's talked about are probably slim, without at least a great deal of watering down. Just like Obama continued multiple Bush policies, failed to match his own campaign rhetoric (e.g. closing Gitmo?), and probably deported as many illegals as Trump is ever going to.
Nobody knows what Trump is going to do, other than that he has no interest in learning what he needs to know to govern effectively (we do know that much--tiger doesn't change its stripes suddenly at the age of seventy years). He has the attention span of a ten-year-old with ADD and he will follow his whims.
It's gonna be just fine. He's gonna pick a great team, build a great wall and make great deals. Just for you.
In the future when people live on Mars they're going to have History Class where they look in telescopes at Earth and the teacher will be like: "There's the Great Barrier reef, and up north of it is the Great Wall of China, and look over there at the Americas, here we can see the Great Wall of Trump very clearly".
I see Minnesota did go to Hillary. That puts her at 228. If we assume Arizona and Michigan for Trump and New Hampshire for Hillary (as NYT:s latest estimates suggest) then the final result will be 232 - 306. Seems like Trump could have lost Florida even, and still won.
Man there must be really, really many of them there angry, old, uneducated men in America. The whole country just full of 'em.
Question is still pending:
"ALL progress…are inventions of the WHITE MAN."
Is this supposed to be the result of some inherent superiority of the ‘WHITE MAN’?
No Lee, it's just an argument to back why I'm so f-ing sick and tired of everything always being the fault of that "white man". That was how that discussion started.
You can't have missed that the #1 target those identity politics SJW:s always attack (and are allowed to attack with impunity) are "angry white men" throw in "heterosexual, low-educated and middle aged" for good measure and you get the ultimate effigy to pour scorn on.
Now call me crazy, but fact is a lot of what makes our societies function is the hard labor of men who are white and do not bugger other men up the rectum and who might not have an advanced degree but have professionalism in their trade.
You call them evil and deplorable and whatnot and sooner or later they'll start fighting back.
"No Lee, it's just an argument to back why I'm so f-ing sick and tired
of everything always being the fault of that "white man". That was how
that discussion started."
No, that is definitely not how that discussion started. The discussion was about Trump, and who were his ‘base’ of supporters. Trump is not everything. Trump is merely Trump. And besides, I've been referring to his base supporters as ‘white folks’.
Damn, papers and magazines and blogs are all full of people trying to predict Trump; which way will he go; what will he do. Can't predict Trump; there's not enough evidence in. (What he said on the stump is not evidence. He just said whatever came into his head. He could change his position in the middle of a sentence.) Thing people ought to be considering is what to do in spite of Trump or in case of Trump, as the case may be.
Wanna write speculative pieces it'd be better to consider what's gonna happen when Trump doesn't deliver those factory jobs he's promised (it can be safely predicted he's not gonna do that; that ain't never gonna happen). What will his supporters turn to when it becomes apparent there's no salvation in Trump? That might be a reasonable line of inquiry and speculation.
Well, the damn papers, magazines and blogs are also full of Republicans and right-wingers who're suddenly full of acceptance for Trump's brand of politics (whatever that is; they'll be in favor of it soon as they find out what it is they need to be in favor of). A fair percentage of those #NeverTrump people have seen the light. And the light is orange.
"Russia’s deputy foreign minister said Thursday that officials from
his government were in contact with Donald Trump’s presidential
campaign, contradicting pledges from the president-elect that he had
not interacted with the Kremlin….’"
Politico.com
I've been listening to Radio-Right-Wing which runs a five minute FoxNews segment on the half-hour and a ten minute segment (including a brief local weather report) on the hour. So far they're not interested in reporting any rumors of Kremlin contacts with Trump's campaign. Not a peep.
It's a bad day to be an "analyst":
http://bbs.dailystormer.com/uploads/default/original/3X/3/3/334bfce24b88fff62dff74e62240b80f05a7c490.jpg
I'm sure they're all individually running around trying to explain how THEY PERSONALLY were not on board with this apparent consensus.
It's a good thing the new US president is speaking to the Russians and trying to come to some common grounds. I'm sure Donald won't be selling ya'll out to Putin, he just wants to make a great deal for everyone. Russkie and Merkin alike. About time that happened.
Should Putin try and take too much advantage of the situation (which he will not, he's too smart for that) Donald will simply grab him by the p*ssy and show him who'se the real boss. And Putin knows that. So he will be friendly.
"I'm sure they're all individually running around trying to explain how
THEY PERSONALLY were not on board with this apparent consensus."
Seein’ as how that headline is some 16 months old, I'd bet agin that proposition. Odds are they're not still fielding questions ‘bout last July's predictions. Been news since then.
"Donald won't be selling ya'll out to Putin…"
Probably not. What with the price of oil bein’ down, Putin would be hard pressed to come up with cash enough for more than maybe Finland and the Baltic States. Maybe get Sweden thrown in for good measure, but I don't know if Putin can afford Sweden.
You guys have been busy today, and I've been busy at work. I'll have to catch up tonight...
Wanna write speculative pieces it'd be better to consider what's gonna happen when Trump doesn't deliver those factory jobs he's promised (it can be safely predicted he's not gonna do that; that ain't never gonna happen).
Indeed. For angry, old, white men, they were pretty gullible in thinking that he really could make a difference in that regard.
There were protests here in Minnesota tonight against Trump. Social media has struck again. In some respects I have to feel a little sorry for him. I have the feeling that he's like the emperor with no clothes, he has bought into his belief of his "greatness". It must be a bit of a shock to see so many people out in the streets protesting against him. He is also very much like Jesse Ventura before him, very thin skinned. I doubt he will be conciliatory towards the people protesting. And that could be a very big mistake. While they will eventually calm down and go home, those people who believe that Trump is a racist, and that he doesn't represent them, are the future of this country. Those angry, white men are set to become a minority. Lee may very well be right, Trump may be the death of the Republican party as we have known it. People will now associated Trump with it.
Hmmm...they seem to have attracted some of the anarchists and the black lives matter people to the protests in California. They could be a problem for police.
Trump may also find that living in a fish bowl is going to be rather uncomfortable.
-.-
"…they were pretty gullible in thinking that he really could make a
difference in that regard."
Quite a fair percentage of them never did believe that, don't believe it now. They're not going to be disappointed by his failure to turn back the clock. (‘Course, there are others that will be disappointed, but how much of each. That's another question for another time?)
You don't seem to think I's serious, but I was. I grew up among these Trump people; I live amongst them now. This is the old white folks' equivalent, especially old rural white folks' equivalent, of black city folks burning down their own commercial districts when they get sufficiently pissed off. Doesn't make objective sense, but it keeps on happenin’ anyway. Lotta these folks voted for Trump not because they think he's gonna fix things, but because they think he's gonna break the things that are still left unbroken. This is ‘burn the sucker down’ time for them.
You may think I'm being dramatic, but I'm not. This is real; this is the nihilism of the previously privileged in action. They will come to regret it, and then they will deny it happened, but that's where we are, their coming denials notwithstanding.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Trump may also find that living in a fish bowl is going to be rather
uncomfortable."
Might, but he's a narcissist; he may instead enjoy the attention. (I think he's fairly used to tuning out criticisms he can't silence.)
One of the things I'm wondering is what the hell will be Trump's relationship with a Republican Congress. I read that the House ‘Freedom Caucus’ has decided not challenge Paul Ryan for Speaker of the House (probably because they have no one to propose as his replacement). However, I also read that Steve Bannon, he of Brietbart fame and CEO of the Trump Campaign and possible for Trump's Chief of Staff in the White House, Bannon has insisted there will be no forgiveness for Ryan. Essentially, they expect Ryan to give it up and become Trump's puppy in the House.
Ryan expects to run for President, figured to do it in 2020 although that plan might or might not be on hold just now. Ryan's gonna expect Trump to sign what they send over.
I got a feeling they may come to blows, figuratively speaking.
To be fair the Democrats have some hard work ahead too. Obama is leaving, Clinton is leaving a void much sooner than the party had expected, do they have anyone in the pipeline really? Also maybe some soul-searching to do.
Here's an article:
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-win-democratic-party-2016-11?r=US&IR=T&IR=T
"…do they have anyone in the pipeline really?"
They've got a couple, but only a couple, of genuine, known presidential prospects. Their bench is thin. (Elizabeth Warren is too old to be a genuine prospect four years down the line.) But, they've got plenty of time to identify more prospects. They've got the four years.
"Also maybe some soul-searching to do."
Not so much. When they come out of shock they'll realize that they'd already identified the problem of their being out of touch with the angry old white folks. Bernie Sanders showed them that (although much was made of Bernie having the millenials; it was notable that his coalition included white folks almost exclusively, including those who'd have once been union folks if there were private sector unions still functioning anymore). They just thought they'd have another cycle to address that problem before it bit ‘em; they didn't.
Hillary's get-out-the-vote operation wasn't as good as what she paid for it. That may have been a surprise, but that doesn't require much in the way of soul-searching. Trump's folks turned themselves out without much in the way of a Trump get-out-the-vote operation, which was definitely a surprise, but doesn't require much soul-searching either.
They are, however, Democrats. Therefore they will engage in much public display of angst, whether it's necessary or not.
The Democrats time will come later, after the Republicans break up and they have to try to hold on to their left-wing whilst trying to absorb those elements of the old Republican coalition that they can co-opt (elements which will be antithetical to the Democrats' left-wing). This'll be a hard time for them.
Let's face it. Trump's economic policies are as bogus as are Paul Ryan's, what Trump's got in mind won't work. But, what Ryan's got in mind won't work either.
What Hillary had in mind was never gonna happen. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell were gonna see to that.
So, we'll have an economic situation develop rather faster now than would have been the case under a Clinton administration (which would have been at loggerheads with the Republicans and therefore would have gotten very little if anything done). Clinton vs the Republicans would have promised another four years of muddling along stalemated, and probably have put off the reckoning for most of that four years, maybe all of it.
But, she wasn't gonna get much of anything done.
Now the world will have to get along without ‘American Leadership’ for the next four years. They may appreciate that in some places--certainly in Moscow and Bejing that'll go over well, may lots of places in Europe too.
At best Ryan (with McConnell in tow) and Trump will freeze things up and maybe, just maybe, they'll manage to muddle along for four years without getting anything done either, and thus they'll avoid the consequences and the backlash from implementing their preferred policies. But, I don't think they'll be that lucky.
But, they've got plenty of time to identify more prospects. They've got the four years.
Funny, but until Marcus mentioned it I never thought much about it. If I had to pick someone, I would pick Amy Klobuchar. I have always liked her. She may be able to succeed where Hillary Clinton did not. That is, break that highest glass ceiling.
At best Ryan (with McConnell in tow) and Trump will freeze things up and maybe, just maybe, they'll manage to muddle along for four years without getting anything done either, and thus they'll avoid the consequences and the backlash from implementing their preferred policies.
They have two years. In two years they will get a mid-term report card.
Only a few more leaves to go. I am seeing a light at the end of my leafy tunnel. Yay!!!
Lee: "Not so much. When they come out of shock they'll realize that they'd already identified the problem of their being out of touch with the angry old white folks."
If they too stick with the "old angry white folks" in their analysis they're starting in the wrong place and are bound to fail. Trump brought out way more than those.
Also, I suspect you don't quite yet understand how hard it is to bring someone who's fuming because he or she has been named "deplorable" back. That's one thing I have seen right here at home. People who take a stance because they are genuinely worried about the development of their society and get called bad names become die-hards who are not easily swayed back from their newfound position.
I haven't seen it mentioned yet in the aftermath of the election but I believe myself that the "deplorable" comment was of genuine importance here, maybe even to the point of actually deciding the outcome. Speaking like that to people from a position of great privilige and power can REALLY piss people off.
Lynnette:
"She may be able to succeed where Hillary Clinton did not. That is, break that highest glass ceiling."
While that would be an accomplishment in its own it can never be the basis for a campaign. It will never be overriding factor for more than quite a small percentage of people to see that ceiling broken (not that I would mind it broken, just stating facts here). It could be a matter of some importance I guess but it won't be at the top of the list of people's priorities. So she'd better have a solid political program first and let the gender issue work for itself. Probably best not to even mention it. Barack never ran as a black man for instance - he ran on a political vision.
Wall Street Journal's Peggy Nonan (long time staunch Republican, early Trump convert, just after he clinched the nomination) tells us what Trump must do (gotta go through Google to get there).
Turns out what he must do is surrender control of his administration to those wise and learned ‘Establishment’ Republicans whom he just whupped all through the primaries.
Yeah, right, like that's gonna happen.
"They have two years. In two years they will get a mid-term report card."
Even if the Republicans do poorly in the mid-terms (no reason they should do poorly in the mid-terms; that's when the older whiter voter usually outnumbers the Democratic base), Trump is unlikely to take that as a reflection on him.
"I haven't seen it mentioned yet in the aftermath of the election but I
believe myself that the "deplorable" comment was of genuine
importance here…"
I don't think it mattered. The people who thought it actually applied to them (mostly they were correct), they were already firmly committed to Trump. They got really pissed off ‘bout it, but it didn't piss of people who didn't already think it applied to them and who weren't already Trumpkins.
"…until Marcus mentioned it I never thought much about it. If I had
to pick someone, I would pick Amy Klobuchar."
I had thought about it. I had a list of about five. Amy Klobuchar would make six--she's got a shot I think. Another female would be Kirsten Gillibrand (Senator from New York).
"f they too stick with the ‘old angry white folks’ in their analysis they're
starting in the wrong place and are bound to fail. Trump brought out way more
than those."
Trump is a demagogue and brought out authoritarians of all colors and fascists and racists of all ages. Add those to the angry white folks and he had enough of a vote there to beat Hillary in what turns out to be a low-turnout election. (With a little help from the FBI and the Russians--odd batch of allies there, but there they were.)
(The authoritarians and the fascists and the racists will always be there. Gonna get about 15, maybe 20% just goin’ for them and nobody else.)
Lee: "They got really pissed off ‘bout it, but it didn't piss of people who didn't already think it applied to them and who weren't already Trumpkins."
Prolly wrong right there. Lots of people who didn't see themselves as deplorable (few actually were) and who were't already in line for Trump would have reacted to that statement, being uttered in the arena it was uttered.
You obviously need schooling in the new politics of today because the old politics where you think you're so knowledgable no longer applies. I TOLD you Trump would win, and you were pretty snarky about it up until it was a fact. Why won't you even attempt to listen to me when I explain why, and why this new trend is not easily reversible?
I could have told you Brexit would happen, I told you Trump would win. Now I tell you that in May Marine Le Pen becomes the new President of France and next August Merkel will have to resign after dismal election results. And all the forces who oppose this still seem to somehow not get the picture, they still think they can shame people into the fold. Sorry, that's over and done with. Finito.
The thing is Trump isn't really a "new thing" or a "novelty" as many still seem to believe. He's a catalyst. He came along at just the right time to tap into a movement that had already begun growing. Granted, he was just the right man against just the right opponent at just the right point in time to really speed things up. But all he did was give the pendulum, which was already in motion, a great push. He sped things up is all. We were heading in this direction with or without him, but now it'll go faster.
"Why won't you even attempt to listen to me when I explain why,
and why this new trend is not easily reversible?"
Because you're an admitted bigot and while I don't know if your economic principles are consistent with fascism (and therefore I do not call you a fascist yourself) you are nevertheless way too happy to support fascists across the board.
What we've got in America is a white middle class that's found that there is no middle class in this country anymore (at least, that's not the trend; there is a middle class who've held on but their prospects are increasingly grim). Our problem is with the economic model. Your problem is ethnic. You don't understand our problem. You think your problem applies here. It doesn't. The only similarity is that both problems tend to give rise to demagogues--but the demagogues are the manifestations, not the problem itself.
Both measles and influenza can cause a fever. But they are not the same problem.
You are correct when you say the problem is not easily reversible, but that's by coincidence. You didn't get that right by diagnosing the problem correctly. You had a 50/50 chance of gettin’ it right (easily solvable or not easily solvable) and you guessed it right.
"I could have told you Brexit would happen, I told you Trump would win."
You are merely rooting for your side to win. Hillary would have won if Comey hadn't reopened that investigation without cause, and made that public against all DoJ protocols. (Doesn't mean Hillary didn't screw up her campaign some too, or that it wasn't a really, really bad idea to have used a private e-mail server, especially when the knock on her was that she was ‘secretive’ already).
Ya got lucky on the Trump call--nobody could have guessed that Comey would have weighed in there.
That was a true black swan event. (Petes may want to make note for clarifying his definitions.)
Lee: "Our problem is with the economic model. Your problem is ethnic. You don't understand our problem. You think your problem applies here. It doesn't."
My problem has never been of ethnicity but rather about citizenship. And in citizenship I demand assimilation, not integration. This is different from the USA where integration probably is the main thing.
Yes, I am less tolerany of so called "multi-culturalism" than most Americans are, or seem to be. This has historic reasons and is a result of how our different societies were started, or what they "mean".
You're used to a melting pot of different cultures, so multi-culti might be OK for you. I am a descendant of a (globally) very small culture but one I love and would like to preserve so I demand assimilation from immigrants and for that to work at all the numbers have to be very limited.
But that's a seperate discussion.
I understand YOUR problems very well indeed. Goood enough to call your elections results which you obviously were not able to do, and which seems to have shocked a lot of your fellow liberal-leftie cohorts into protests and riots. (WTF they think they're supposed to accomplish is beyond me - seems like grown children who got their christmas presents stolen from them, or something)
There's an old story from out of the south ‘bout how the rich guys conspired to collect all the bisquits at the the church social meeting and share them among themselves, so they gathered them all up and left just one sittin’ on the table. And when they saw the hillbilly from the shack up on the mountain moving down the banquet line, one of them nudged him and said, "See that darkie over there? He's wantin’ to try to get your bisquit."
We got an ‘immigrant problem’ only because the rich guys need a scapegoat, a diversion. Not ‘cause the immigrants are tryin’ to get the last bisquit.
"…and which seems to have shocked a lot of your fellow liberal-leftie
cohorts…"
Those aren't my people. Apparently you missed the part where I criticized them when Lynnette mentioned them.
You do not get it.
Our problem is with the economic model.
Comey mattered way less than "deplorables". 100% certain of that. You oppose that you don't even know your own fellow citizens Lee. That's why I'm telling you you need schooling. Be nice and I'll school you even. Make you into a political superstar down at the bar&grill where you'll be able to call things ahead of others and watch your predictions come true. Just ask Lee and I'll tutor you.
Me^
"The thing is Trump isn't really a "new thing" or a "novelty" as many
still seem to believe. He's a catalyst."
You got the part about not being new correct. He's the modern day equivalent of Huey Long, Father Conklin, and, to a lesser extent, Joe McCarthy. But, he's not the catalyst--that's where you got it wrong. He's the result; he's the demagogue who comes along and makes the promises to folks who want somebody to promise them he'll make it all better, ‘cause they can't see how to fix things. (We got more hispanics slippin’ back across the border to Mexico than are coming north these days, and those fools want to build a wall.)
"Comey mattered way less than ‘deplorables’. 100% certain of that."
Often in error, but seldom in doubt, as the saying goes.
Hmmm… Let's think on that again. What she said was that ‘half’ of Trumps supporters were ‘deplorables’. She reversed herself on that almost immediately--not half. That's more than there were--but there still were some.
Whadda ya wanna call it 10% may 25%? You really think whatever she said, anything she did or did not say, was gonna get her that last 10% maybe 25% of the Trump people who are out and out racists? (Yeah, we still got ’em.) You really think you can sell that one to anybody ain't already committed to that stupidity?
Lee: "We got an ‘immigrant problem’ only because the rich guys need a scapegoat, a diversion. Not ‘cause the immigrants are tryin’ to get the last bisquit."
Well that'd be all good and well if yoou didn't have a severe crime problem related to immigrants and if illegal immigrants weren't used to push wages down (which I admit you sorta adressed).
What about the recent murder by machete in Houston Texas by a MS13 gangmember who had been twice deported before? You're gonna tell the family of the chopped to death victim that it was A-OK for that lowlife criminal to bounce back and forth across the border with impunity only to end up hacking a human to death by machete?
Or are you gonna get on board the Tump Train and BUILD THAT WALL?
Lee: "Hmmm… Let's think on that again. What she said was that ‘half’ of Trumps supporters were ‘deplorables’. She reversed herself on that almost immediately--not half. That's more than there were--but there still were some."
Doesn't matter at all, and you should know that. She said it and people absorbed it. Like: she's a multimillionaire talking at a HBTQ-rally and calling folks who are for Trump "deplorables".
Those folks won't ask themselves was that me or was that my neighbor or was it both? They're slighted. And you can never get them back.
"Well that'd be all good and well if yoou didn't have a severe crime problem
related to immigrants."
Actually, we don't. The severe crime rate is actually lower among immigrants than it is among the native born. (This remains true even if one filters for only hispanic immigrants.) A lot of the Trumpkins insist this cannot be true because the immigrants they're ranting about are ‘illegal’ in the first place. But, it is not a crime to come across the border without permission. (If you've been picked up here, and been to court already and been ordered sent back and then come back a second time that's a crime--there's an actual law against that and a punishment prescribed for it, but the ‘first offense’ entry into the United States is not a criminal matter. Surprises the hell outta most right-wingers and Trumpkins, but it is true.)
Schooling for Lee:
#1 Google the word "deplorable"
#2 Google the phrase "deplorable decided the election"
#3 Google "deplorable hate Clinton"
You do that Lee and might could happen if you keep an open mind (which yoou're not apt to do) you'll realise why this election went the way it did.
I'm giving you pearls here boy. I don't usually do that but there you are.
"Doesn't matter at all, and you should know that. She said it and
people absorbed it."
YOU absorbed it. But, then, you're a bigot. You're one of the people she was talkin’ ‘bout. Of course you're pissed. Most of them are. The rest don't really listen to Radio-Right-Wing enough--even though they were really, really tryin’ hard to make everybody else take that personal too.
Three steps to Google up the Radio-Right-Wing spin on that? Damn boy, ya'll gotta get that down to two steps max. You'll never make it go mainstream otherwise.
Tell ya what to watch for. Ain't gonna be no wall. Ain't gonna happen. Remember ya heard it here!
Actually, that ‘deplorables’ thing is kinda like Benghazi. It means a lot to right-wingers and now to Trumpkins, but they never got it to catch on mainstream. (Eight friggin’ congressional committees and they still couldn't take it mainstream.)
It's gonna be a GREAT wall! The greatest one since the chinese wall. And yes it's gonna happen Lee. It WILL be built.
Again I get to school you and tell you what's gonna happen. So here:
Trump's probably gonna trade his wall with house GOP menbers who are more concerned about NAFTA and TPP so he'll sell his voters out on trade but they won't even notice since he'll build that wall. And the Reps in congress will suck it up and accept that wall as long as NAFTA and TPP remains in place.
That's how this plays out. Restrictions on movements of people but a free reign on movements of goods and money.
But the wall gets built. Bet that.
Ladders are too cheap. So, Ryan ain't gonna give ‘im the money for the wall--they've looked at that appropriation before and it don't get them enough in campaign contributions. Just don't. Still don't.
And, no free trade, TPP is gonna die, be dead in the first 100 days, even Ryan and McConnell will have given up on it. Maybe even NAFTA, although he'll have to sell that one to a dubious set of Congressional Republicans.
So basically we have here:
Lee: Nafta - dead + TPP - dead + wall + dead.
While I say:
Marcus: Nafta - remains + TPP (in question) + wall = VERY GREAT WALL.
Now again we have a chance to see who'se right. And since I've been crushing, reallb demolishing LEE C lately I would assume most folks with braincells left in their skulls would tend to listen to me.
THE WALL WILL BE BUILT!
BTW:
"Ryan ain't gonna give ‘im " ...Blahblahblah!
That cuckservative Ryan who basically converted under the gallows aint ever gonna decide shit.
He's done. Finished. Au Revouir. You might not know it yet but he's dead in tge waters.
Trump will not be so magnanious. Ryan is gone. His political future is dead.
The 100% certain thing is that the WALL will be built. The rest is up for negootiation. But there will be a WALL. No doubt about that.
"You might not know it yet but he [Ryan] is dead in tge waters."
Your problem is that you don't manage to absorb stuff unless it comes from one of your favored, appropriately slanted sources.
"I also read that Steve Bannon, he of Brietbart fame and CEO of the
Trump Campaign and possible for Trump's Chief of Staff in the White
House, Bannon has insisted there will be no forgiveness for Ryan."
Lee C. @ Fri Nov 11, 06:13:00 am ↑↑
You might want to get over that problem before you presume to try to lecture me on American politics.
On the bright side, we do know where you've been gettin’ your information. You are still following along in full-Brietbart mode. So, we can discount it appropriately.
Trump won with fewer votes (overall) than Romney got when he lost in 2012 (David Plouffe in the NYT) That's how far down the turnout was this election.
"And since I've been crushing, reallb demolishing LEE C lately…"
Fella's become a true Trumpkin. (Although, in fairness, this tactic has long been a refuge of Petes, and Marcus may have picked it up from him.)
"But there will be a WALL. No doubt about that."
May wanna check with Trump's people on that one. Trump spokesman, Newt Gingrich (who's being talked up for Secretary of State--Oh my God!) has already admitted that noise was just a good ‘campaign device’. (Link) How long did that take?
By the way, Chris Christie, who was leading The Donald's transition team, is out and Veep Mike Pence has taken over that job. (Major mistake there--can't fire Pence if he too is unable to handle it--need to give that job to somebody you can blame and then fire if Trump's not ready to take the reins come January--which he likely will not be. Major mistake there. Not a good sign he's making major mistakes already. Better damn well hope his luck holds and Pence can pull it off.)
Tweet from Margarita Simonyan, head of the propaganda channel RT:
""If Trump recognizes Crimea as ours, lifts sanctions, makes a
deal with us on Syria and frees [Julian] Assange, I will
retire. Because the world will be beautiful."
LSM Viewpoint
Any question that they're behind Julian Assange?
So she'd better have a solid political program first and let the gender issue work for itself.
I like her, not because she is a woman, but because she seems to have a solid track record as a Senator. I only mentioned the glass ceiling thing because she does happen to be a woman.
The people who thought it actually applied to them (mostly they were correct), they were already firmly committed to Trump.
I just read that the KKK is planning a parade in Trump's honor. Just what a future president wants to hear, I'm sure.
There have already been a number of incidents in schools with kids yelling "build the wall" or marching down the halls with "white power" signs.
While Trump may think his campaign tactics were perfectly okay, since he won and all, other people find them, well, deplorable. There are quite a few people out here who do not want a leader who espouses racism. One can only hope that he grows up and matures in office.
ell ya what to watch for. Ain't gonna be no wall. Ain't gonna happen. Remember ya heard it here!
I believe the spin started on that is that it may not be a physical wall. There are other ways to build a wall besides bricks and mortar.
. (WTF they think they're supposed to accomplish is beyond me - seems like grown children who got their christmas presents stolen from them, or something)
If you are of the belief that they are not all bought and paid for, but that there actually are real everyday Americans out there marching, I would suggest that they are venting their fear that they have woken up to find themselves living in an America they don't know. An America that finds it okay to denigrate people for ones own personal gain. An America that is not inclusive of all. A lot are young people, and marching is an activity they understand. An older person's venting comes more in the form of giving interviews on TV, if one is of some renown, or typing in a blog's comments section, if one is not.
Protests are not new to America. As long as they are not violent it is a person's right to vent their anger. Hopefully it will blow over and they will eventually go home. But it is the weekend and some people have a lot of time on their hands.
Btw, Hillary won the popular vote. Like the Gore vs Bush election there are those out there who feel cheated.
"There are other ways to build a wall besides bricks and mortar."
The Berlin Wall was mostly concrete as is Israel's wall, and the neighborhood walls in Baghdad. If they're made of wood or wire though they're generally called ‘fences’ rather than walls. Although, I believe you're implying that there's going to be an imaginary wall, a make-believe, pretend wall. That would not surprise me.
Listening to Radio-Right-Wing this morning. Opening show (local show) has, as its theme for the day, breathless hysterics about supposed physical attacks, shootings and beatings, on Trump supporters on the streets of the cities of the Mid-West. Right here in the Great American Midwest where Trump supporters dominate they're now not safe on the streets on account of wild-eyed liberals are hunting them down. And it's being said that the Secret Service has told Donald the Great that he must wear a bullet-proof vest at all times. We must all pray for Trump's safety I'm being told, plus, of course, keeping an eye out for those crazy, violent liberals who're hunting Trump supporters on the streets of our great nation.
Although, I believe you're implying that there's going to be an imaginary wall, a make-believe, pretend wall. That would not surprise me.
Something along the lines of drone surveillance, perhaps. There are portions of fencing and such in places. Multiple hurdles to building an actual wall exist, not least of which are environmental and private property issues.
And then there's the funding problem.
I've heard Trump's people refer to it as a ‘virtual’ wall, like virtual reality. They can show you a computer generated picture of a wall, and that'll have to be good ‘nuff, ‘cause there ain't gonna be no real wall in the real world. (And, considering that net immigration across the Mexican border has been negative for several years now, that may indeed be good ‘nuff.)
OK so it's Saturday and I'm off from work and I'm off tomorrow too so I decide to roll lunch and dinner into one and go down to this local pizza parlour and get a pie and some beers, right.
So I go there and I bring the newest edition of Time Magazine because I subscribe to it and I think it's gonna get me a kinda cool, worldly look amongst the other heavy drinkers down at Slottstadens Pizzeria, right?
No but to be honest I do subscribe to Time and I do like it because of its level and fair reporting of global current events. LOL! JK.
No but to be honest I actually DO read that crap for entertaiment value. So while I'm chomping down my Calzone (extra cheese) and gulping beers one afther the other I come across this smallish article about Lebanon.
Says they have a new President too. Just recently elected. Much like the Glorious Leader Donald J Trump is about to become King in the USA this dude's gonna rule Lebanon. Anyhwo dude's name's Michel Aoun and supposedly he's a Maronite Christian.
Then I had to ask myself: what the hell is one of those? OK so I get he's supposedly a Christian of some sort even if his name sound froggy and his face looks araby, but I say OK a Christian's still a Christian. But WTF is this whole "Maronite" deal about?
Anyone who knows? I'm looking for very specific and detailed information on what constitutes a Maronite here. Some help please?
Not interested in the news on Trump's wall? Whoda thunk it.
News? We have to wait until Jan-20 Inauguration day, Lee. Then the great earth-moving machines will roar up their diesel fuelled engines at 00:01 and get to work on the foundations of the Greatest Wall ever built. Just gotta toss that failure Obama, who will have no legacy, out of the White House first. And that apparently takes until Jan-20 for some strange reason.
So until then we have ample time to really get into the question of: "what is a Maronite"?
"what is a Maronite"
It's a religious designation. It's a sect, or a denomination, or whatever it is they call affiliated Catholic sects. I'm sure there's a special Catholic word to express that relationship, but, since neither of us is Catholic, I don't reckon it much matters. One correct answer is that ‘Maronite’ is a religious designation.
So, we don't have listen to you bluster ‘bout Trump's wall until at least January then?
We must all pray for Trump's safety I'm being told, plus, of course, keeping an eye out for those crazy, violent liberals who're hunting Trump supporters on the streets of our great nation.
One of those crazy liberals
Course, he'd probably just call her a nasty woman.
Perhaps she could hold an outdoor concert at the imaginary wall?
I'm looking for very specific and detailed information on what constitutes a Maronite here. Some help please?
Ahhh, the old Maronite distraction ploy. Worked so well in the past. But we really need Petes as well as Lee C to help really get it going. lol!
Nope, I think he's out studying that rather large Moon we have going on around about now. (It was beautiful last night, btw.) Should be even more spectacular on Monday.
Do Maronites have walls?
Then the great earth-moving machines will roar up their diesel fuelled engines at 00:01 and get to work on the foundations of the Greatest Wall ever built.
just get out the ladders and shovels, boys. No worries.
Perhaps she could hold an outdoor concert at the imaginary wall?
Maybe an imaginary concert?
We can even give the wall a name. He said it might be named after him. We could call it Trump's Folly. Has a nice Old English ring to it.
Lee:
"So, we don't have listen to you bluster ‘bout Trump's wall until at least January then?"
Well, I might on occasion mention the GREATNESS of it all, but really - no - we don't need to talk about the inevitable Wall before it's built.
Well, we might debate it during construction when I will surely tell you about the great builder Trump and how he'll build his Great Wall on time and under budget - as he was wont to do in his building business previously.
But up until Jan-20 when the engines start to roar we can talk about other stuff I guess.
Trump's German. I think it'd be "die Drumpfen Mauer".
Lynnette: "We can even give the wall a name. He said it might be named after him. We could call it Trump's Folly. Has a nice Old English ring to it."
No, it's gonna be "The Great Wall of Trump"
Nothing else.
Other suggestions were "the great white wall", but that was deemed (too) racist, and "the deplorable wall" but that just had a sad sounding name for such a great thing, and "The Wall" plain and simple but that would crowd out the Berlin wall in history. So none of 'em really worked out.
I hear they're now even shooting at eachother. The anti Trump protesters that is. They went from protesting in no-Trump areas, to vandalising in no-Trump areas and now they're shooting one another? Seems really dumb to me, but what do I know. Libruls gonna be be libruls I guess.
Also it brings about the importance of the 2:d amendment. That sane folks should be ready and armed in case undemocratic hordes like the ones we are seeing now should pop up and tresspass into honest folks lives. Then you need to be ready and able to just gun 'em down.
Post a Comment