nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off Topic Thread 3.0

Zzippy

All things non-rugby related here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

molloyjh wrote: »

This wasn't simply a vote for change. It was a vote for anger and hatred, for polarisation and extremes.

It was a vote for Trump to be President.

Everything else is analysis beyond the data that exists. Same as the arguments being made now in the UK about what the 'Brexit mandate' truly is.

I guarantee that some element of the vote was as you describe, but projecting those extremes onto the majority, let alone the entirety is simply wrong. It is always easier to think of the 'other side' as monsters etc, but there will be a huge swathe of good-honest-straightforward people who voted out of desperation for change. The 'roll the dice' group.

molloyjh

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

While "wipe the floor" is a bit strong, yeah, I believe he'd have beaten Trump overall. Polls seemed to indicate that prior to the Democratic primary (though again, they said similar about HRC too, though not to the same degree).

Whilst there would be a certain % of Republican voters who wouldn't give Sanders their "Not Trump" vote, there would also be a % of Republican voters would might give him their "Not Hillary" vote. They really really hate her over there, he wouldn't have received the same ire (for the same reason at least). There is also the effect of the various 'scandals' that have affected the HRC campaign, Sanders wouldn't have those. He might have his own skeletons, we'll never know, but there didn't appear to many - of course an actual Presidential campaign comes with more scrutiny.

For all that Trump is a lying racist sexist piece of sh*t, he garnered votes for the anti-establishment aspect of him. Sanders could have tapped at least some of that, given his record.

I'm not blind to the difficulties of him winning, not at all, but given HRC couldn't beat Trump (hindsight, 20/20, etc) the post mortem should definitely include how and why HRC topped Sanders in the primaries.

We'll never know, I suppose. Bottom line though is that they went up against a ****e candidate in Trump, and lost. Hopefully they learn for next time and/or the system undergoes some type of change (doubt it).

Those people who voted for Trump because he was anti-establishment were not the type who would vote for Sanders. They are the ones calling Sanders a Socialist and claiming that if he were President that he would turn the US into Columbia (and other totally mental things like that).

This wasn't simply a vote for change. It was a vote for anger and hatred, for polarisation and extremes.

Dave_The_Sheep

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you seriously believe this?

While "wipe the floor" is a bit strong, yeah, I believe he'd have beaten Trump overall. Polls seemed to indicate that prior to the Democratic primary (though again, they said similar about HRC too, though not to the same degree).

Whilst there would be a certain % of Republican voters who wouldn't give Sanders their "Not Trump" vote, there would also be a % of Republican voters would might give him their "Not Hillary" vote. They really really hate her over there, he wouldn't have received the same ire (for the same reason at least). There is also the effect of the various 'scandals' that have affected the HRC campaign, Sanders wouldn't have those. He might have his own skeletons, we'll never know, but there didn't appear to many - of course an actual Presidential campaign comes with more scrutiny.

For all that Trump is a lying racist sexist piece of sh*t, he garnered votes for the anti-establishment aspect of him. Sanders could have tapped at least some of that, given his record.

Buer wrote:

Whilst I believe Sanders would have been the best man for the job, I don't believe his election would have been a sure thing. America are hugely resistant to socialism still. Sanders wouldn't have made a dent in any conservative areas.

Agreed. I'm not blind to the difficulties of him winning, not at all, it would have been tough. Given HRC couldn't beat Trump (hindsight, 20/20, etc) the post mortem should definitely include how and why HRC topped Sanders in the primaries.

We'll never know, I suppose. Bottom line though is that they went up against a ****e candidate in Trump, and lost. Hopefully they learn for next time and/or the system undergoes some type of change (doubt it).

[Deleted User]

That's probably the short term best answer.

Unfortunately the long term best answer is significantly ****ter. As moral hazard suggests that the people wouldn't 'learn' from a No-Impact-Trump-Presidency and the demagogues would rise again and again. It could well be in the world's interest for Trump to actually implement some of the signatures and the effects roll out.

Definitely, definitely, definitely not in American's interests though.

irishbucsfan

The best outcome (apart from Trump actually turning out to be 3 kids standing on each others shoulders using a painted pumpkin as a fake head) is probably that Trump line his pockets for 4 years while the political elite return to basics

[Deleted User]

We truly have no idea what to expect from a Trump Presidency because;

He said everything.
He contradicted himself on everything many times.
His signature policies are mutually exclusive.
He is likely to repeat the same 'trick' as when he won the Republican Nomination and decree that 'I only said that to win the Presidency'.
Considering all of the above, the HoR and Senate, whilst both under a Republican majority, are not going to be supportive of policies that they disagree with. They will not blindly support any bizarre stuff.
Murica.

molloyjh

A few thoughts this morning....

The Democrats need to go away and have a long, hard look at themselves. That they were unable to put forward a candidate or campaign capable of beating Trump must be a huge wake up call.

Do we have any idea what we can expect from Trump? Will he really be the extreme right wing nut he's portrayed or was a lot of that just grandstanding to an audience? There's one thing is for sure though, he is not a diplomat. How will he interact with world leaders (and they with him) and how will that impact America and the rest of the world?

What must other world leaders be thinking right now, realising that they are going to have to deal with this guy? None of them can really come out against him now either as they'll need to work with him.

Can we really be that surprised that this guy has gotten elected having seen more and more people moving to what would have traditionally been seen as fringe political groups. This has been coming slowly but surely for years, not just in the US but in the Western world in general. Libertas here duping the people into rejecting Lisbon with nothing but lies and misrepresentation. Brexit. For the last 20+ years voter turnouts have been in decline. People clearly don't feel that mainstream politics and politicians represent them or truly speak for them. The global recession was the last straw for a lot of people. And instead of positive candidates emerging and becoming successful, it's the likes of Farage and Trump who are gaining favour. Throw in a truly ridiculously polarised society like the US and we were probably always on a hiding to nothing.

Buer

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

The Dems had a potential candidate for change that could very well have wiped the floor with Trump. However, instead they shat the bed and went full tilt for the status quo candidate, and it's backfired massively.

Only themselves to blame.

I'm not sure he would have. I think he would have had a good chance but I don't think it would have been as clear cut as some believe.

Sanders doesn't represent the disaffected elements that Trump spoke to. Immigration and industry were the twin pillars of Trump's campaign.

Sanders had the polar opposite approach on immigration and, in terms of industry, Sanders would have been attacked repeatedly. Trump would have gone after his lack of experience in industry. He'd have called him a communist for the medicare and living wage proposals. That would have resonated with his supporters just the same as his accusations of criminal behaviour against Clinton have done.

Whilst I believe Sanders would have been the best man for the job, I don't believe his election would have been a sure thing. America are hugely resistant to socialism still. Sanders wouldn't have made a dent in any conservative areas.

[Deleted User]

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

The Dems had a potential candidate for change that could very well have wiped the floor with Trump. However, instead they shat the bed and went full tilt for the status quo candidate, and it's backfired massively.

Only themselves to blame.

Do you seriously believe this?

What % of Bernie's socialist voters would have moved across the spectrum to vote for Trump? What % of them voted for Hillary do you guess?

Hillary actually got a % of Republican voters for her in an effort for 'Not Trump'. There is almost no way that I could possibly see Republicans giving their 'Not Trump' vote to Bernie though, its far too much to ask.

It's like suggesting that the carnivores with a specific taste for meat that didn't choose the salad over the rhino steak would prefer this vegan paste and hemp sandwich.

[Deleted User]

pickarooney wrote: »

If they wanted serious change there'd be a viable third party instead of the absolute jokeshop collection they gave themselves to choose from.

North Korea had a better selection.

The system is set by the incumbents. The incumbents would be mad to change it.

Third parties are an irrelevance in the US.

Dave_The_Sheep

pickarooney wrote: »

If they wanted serious change there'd be a viable third party instead of the absolute jokeshop collection they gave themselves to choose from.

The Dems had a potential candidate for change that could very well have wiped the floor with Trump. However, instead they shat the bed and went full tilt for the status quo candidate, and it's backfired massively.

Only themselves to blame.

Adbrowne

pickarooney wrote: »

If they wanted serious change there'd be a viable third party instead of the absolute jokeshop collection they gave themselves to choose from.

North Korea had a better selection.

Trump isnt part of the establishment. Hard to believe a Simpsons episode came true either.

Would love to be a fly on the wall when Trump meets Obama next week.

pickarooney

If they wanted serious change there'd be a viable third party instead of the absolute jokeshop collection they gave themselves to choose from.

North Korea had a better selection.

Adbrowne

Felix Jones is God wrote: »

Stupid people vote too....when you actually encourage stupid people to vote....bad things happen!!

FF ruined Ireland, FG punished the people. Who did we vote into power 9-10 months ago?

Maybe the yanks just wanted serious change as opposed to more of the same.

CatFromHue

mfceiling wrote: »

"Mainstream" politics has a lot to answer for. With Brexit and now Trump why are people turning their back on normality and voting this way? Why is there such backlash voting now taking place?

While we can play the blame game for bad political decisions we're not without fault. How many single issue people did we elect to the dail who's main electioneering tool was to throw mud at the establishment?

I mean FFS we have a TD holding protests trying to influence the policing of the country and the protests themselves are to stop politics in policing

He's actually protesting against himself!

Buer

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It's been dropped. Just like the other two against him were when he paid to make them go away.

Call me cynical but a 20 year old case where the victim only decides to go to the authorities when the accused is running for the highest office in the land stinks to high hell.

If we're assuming money changed hands, I would imagine it was as likely to be provided by the Democratic party to instigate the case as it was by anyone from the Trump campaign to bury it.

Dave_The_Sheep

With a Republican Senate, Congress and soon-to-be Supreme Court, it'll take decades to undo the damage done in the US in the next four years... and it's not like the planet had a whole lot of time (if we're not already past the point of no return already, ecologically speaking) to begin with.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Felix Jones is God wrote: »

Im just wondering what happens when the historical rape case that was filed in court a few months ago proceeds . Then there's going to be fun

It's been dropped. Just like the other two against him were when he paid to make them go away.

bilston

thomond2006 wrote: »

Well it shows celebrity endorsements mean nothing.

I'd be concerned for public unrest and riots in the US over the next week.

That's might be the biggest worry. We know about the tensions between the police and some sections of the Black community. I can't see it improving anytime soon.

The Brexit vote had led to a rise of racist attacks in the UK. Will this have a similarish impact in the States.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

That's one area that hasn't been mentioned much. If Trump appoints super-conservative judges then it could significantly set back a number of movements such as LGBT rights.

With the Republicans surprisingly retaining the Senate, he has carte blanche now. Whatever about walls and taking criminal action against Clinton, his economic policies are very much a reality now.

Well... I can see the Supreme Court being handed over to Paul Ryan as a negotiating chip.

But his economic policies, it's madness. The fed is in trouble. It could be majorly majorly damaging to the world economy unfortunately. It may be that the rightest wing austrian elements of the party get proved right, but that line of thinking has been failing to achieve much for about 300 years.

Buer

Interested Observer wrote: »

He'll have a conservative supreme court too fwiw.

That's one area that hasn't been mentioned much. If Trump appoints super-conservative judges then it could significantly set back a number of movements such as LGBT rights.

With the Republicans surprisingly retaining the Senate, he has carte blanche now. Whatever about walls and taking criminal action against Clinton, his economic policies are very much a reality now.

[Deleted User]

Can only hope he's going to be a bit more sane in office than he was on the campaign trail.

He'll have a conservative supreme court too fwiw.

thomond2006

Well it shows celebrity endorsements mean nothing.

I'd be concerned for public unrest and riots in the US over the next week.

sydthebeat

mfceiling wrote: »

"Mainstream" politics has a lot to answer for. With Brexit and now Trump why are people turning their back on normality and voting this way? Why is there such backlash voting now taking place?

Completely agree.

No one to blame but the political class itself.

American now has Republican house of representatives, Republican Senate and a Republican president. He can do whatever the fcuk he wants.

Felix Jones is God

mfceiling wrote: »

"Mainstream" politics has a lot to answer for. With Brexit and now Trump why are people turning their back on normality and voting this way? Why is there such backlash voting now taking place?

Stupid people vote too....when you actually encourage stupid people to vote....bad things happen!!

mfceiling

"Mainstream" politics has a lot to answer for. With Brexit and now Trump why are people turning their back on normality and voting this way? Why is there such backlash voting now taking place?

Felix Jones is God

Im just wondering what happens when the historical rape case that was filed in court a few months ago proceeds . Then there's going to be fun

irishbucsfan

At what point do the imbeciles realise that calling the US "stupid" or criticisng the voters is how we got into this mess in the first place? Will it take Marine Le Pen as French premier?

Felix Jones is God

Dude! The preppers were right all along !

dregin

I'm honestly surprised the internet is still working.