El Presidente Trump

robindch wrote: »

Unfortunately, idiots have exactly the same kind of votes which much smarter people have.

Let me guess you of course would get to vote in this new system because of course you know what is best.

listermint wrote: »

Same percentages voted for Romney though... so, its not like they turned.

It has been the mis-selling of Obamas healthcare that has many middle states changing their voting. It was being derided left right and centre that healthcare for all is bad. Many antagonists selling it as 'communism' and 'socialism' you know all things bad.....

Hilarious that it big Pharma that was paying for this messaging.

Big business controlling the mantra through their groups and their controlled senators.

Its hilarious irony all the same.

The rust belt states went from voting Democrat a number of times, even when the democrat was, shock horror, a black man to then voting for supposedly a white supremacist. :rolleyes:

It is not just the likes of Obamacare it is fact that these states have lost their old industrial power houses, are falling apart ala Detroit and the old political establishment don't seem too bothered.

I would bet more than half the people that voted for Trump probably can't stand him or most of his supposed policies.
Look at the popularity rating of both contenders, they were in the negatives.

It is another real sad indictment of the state of American politics that those two were the best that they could find.

Manic Moran wrote: »

... Wisconsin got ignored by Clinton this campaign, the first time in decades a major candidate didn't visit. I guess either they didn't like being taken for granted, or like being ignored.

The Republicans were wondering why the feck Trump was bothering with them because they were supposedly staunch Democrat.
He visited 5 times.
Clinton couldn't be ar**ed and if the Republican party leadership had their way he wouldn't have even gone there.
This is exactly what is wrong with old political establishment.
They decided to take people for granted.

Trump and his campaign were smart enough to see that there are huge swaths of people that are seriously pi**ed off.

And it aint like some absolute tools try and spin it on here (or on twitter, Irish Times, etc) that they are white middle aged men who want to go back to the days of segregation or something.

The political establishment, the mainstream media, the celebrity do gooders and social crusaders across the western world have been ignoring ordinary people's legitimate concerns, arrogantly talking down to them, nay lecturing them and then they label them racists, suffers of some phobia or other and still expect them to meekly do as they are told.

Brexit was the first great lesson, Trump has been the second, any bets on Le Pen ?

The other problem for the political establishment will be what happens when Brexit, Trump fail to deliver on all it's promises to these people ?
Will they turn back to old establishment or go further to the extremes.

I can't see them coming back to a mainstream that is actively insulting and admonishing them.

Akrasia wrote: »

I get the urge to change things, but Trump is a total wild card.

I give him about a 2% chance that he'll turn out to be a good president, a 30% chance that he'll just be business as usual or blocked by congress and therefore ineffectual, but a 65% chance that he'll make things much much worse. That is based on his Environmental, foreign policy and regulatory positions, and his likely appointments to the supreme court.

As per Clinton, there was a 95% chance that she'd just be a business as usual politician with a small chance that she does something extreme and starts a war somewhere

He will be business as usual, his mad claim to ban all muslims from entering the USA has already disappeared from his website, not that Im surprised

wakka12 wrote: »

He will be business as usual, his mad claim to ban all muslims from entering the USA has already disappeared from his website, not that Im surprised

Not sure that was ever on his website ?

His stuff about the wall is still there.

The Backwards Man wrote: »

We all hope the poster is wrong. But there's more than a reasonable chance they will be right.

Keep an eye on things as they unfold, then. Assuming the worst won't help.

wakka12 wrote: »

The most worrying thing to me is that he's a climate change denier. At such an important time in world history, where we desperately need to become more sustainable together to save the planet, it could be catastrophic if he began to reverse any progress made in a massive country that consumes so much of the worlds resources as is.

Well the Paris agreement is enshrined in law, and it would take him about four years to unpick it - that's about how long he'll have as a president I'm guessing. So it might not happen. He'll drag his feet, but perhaps not change much. Too many lobbyists.

If anything Leonardo Di Caprio can make another movie about it.

eviltimeban wrote: »

Well the Paris agreement is enshrined in law, and it would take him about four years to unpick it - that's about how long he'll have as a president I'm guessing. So it might not happen. He'll drag his feet, but perhaps not change much. Too many lobbyists.

If anything Leonardo Di Caprio can make another movie about it.

How will countries be forced to accept the Paris agreement ?

I'm sure Trump doesn't care if the US will be fined for not following it.

The irony of the feminists, "Its a tragedy a woman can't become the President"

Isn't the very purpose of feminism to be valued just like your male counterpart and not because of your looks or gender?

A woman will be president on merit some day, just like a black man was.

ashvsed wrote: »

My gf says trump won because he was up against a women. I don't think that true. What if trump being in power does not change anything? the system that really runs the place is still there, the prez is just a figure-head.

Trump won because he was up against a generally disliked and distrusted shitehawk who comes across as cold, talks down to people and who happened to be a woman. You could take the view that that is in itself tragic, but that is a more accurate statement of the problem.

rob316 wrote: »

The irony of the feminists, "Its a tragedy a woman can't become the President"

Isn't the very purpose of feminism to be valued just like your male counterpart and not because of your looks or gender?

A woman will be president on merit some day, just like a black man was.

Perfectly said.

lawlolawl wrote: »

That's what feminists want. Actual equality is the last thing on their mind.

"Its a tragedy a woman can't become the President, regardless of what kind of a ringin' bitch she is!" :pac:

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Spot on, surely a key demographic for Saint Hillary.

ashvsed wrote: »

My gf says trump won because he was up against a women. I don't think that true. What if trump being in power does not change anything? the system that really runs the place is still there, the prez is just a figure-head.

I really don't think Hillary lost because she is a woman. If anything, I think being a woman went in her favour. People always root for the underdog and I think being a woman got her as far as she did. She shouldn't have outran Sanders and I firmly believe she only did so because they felt as she is a woman she had more of a shot of beating Trump than a small grey haired man who many millennials did not connect with. Being a woman was to her advantage more than it was a hindrance.
Look at Obama, a lot of people say he was only elected because he was different and people wanted to be seen to be investing in change. People like to make statements with their votes, but I guarantee you had Obama not been elected it would have been the usual "he lost because he is black".