US Elections: Day dawns on Trump.

[The guy from the Vale]

He's not opposed to nuclear brinksmanship or proliferation either, though. Which is scary in and of itself.

 

 

[James Arryn]

42% of women chose Trump over Clinton?!?!??!

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, The Killer Snark said:

Congratulations to every person who struck a blow against corporatist corruption, the most criminal Dems establishment in history, the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, the corruption of big banks, domestic terrorist racial division and attacks on law and order, Cultural Marxist prejudice against the interests of white males, and intended Islamisation of America: and voted Trump to take back your country as we voted to take our own back here in Britain - and to strike a blow against Soros' and the Rothschilds' destruction of Western culture and democracy, via the hideous EU.

Yeah, this doesn't sound fascist and anti-semtic at all.

[The guy from the Vale]

2 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

The problems in Eastern Europe originated due to NATO expanding to Russian borders. Stop doing that and respect national security concerns of others and you'll see the majority of problems will solve themselves.

I'm respecting the national security concerns of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukraine in addition to the national security concerns of Russia. They are not totally compatible, but I'm not about to throw the former under the bus, Chamberlain style.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Just now, James Arryn said:

42% of women chose Trump over Clinton?!?!??!

They were the non-nasty women.

[Mr Fixit]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I think this is nonsense. I'd argue that both the US and Europe have an interest in maintaining liberal democracy and Nato is vital to that.

We've already given our pledge to the Baltic States. We've told them we have their backs. And they want us there. I do not think we can throw them under the bus so easily.

NATO is relevant only to warmongering criminals who want to use "coalitions of the willing" to do their dirty work. I am all for a unified European defensive architecture, but I'd like to see chief war criminals who invaded half the planet under various pretenses not be a significant part of it.

[Tempra]

39 minutes ago, Fez said:

Well, I was wrong. Almost completely and totally wrong. All I can say in my defense is that I was hardly the only one. This election has shown us that nearly everything we think about political campaigns is wrong; and either by luck or by insight Trump knew this. The question is, can Democrats learn this lesson too?

As for Trump, the only thing to do is hope that the awesome weight and responsibility of the office he now has fundamentally changes him. Its not a preposterous idea, but I have no idea what the odds of it happening are. His victory speech was surprisingly encouraging though; focusing on uniting the country again and naming infrastructure improvement as his number one priority. That doesn't mean much on its own of course, but it wasn't something he needed to do; he could've just gloated.

The questions going forward are:

What issues does Trump personally care about, where does he stand on them, and will he push back against Ryan and McConnell when they disagree? 

What issues does Trump not care about, and will he just sign whatever Ryan and McConnell send him?

Will the Republican foreign policy establishment, who were the primary #NeverTrumpers, and Trump reconcile and allow them to keep US foreign policy at least within the boundaries of what has been mainstream up until now?

I have no idea what the answers to those questions are, but they will decide what the next four years are like. And there's a pretty diverse set of possibilities here.

There is hope for liberals yet.  

38 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Doesn't make it any less true. And no need to thank me, I voted against him. 

Your vote against Hillary (like mine) was too little too late.

Trump's win didn't occur in a vacuum.  It occured, partly, because liberals have spent years villifying conservative voters.  You had a role in that and until you and others accept responsibility for this mess, we are going to see voter reactions like this.  DONALD TRUMP IS PRESIDENT.  What bigger wake up call do liberals need?

[The guy from the Vale]

Just now, Tempra said:

There is hope for liberals yet.  

Your vote against Hillary (like mine) was too little too late.

Trump's win didn't occur in a vacuum.  It occured, partly, because liberals have spent years villifying conservative voters.  You had a role in that and until you and others accept responsibility for this mess, we are going to see voter reactions like this.  DONALD TRUMP IS PRESIDENT.  What bigger wake up call do liberals need?

So, your answer to bullying is... not standing up to bullying so the bullies will stop? Really?

[Future Null Infinity]

7 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Tensions between the West and Russia reduce dramatically, Europe becomes more stable as the immigration flow reduces, and the Great Powers can focus on hunting down ISIS in whichever new strongholds it tries to carve out for itself across the Middle East

As an arab and muslim living in an arab country, the only thing that worries me about the future is getting an american missile in the ass from Trump just because I'm a muslim, and I don't think that Trump will accept to be in the international coalition like Obama, it's not his style

[James Arryn]

1 minute ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

They were the non-nasty women.

I'm not getting the joke.

But that the margin of difference in women voting was 8% is stunning to me.

[Castel]

1 minute ago, Tempra said:

There is hope for liberals yet.  

Your vote against Hillary (like mine) was too little too late.

Trump's win didn't occur in a vacuum.  It occured, partly, because liberals have spent years villifying conservative voters.  You had a role in that and until you and others accept responsibility for this mess, we are going to see voter reactions like this.  DONALD TRUMP IS PRESIDENT.  What bigger wake up call do liberals need?

What of the shit conservative voters have been doing since Obama got into office? Including their recent run to block the elected president from fulfilling his constitutional duties and even getting an answer from the Senate on Supreme Court judges? That shit was just, what, the Republicans reaching out?

 

[Mr Fixit]

1 minute ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

I'm respecting the national security concerns of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukraine in addition to the national security concerns of Russia. They are not totally compatible, but I'm not about to throw the former under the bus, Chamberlain style.

And no one is asking you to. The entire spiel of Russia invading the Baltic countries (and Poland! and Finland! oh my God, Sweden too!) is just that. A propaganda tool to deflect attention to Putin for everything that's wrong in the world. Munich, appeasement, and Chamberlain are up there with Hitler, WMDs, and genocide with their usefulness in internet discussions, given how tritely overused those arguments have become when it's time to justify "humanitarian interventions" with unfortunate numbers of "collateral damage".

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 minute ago, Future Null Infinity said:

As an arab and muslim living in an arab country, the only thing that worries me about the future is getting an american missile in the ass from Trump just because I'm a muslim, and I don't think that Trump will accept to be in the international coalition like Obama, it's not his style

I honestly don't think Trump is interested in dropping missiles on your country. He is focused on sorting out his own country. You probably faced a bigger risk of having missiles rain down on your country if Clinton won the election.

[James Arryn]

2 minutes ago, Tempra said:

There is hope for liberals yet.  

Your vote against Hillary (like mine) was too little too late.

Trump's win didn't occur in a vacuum.  It occured, partly, because liberals have spent years villifying conservative voters.  You had a role in that and until you and others accept responsibility for this mess, we are going to see voter reactions like this.  DONALD TRUMP IS PRESIDENT.  What bigger wake up call do liberals need?

Consequentialism is an intellectually bankrupt concept.

I know in USA! USA! USA! that winning retroactively legitimizes the victor's positions, but you should know that terrible leaders have won elections for terrible reasons many times in history. Deriving lessons from an electoral college quirk/popular vote loss is even more bizarre than the usual error that Thoreau derided. 

[Ormond]

Good morning, all. I went to bed at 11:30 Central. My 65 year old system usually gets me up once or twice a night to go to the bathroom; last night it was at least six times. Not sure how much sleep I really got. Interesting that my bodily reaction seems to have been more severe than my conscious mind. I only consciously feel mild anxiety -- hope that ends up being energizing.

Until today I was never much of a fan of that idea that states should pass laws saying all their electoral votes will go to the popular vote winner when enough states to make half the electoral votes do pass such a law. Now I think this should be a top priority and people who live in states who have not passed that law but who allow petition initiated referenda should start working on getting state constitutional amendments to that effect passed. I actually think that's something a lot of "red" state electorates might end up voting for, just as a couple of years ago they passed minimum wage increases.

As a psychologist I really doubt Trump will be completely controllable or that he will become more statesmanlike in the long run. 70 is just too only for a complete narcissist to change, and that's one of the least likely problems to change a lot at any age. The best we can hope for is that he does really care so little for the actual work that Pence and Ryan end up making most decisions and he just rubber stamps them.

Trying to keep uppermost in my mind that 95% at least of everything that happens to me every day will not be directly affected by this. But I do fear a bit for anyone who is different in any way from the crowds at Trump rallies.

As I said last night, I agree Clinton was a poor choice of nominee in the end. But there were just too many thousands or even millions of Democrats (centering on older feminist women, but that's by no means everyone) who were convinced she deserved it after her loss to Obama and run as Secretary of State. They just couldn't see how the baggage she carried, whether it was deserved and misogynistic or not, would make it difficult for her to appeal to enough voters in enough states to win.

 

[The guy from the Vale]

No, it's not. If Georgia and Crimea never happened, you might have a point. But they did happen. I see no reason for Putin to stop except for him risking war with the US if he goes ahead with his plans. 

It's precisely because I'm against war that I cherish the NATO. Yes, this might seem absurd, but my impression is that NATO's deterrence potential is far more valuable than its rather rare use on the offensive end.

And the point of the Chamberlain comparison is precisely that we should not hand over our allies' sovereignty on a silver platter just based on pacifism. You don't stop expansionist policies by sucking up to them.

[Tempra]

5 minutes ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

So, your answer to bullying is... not standing up to bullying so the bullies will stop? Really?

This issue predates Donald Trump.  Nice try.

 

On a different note, will the Obama administration show more class than the Clinton administration and not vandalize the white house as they leave?

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

1 minute ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

No, it's not. If Georgia and Crimea never happened, you might have a point. But they did happen. I see no reason for Putin to stop except for him risking war with the US if he goes ahead with his plans. 

It's precisely because I'm against war that I cherish the NATO. Yes, this might seem absurd, but my impression is that NATO's deterrence potential is far more valuable than its rather rare use on the offensive end.

And the point of the Chamberlain comparison is precisely that we should not hand over our allies' sovereignty on a silver platter just based on pacifism. You don't stop expansionist policies by sucking up to them.

Time for us Europeans to beef up our own defenses then, instead of being dependent on the Americans. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, Tempra said:

It's the supremest of ironies that Clinton has refused to give a traditional concession speech after all the crap thrown at Trump for not promising to concede and peacefully transfer power if he loses.

Just another example of liberals needing  to hold a mirror up to themselves when they criticize conservatives because they are guilty of the same faults. "But, but, it's different when we  do it" they say.  No, no it's not.  Stop making excuses and accept reality.

 

 

 

 

That bothered me too.  Especially after giving the crowd at her post-election location the impression that they weren't going to concede.

[Wall Flower]

26 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

You do understand that there a both demographic and economic forces working in Mexico that makes future immigration less likely? The birth rate has fallen there and wages have risen.

The whole wall thing was nonsense.

Plus the fact that the right's immigration hysteria was based on a lot of nonsense.

Not an economic expert (at all) but isn't Trump proposing to inflict a tariff on Mexican goods coming into the USA - presumably Mexico's chief trading partner. Would that not risk an adverse result for the Mexican economy and create an increased demand for immigration to the US?