Donald Trump Is Sworn In As the 45th US President (reuters.com) 1560
Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th president of the United States on Friday, succeeding Barack Obama and taking control of a divided country in a transition of power that he has declared will lead to "America First" policies at home and abroad. Reuters reports: As scattered protests erupted elsewhere in Washington, Trump raised his right hand and put his left on a Bible used by Abraham Lincoln and repeated a 35-word oath of office from the U.S. Constitution, with U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts presiding.
Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Nobody rushing the stage shouting "You are the greatest monster in human history!" while blasting away?
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Well wouldn't it be late to stop Obama at this point?
Those time travelers need to check their clocks.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Insightful)
People who want to assassinate trump are absolutely out of their minds on many different levels. If he dies, we get Pence. Anyone who ever objected to Trump about anything at all should be very, very afraid of Pence.
Let the clown reign, he was lawfully elected, whether we like it or not. At least with him he might throw a temper tantrum in your favor.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Insightful)
Every VP back to Quayle has been an assassination preventor.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno. Biden at least seemed harmless. There again, Biden is probably like Palpatine from Star Wars- he can probably shoot lightening out of his fingers too.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've noticed that putting a clown in the vice president position seems to be the standard M.O. of modern presidents to defend against assassination.
I'm not fans of either but Gore and Bush Senior were the only non-buffoons in that position in my lifetime.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:4, Informative)
Dubya might have had an IQ of 120 when young but decades of heavy drinking probably brought him down to the level we observed which was probably in the mid 90's. Contrary to popular belief, drinking doesn't kill off just the weak neurons.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Informative)
Then explain why there were no credible threats in the past 8 years, but plenty against Trump before he took office?
Please educate yourself. Obama had plenty of death threats and people have gone to prison for making them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_threats_against_Barack_Obama [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Lots of Democrats in that page.
Re: Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yea right. And Timothy McVeigh wasn't a right wing Militia member that blew up a building and killed an entire daycare's worth of kids.
There's plenty of nutjobs on both sides, what you are doing is attempting to make yourself feel better about your political choices by demonizing the other side. This dehumanizes them and allows you to make ridiculous statements like the above post. The people in charge like it when you do this because it divides people and allows the people in charge to pit the people against each other to their own benefit.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Time travelers already learned their lesson with Hitler. With no Trump presidency, there's no WWIII, and the technology that leads to time travel never gets invented, so using time travel to prevent America from getting trumped is pointless because paradox. Just like with Hitler and WWII, so since we already learned our lesson about how futile such things are there, none of us bother trying to run face first into paradox over Trump. Sad.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:4, Insightful)
Trump does not have what it takes to be "the greatest monster in human history". Even as a villain, he is a joke.
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score:5, Funny)
"Nobody rushing the stage shouting "You are the greatest monster in human history!" while blasting away?"
No, we'll have to wait for a millennial Lee Harvey Oswald.
Any self-respecting millennial would use a drone; running & shooting is hard enough without trying it while handling a selfie stick
already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Funny)
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:4, Interesting)
As a European (from Finland, and a Hitchensian socialist and anti-theist), I've felt the policies of secretary of state Clinton on my daily life, and am convinced she's a warmonger. I haven't gotten that vibe from Trump. If anything, he won't meddle in middle eastern conflicts trying to change governments, and seems in good terms with the greatest nuclear power after the USA. So in terms of nuclear war, or regional wars, I think we'll be better off.
Again, I'm saying this as someone who's not a US citizen, nor do I share the American culture or history in any way. I'm looking out for the interests of my family and me, and am glad Hillary isn't president.
As a fellow European (Score:4, Insightful)
Im Irish and from what I've seen, there has been an enormous smear campaign against him especially from CNN and all the way back to Jeb Bush who tried to destroy him and fell flat on his face. There's nothing wrong with putting your country first and America's prosperity is good for Europe. My only concern is that he has establishment enemies, liberal extremelist enemies, and radical islamic fundamentalist enemies. The secret service need to be up to the task. I believe he is a good man for the most part.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm Russian and the fake news media have been really unfair to this second coming of Jesus Christ mixed with Albert Einstein. I think he will bring peace and prosperity to the entire world, except evil Chyna, unlike that world war loving monster Hillary Clinton and that Kenyan muslim Hussein Obama. Also, all the protesters are paid actors hired by Soros, all REAL Americans love this hero, just look at the record breaking turnout for his inauguration! #MRGA
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm looking out for the interests of my family and me, and am glad Hillary isn't president.
In all the circus of ridicule and horror at Donald Trump constantly blasted by the media, people forget just much dread there was at the prospect of Hillary Clinton.
Some people are afraid of someone who is unpresidential and a blowhard and unapologetic and probably needs to think more before speaking.
At the polls, more people were afraid of someone who has been trying her hardest to appear presidential for the last 24 years.
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:4, Insightful)
At the polls, more people
*more people in swing states
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
More people in 49 states. If you take California out of the Popular Vote tally, Trump wins handily in 49 states. So much so, that the ONLY reason she won popular vote was because of the landslide that was California. And given that California Democrats just put Bernie supporters in power, we'll see how that plays out on the national level.
I am pretty sure that most Americans, including national Democrats don't want California Commies running things.
We can also take out Texas and she'd have won the electoral vote. What exactly is your point??? California's the most populous state in the country, they should get a correspondingly larger amount of say in what people are doing. I mean, should we exclude Montana because there are more moose than people?
Also, I think you should take a look at California's politics. There was a Republican senator in power until 2011, a Mr. Schwarzenegger, and California had a weak economy with a broke government that mostly floated on large companies, and he made it like that. Democrats won, now the state has a powerful and emerging economy, is restoring and modernizing its infrastructure, and is at the for front of civil rights. If you compare the record of Indiana and Louisiana vs California or Oregon Ohio and Oklahoma vs Massachusetts or Washington, I think I'm ready to cave in to the "commies". Education, public resources, things to actually spend your money on, and a much higher standard of living... Those are all pretty attractive I think, even though Nigeria's low cost of living and taxes are nice in the short term, I'm pretty sure you'll want Norway's standard of living after the romance.
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:4, Insightful)
America's strength is the diversity of cultures. Having the culture of any one area dominate the country is bad. The electoral college does a good job of balancing this - to the extent that state boundaries reflect cultural boundaries, which is reasonably close.
As far as comparing states - compare Cali and Washington. Similar culture, totally different tax scheme and implementation. Sure, Cali is bigger, but taxes and services are per-capita to begin with, so that doesn't seem to matter. You can have the government services you crave without Cali's amazing taxes and overbearing government intrusion into life (local as much as state).
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
It is because Left Wingers keep parroting "Clinton won the Popular Vote" as if that mattered. When liberals offer that up, it opens up every other comparison out there. Hillary lost the election, popular vote doesn't count. If you wanted it to count, the vote totals would change, substantially. A lot of Republicans in California don't vote because what is the point?
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Interesting)
Technically speaking, about 3 million more people voted for Hillary than Donald. It's just that, thanks to our electoral college system, those votes were divided up such that he won.
(Not saying his not a legitimate President because of that fact. We can argue about whether or not the electoral college should be changed going forward, but those were the rules going in and should be respected as such.)
Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
But he won the game. And that was the point. And had it been about the popular vote. Trump would of campaigned differently, focused only on the large cities. And since he would of got almost all of the rural votes by default, he'd only have to swing a few points in a couple of cities. And he could of easily won the popular vote.
But what point is there in winning a few million more votes in California to be popular if it doesn't help you get elected?
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
Take the perception that she's a warmonger, for instance. I mean, sure, she's not a pacifist or a dove by any stretch of the imagination, but there's a large amount of difference between someone that's willing to entertain military solutions to international crises, and someone who actively goes looking to pick a fight. People blame her for supporting the Iraq War, which is fair - but she wasn't one of the ones pushing it, nor can anyone believably argue that she'd have chosen to invade Iraq had she been President instead of Bush-43.
More importantly though, she is first and foremost a -rational- actor in terms of international policy. She is calm, calculated, and deliberate. She's not likely to fly off the handle, overreact, or wind up in over her head in a dispute with her prestige on the line. Consider 2008 - do you think Trump would have conceded gracefully the way she did to Obama, never-mind agreeing to work for him in a role that wasn't even the number 2 spot? I think it far more likely he would have flown off the handle, and threatened to retaliate however he could.
I realize that some people seem to think that Trump will be different now than he has been in the past, but I have yet to see anything in his track record to give me any indication he can be someone other than who he continues to show us that he is - thin-skinned, proud, incapable of taking a slight or backing down from a confrontation. Explain to me again why this is more reassuring than someone who is an old hand at foreign policy and a known commodity?
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:4, Insightful)
...people forget just much dread there was at the prospect of Hillary Clinton.
The "dread" you speak of was only by people who watch FOX exclusively and believe Youtube videos are real. The GOP spent decades demonizing Hillary, going so far as to put her on trial for Benghazi SEVEN TIMES. They still never found anything they could indict her for. Hell, they raked her over the coals for supposedly abusing her charity while pretending it didn't matter when Trump was accused of the same.. the GOP, defining the term "double standards" since at least the 80's.
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
The few Finns I've talked to seem rattled by Russia's annexation of Ukraine. Like Crimea, Finland was once a territory of Russia. So I expected that Finns would not be happy about having a US president that doesn't support NATO and has almost forgiven Russia for their acts in the Ukraine. Finland has been moving to join NATO for over 10 years.
Re: (Score:3)
The rest of NATO spending 2% of GDP on their military is the _last_ thing Russia wants.
Europeans uncomfortable with the dominance of the USA should also be 'all for it'.
Europe has rebuilt, it's not 1946 anymore. Being against paying for the defense of Europe is not the same as being against Europe having defense.
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That depends on your definition of "at war". We've officially withdrawn from Iraq. We still have advisers there, but we never completely withdraw from anywhere. Troop levels in Afghanistan are also lower than they've been in a decade: http://www.npr.org/2016/07/06/... [npr.org]
Especially considering he didn't start *any* wars, I'd say it's pretty easy to argue that he was better than Bush.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, politics is a little more complicated than this. We don't know what the best answer to Putin's aggression is. Giving him Crimea without any protest and ending the sanctions might make him more hungry. Finland (along with the Baltic states) could be high on his list for future aggression. Finland has an advantage over the Baltic states, though, because Finland isn't in NATO.
Besides, what gives you a non-warmonger vibe from Trump? Have you heard him talking about ISIS or Iran? He seems ready fo
Blind Biker (Score:3)
Absolutely agree, Hillary was endeavoring to establish a new Cold War with Russia. Over largely baseless accusations, and actions that utterly pale in comparison to what America has done to its rivals and even its allies.
Meanwhile, folks think rich always want war. And perhaps certain wars benefited oil moguls, etc. But Trump is a real estate billionaire. Hotels, resorts, properties. War is NOT GOOD for those type of businesses. First off, tourism plummets, second their buildings are often destroyed. So I
Incorrect (Score:5, Funny)
Bill Clinton was sitting near the font and there were several women within hands reach (not including his wife obv.).
Re:already exceeding expectations (Score:5, Informative)
You meaning advocating for a No Fly Zone in an area where the Russian Air force is operating daily?
How do you enforce a No Fly Zone?
A. Ask nicely that the planes leave.
B. Hold a press Conference and strongly denounce that fact that you were ignored.
C. Shoot down planes that violate the No Fly Zone.
Who was it again who wanted a No Fly Zone?
Hint: She kept a private email server.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, he's itching for a confrontation with China which is worse- because unless we could kill them off quickly, we'd probably lose in a long-drawn out confrontation. Europe could probably defeat Russia without us.
Also, Chamberlain before WWII kept granting Hitler room to keep expanding, until it was too late and war was inevitable when he finally crossed the line against Poland. That's could potentially happen against Russia. He takes a chunk of Georgia, he takes a chunk of Ukraine, he takes a chunk of La
Perhaps globalism might be in fear for once. (Score:4, Insightful)
Less H1-b fraud/abuse, more regular employment for those that want it, and a climate where anyone can succeed - not just those that identify correctly.
Even if one opposes him, one should be hoping for success.
Re:Perhaps globalism might be in fear for once. (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if one opposes him, one should be hoping for success.
Absolutely. Personally, he frightens me - I feel like he's too impulsive to wield that much power. But if he does poorly, we all lose. I wish him nothing but success (assuming that his definition of success is close enough to my own.)
Not impulsive at all (Score:5, Interesting)
It amazes me that people continue to believe Trump is impulsive. There's nothing impulsive about anything Trump does; it's all extremely calculated. If I didn't know better I was say the press were in collusion to spread that myth in order to make people underestimate Trump, but as usual Occam's razor applies and the press are just full of idiots.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not impulsive at all (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, it was calculated.
Because the press was going to spend every moment describing how "valiant" John Lewis was, and how "Heroic" a person he was and .....
Trump disengaged it instantly with a tweet, that got everyone talking about something else ... Trump.
And the only way to get that tweet some traction was to say something "outrageous". And ... You ... Took ... The ... Bait. He won, John Lewis is sitting out and nobody cares. Trump has won that round.
Even if you hate the guy, if you underestimate him, you'll lose every time. That is why he won, and Hillary lost. Because in spite of all the media lined up against him, he distracted the narrative they were trying to paint. Only a few smart people can see past the buffoonery act because it is that powerful. And I believe it is an Act.
Re:Not impulsive at all (Score:4, Insightful)
They're not stupid. They're just smug. Liberals in general got full of smug somehow. Gone are the days of men from working class backgrounds rising to power. Smug weenies rule the left in the USA. Their strategy in the face of the current distress seems to be, "We weren't smug enough. We need to pile on more smug".
Re:Not impulsive at all (Score:5, Interesting)
"He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured."
“An ‘extremely credible source’ has called my office and told me that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a fraud”
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re not sending you, they’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bring crime. They’re rapists And some, I assume, are good people.”
“Our great African-American President hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore.”
“It’s freezing and snowing in New York – we need global warming!”
“My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well documented, are various other parts of my body.”
“My IQ is one of the highest — and you all know it! Please don’t feel so stupid or insecure; it’s not your fault.”
"Why can’t we use nuclear weapons?"
"If she gets to pick her judges – nothing you can do, folks. Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is. I don’t know."
“When Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water."
"I’ve been treated very unfairly by this judge. Now, this judge is of Mexican heritage. I'm building a wall, OK? I'm building a wall."
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay? It's, like, incredible."
"We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated."
Re: (Score:3)
SNL does suck, and Meryl Steep IS overrated. Your other point is too general for me to comment on.
Re:Perhaps globalism might be in fear for once. (Score:5, Insightful)
You think there's going to be ~less~ fraud and abuse under a Trump presidency?
He's got a Dept. of Education cabinet pick who blames a clerical error on her being VP of her mother's charity for 17 years, an HHS pick who passed laws to specifically help his stock picks (and I don't mean made it easier to trade stocks - he bought stocks and then helped pass laws that made those company's stock prices go up), and a pick for Sec State who wants to reduce sanctions on Russia so his former company, Exxon (they're tiny, you might not have heard of them), can get billions of dollars worth of investment off the ground there, also helping his stock prices.
Shine on, you crazy diamond.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You think there's going to be ~less~ fraud and abuse under a Trump presidency?
He's got a Dept. of Education cabinet pick who blames a clerical error on her being VP of her mother's charity for 17 years, an HHS pick who passed laws to specifically help his stock picks (and I don't mean made it easier to trade stocks - he bought stocks and then helped pass laws that made those company's stock prices go up), and a pick for Sec State who wants to reduce sanctions on Russia so his former company, Exxon (they're tiny, you might not have heard of them), can get billions of dollars worth of investment off the ground there, also helping his stock prices.
Shine on, you crazy diamond.
Yes, even if all that's true it pales in comparison to what Clinton would have done.
Did you that the "Clinton Global Initiative" just shuttered operations? I mean, who could have seen that coming? You'd think since she isn't President of the USA she would have more time for her, um, charitable work. It's almost like it was a massive scam meant to give the Clintons a slush fund to live the big life on "donations" from people who wanted to buy influence. Nah, couldn't be.
http://www.inquisitr.com/38991... [inquisitr.com]
Re:Perhaps globalism might be in fear for once. (Score:4, Informative)
Raised $313 million for R&D into new vaccines and medicines;
Helped provide better maternal and child survival care to more than 110 million people, and;
Provided treatment for more than 36 million people with tropical diseases.
Even worse, it spent 88% of its 2014 outlays directly on programs (rather than overhead) and that it only has to spend $2 to raise $100. A performance that poor gives it a solid "A" rating from charity watchdogs. We're all clearly better off without groups like this funneling money from rich donors to help poor people in underdeveloped countries around the world.
Source: http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/... [fortune.com]
No more H1Bs only GCs (Score:3)
Now watch the the EB Green Card cap being abolished. If all the H1Bs get Greencards salaries will go up as they will start jumping around.
He looked grim (Score:3)
I watched him take the oath of office.
He looked grim.
Or impatient.
Or maybe annoyed.
Divided Country? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Divided Country? (Score:5, Insightful)
Going back 32 years, the winner always take less than 54% of the popular vote (Bill Clinton only got 43% in '92). Pretty divided *always*.
Re: (Score:3)
The rules haven't changed.
Yeah, it seems crazy that a President can win an election with fewer votes than his opponent. In programming, we call an "edge case." An edge case doesn't always require a rewrite, or throwing out the system. Edge cases are anomalies that sometimes need to be accounted for, but more often we just live with them because it's too expensive to fix them all. Can you imagine having to recount all votes nationwide, in case of a close election? It's much more manageable to recount just vo
I think civility is going to go out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
I think my major concern with the next few years is that he's a bit of a loose cannon. You don't want a loose cannon who's obviously quite sensitive when pushed on things negotiating with other countries or making impulsive decisions that are hard to undo. I doubt he'd start a war (intentionally) but I really think he has to lay off the late-night Twitter. Telegraphing exactly what bothers you to your adversaries isn't a smart move. Sure, you can argue it's all a show, but some of the anger he's displayed with the press, his critics, etc. show that it's very hard to hide his feelings and just keep quiet.
Here's what I'm mainly worried about -- now that Trump's President, the gloves come off of every single loud-mouthed, opinionated angry citizen who loves to moan and complain. By providing an example of "acceptable" behavior via his constant personal attacks on people, I think he's going to signal to everyone that they no longer need to be civil to one another. I know a lot of people who just aren't happy unless they're railing loudly against anyone and anything. Having that be the starting point for any discussion or debate for the next 4 or 8 years is going to lead to further retrenchment of people into their respective camps. I for one can't stand engaging with people who come out swinging, looking for a fight on every little thing...it's just not a personality type I'm interested in dealing with. The world's complex enough already and life's short, so why waste processor cycles arguing pointlessly?
One thing I did like about the Obama years was that he was a very approachable President. Even when the political rancor was at its worst, with a few exceptions he took the high road in these arguments. I doubt we're going to see that very much anymore -- it's going to be years of angry press conferences and sound bites.
Re:I think civility is going to go out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's what I'm mainly worried about -- now that Trump's President, the gloves come off of every single loud-mouthed, opinionated angry citizen who loves to moan and complain. By providing an example of "acceptable" behavior via his constant personal attacks on people
As opposed to all the race rioting spurred on by Obama's stupid comments about Trevon, Harvard Professors, Hands Up Don't Shoot, inviting BLM to the White House?
Or do those don't count because you agree with the cause?
Obama saying that blacks have a disadvantage after a shooting is race rioting, but retweeting an open neo-nazi and calling Mexicans rapists isn't???
chaotic transition (Score:3)
In today's newspaper there's an article that says the new administration still has 3500 (out of 4000) political positions to fill, far more than previous administrations. Has Trump been taken by surprise by his own success?
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
That didn't take long. Keep thinking everyone who disagrees with you is a Nazi.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
So you think Israel should just unilaterally abandon the Two STate Solution and start colonizing Palestinian territory? I'm generally a supporter of Israel, but those illegal settlements are deliberately provocative.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Insightful)
No, I think Palestine should have taken the Two State solution offered by Israel a few years ago, but refused and went on a rampage over it.
The problem is, you think that Palestine wants a two state solution, and they don't. It has been offered, repeatedly, and they keep refusing.
And I wonder why you don't mention the Palestinians "Illegally" launching rockets into Israel. Or the time that Israel pulled its settlements out of Gaza, only to have them turned into rocket launching sites. I'm talking functioning industry and farms being walked away from and turning back into desert because ... Palestinians don't want anything the Jews had built.
Palestinians are functionally incapably of peace at this time.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes. ONLY Israel supports a two-state solution. The Palestinian authorities support the destruction of Israel and extermination of Jews. The Arab world as well. And much of Europe.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Insightful)
So ... Brits were Nazis, Americans were Nazis, Japanese were Nazis... pretty much everyone was Nazi by that definition, at least at some point of history.
Whew. I guess the Germans are finally off the hook now that they're basically like everyone else.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that there's a whole shitload of stupid people out there doesn't change the fact that those people are wrong.
I am not mad at people like you because Clinton lost. I am unconcerned that we have different politics. And I don’t think less of people like you because you vote one way and I vote another. I think less of people like you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him. I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him. I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country. I think less of people like you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board. It isn’t your politics that I find repulsive. It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty. You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget. So, no people like you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever. Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust people like you that will stick with me long after this election.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Interesting)
I am not mad at people like you because Clinton lost. I am unconcerned that we have different politics. And I don’t think less of people like you because you vote one way and I vote another. I think less of people like you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him. I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him. I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country. I think less of people like you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board. It isn’t your politics that I find repulsive. It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty. You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget. So, no people like you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever. Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust people like you that will stick with me long after this election.
I'm surprised that you still get don't get this, but the election proved one thing that myself and others have suspected or claimed for years and people like you don't want to admit. The only "issue" that matters for the vast majority of Americans, and I'd put it at about 80% of the electorate, is whether there is a D or an R next to their name. Some of my old friends who are women could not possibly have cared less about anything bad that Trump did on the campaign trail but completely flipped out over both and real and imaginary things related to Hillary. Trump bragged about grabbing women in the crotch? No problem. But Hillary was tied, barely, to Benghazi where a grand total of 4 Americans died and this was the single biggest American foreign policy disaster ever. People really don't care much about anything except whether a candidate has a D or an R next to their name. Pretty much everything else is negotiable. Congressional races prove this every election. Most Congressional districts regardless of who holds them are no longer competitive for members of the other party. Most of the people who aren't party tied voted for Trump in this election because he told people what they wanted to hear - namely that they were victims of powers and forces beyond their control and only he could stand up to those powers. Given the monopoly the Democrats have had on victimhood it's kind of funny that Trump outflanked them on this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are all true statements. I wouldn't expect Trump voters to care much about the truth though.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Informative)
Mocking the diabled: Video, 45 seconds long: http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2... [cnn.com]
Trump racism: Let's start with 1973 charges of discrimination in housing, then work forward to 2016 where he said the Central Park Five should go to jail DESPITE DNA evidence exonerating them, with all sorts of gems along the way. http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/... [fortune.com] Oh... and then there's the famous quote about Mexicans. And suggesting a blanket ban on Muslims as a category.
Advocating for war crimes: March 2016, defending ordering the US military to commit war crimes of killing non-combatants that are family members of those in combat http://www.washingtontimes.com... [washingtontimes.com] Also advocates for waterboarding and worse in several interviews and speeches.
Regarding treatment of women: Ah, the famous "grab them by the pussy" video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Informative)
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow -- you actually weren't even aware of that comment? And yet you came to this detailed defense of him here?
See -- here's the problem: it's not any one thing. It's a "preponderance of the evidence" thing. And I am far from a "leftist" -- I hate both major parties with a passion and found both major candidates this election to be some of the worst choices EVER.
But Trump is simply in a "different league" of problems. That's why people assume he made fun of a disabled guy. I've seen the Catholics for Trump propaganda before. Maybe it's true. But there are other details about the specific references Trump made that also make me doubt his claim. Personally, I'd give Trump's story that he wasn't actually intentionally making fun of a disability about 5% chance of being true.
And that's mostly because of Trump's other record. He doesn't get to have "the benefit of the doubt" in a case like this when he's been a bullying boorish jerk the rest of the time. And yes, he DOES behave like a jerk. He DOES behave like a bully to many people IN PUBLIC. (I hear he's nice to people in person. That's great. But it's not the persona on the campaign trail.) I personally don't care much about the disability issue -- the very fact that Trump tends to make fun of people rather than debate their issues is a MUCH bigger problem to me than whether or not he insulted a disabled person. (The latter obviously is still a significant issue if true, but again, it's the larger pattern that's concerning, rather than that one detail.)
It seems like you, like many people who ultimately voted for Trump, just decided that you're going to believe the talking points of his supporters that the rest of the media was lying. I fully believe a lot of the mainstream media also exaggerated a bunch of things too (though, to be fair, Trump frequently egged them into doing so by behaving increasingly outlandish to get attention).
I really am trying to give our new President a chance today. Really. I'll wait and see what he does over the next weeks and months. But it distresses me when someone who comes out so strongly as a Trump defender is then not even familiar with the fact that Trump has advocated war crimes!! To me, it shows how warped the message has gotten to many voters. (And yes, it occurs on both sides, but the disconnect from reality has started to increase significantly much more on one of them.)
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Informative)
-I don't care what you believe. [washingtonpost.com]
-Citation provided. [slashdot.org]
-since race is an artificial construct anyway, it's as good a word as any to describe bigotry against a distinct cultural ethnic group a more concise term is coined
-debatable; migration rights are largely seen as a basic human right. and they still have rights under the constitution, particularly in the area of due process, the constitution being a document that describes not just the relation between the government and citizen, but more accurately the government and any person subject to its authority.
-torture is a war crime
-so is retaliatory executions [washingtontimes.com], even the uber-conservative and generally delusional Washington times agrees
-so is the targeting of families [politifact.com]
-your views on women, looks, and what constitutes hypocrisy don't even merit a response. but I will say, you should start by looking up the definition of hypocrisy
-citation already provided
-Yes he is [wikipedia.org], though I can see how its hard for you to see, when you willfully ignore and dismiss everything he's done, as you have in the above mentioned topics.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Interesting)
you didn't answer the question at all.
it may be the same way he mocks able-bodied folks, but WHY does he do it in that particular manner? If not to mock the particular physical disability that some folks have? (including the reporter in question)
it seems pretty clear that the jerking, arm-clutched-to-the-chest motion is the same thing that elementary school kids do to make fun of disabled people. surely you aren't claiming it to be purely coincidental that he chose that very specific physical action.
if your argument is that he mocks able-bodied and disabled folks in the same way, by pretending they all have a physical disability of the arm and hand that causes muscle spasms, then you aren't really helping the case.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, the "whole world" mostly agrees that Trump is a somewhere between an incompetent buffoon and a despicable nazi. It's only your little echo chamber in the US that thinks different.
Re: News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean like the Tea Party tantrums of 2009? I didn't forget about those. Did you?
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
News for Nazis
This. Garbage like this is exactly why Trump won the election. I hope you're pleased with yourself.
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
No, he won because the Democratic Party is too busy tripping over their hypocritical statements and actions. You know, the party of inclusion that can't wait to have 60+ sitting congresspersons "boycott" the inauguration of the president that they now have to work with. Their candidate for president was even there, and tweeting about working together. Yet these petty and petulant asshats can't see that the inauguration is a celebration of the institution, and not of the man being sworn in.
The divisiveness only continues to get worse as long as these douchebags can't see that they are the ones perpetuating the problem.
I'm sure that the Democrats will show all the support and understanding to Trump that the Republicans showed to Obama.
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Insightful)
I seem to remember shortly after Obama was inaugurated that Republican members of congress made it their goal to make him a failed president, opposed him in every action, voted against anything he supported and basically did everything in their power to oppose anything and everything he tried to do. It's interesting that those same republicans and their supporters now get their panties in a wad when the shoe is on the other foot.
It's all fine and dandy to want cooperation and working together but that requires that both sides do it. The republican's made it clear that this divided government thing is the way things will run in the future. It's up to them to fix that by going across the aisle and working with democrats not steam rolling them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Funny)
I'm also quite certain that Trump isn't at all likely to invade Russia heading into a winter, so there is that, too.
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Interesting)
When I take an objective look at the policies of President Trump, they differ significantly from those of Nazi Germany.
Trump doesn't bring in Nazi Germany's policies, definitely, but let's not kid ourselves here when he retweets people who are very open Nazi supporters. He may not be directly peddling their beliefs, but he sure as hell doesn't shy away from them either, and I'd have thought people who be a little more opposed to that. I'm German as well as American, and I still have a little chest in my attic that contains the Nazi papers for my grandmother, proving her "racial purity" and "ability to support the fatherland through childbirth". Next to that are the papers that notify her her husband was executed for "violations of peace and order", with his protesting. It serves as a nice reminder sometimes, what we were all collectively lucky enough to avoid. It's really not a sexy time period to have lived in, and I really would have thought that'd be more of a detriment to people who champion being against the Soviet Union and Russia, places with an absolutely awful record on human rights and standards of living. Ahhhh, but that's not a problem for people today either, eh?
isolationism and self-sufficiency
For the US, these don't really work. Think about it; what are our greatest industries? If you said agriculture, entertainment, and the dominance of the tech industry, you'd be correct. What use is a ridiculous surplus, movies, and a strong control of the industry if there's no use to sell them too? What exactly are we going to do with the ridiculous excess of corn we make every year if nobody wants to buy it?
The emphasis on greater border security, including the building of physical barriers, also backs up the idea that America won't be trying to expand its borders beyond where they are today. These are well-established borders, and have been for a very long time.
Fully agree. Once we collectively realized what asses we were to the Native Americans, thankfully, we (mostly) left behind our expansionist bullshit. I both think and hope we keep it that way. Fortunately, Obama was pretty in favor of border enforcement, as was Hillary Clinton, and virtually every other Democrat. The debate is about what we do with people who've lived in our own country for years but don't have our citizenship; it's probably worth noting that many people born, raised, and died in America also lack these papers or documents proving their citizenship except for maybe a birth certificate.
Actually enforcing long-standing immigration and border regulations is not "racism", as some people appear to incorrectly believe. These regulations apply to all people, regardless of race or other such attributes.
Not sure who this was aimed at, but Obama most definitely enforced immigration rules, and he even gets shit for that from some Democrats. If he let too many people stay, better ring up Bush, Bush Sr, or Reagan, because they all enforced their rules less than he did. (Regan even gave those criminal immigrants a permanent stay, clearly he must've been from Lithuania and only pretended to be an American and isn't really one)
Based on everything we've seen so far, President Trump's administration is actually putting the interests of all Americans first and foremost. This is the first time we've seen this in many decades.
The first comment I think you're flat out wrong. When you get past the Goldman-Sachs guy who wants to lower regulations on his industry, the EPA guy who wants to sue himself and then set precedent for stupid standards for his industry, and the president who wants to get insider deals for hiiiiiis industry, we can maybe start with Republicans & Trump repealing an act that will kill tens of thousands of people, or a guy who wants to concentrate on publicity stunts and shows focusing on his own glory i
Re:News for Nazis (Score:4, Insightful)
That would be India. Over a billion people with democratic elections.
Only slightly more corrupt than the US.
This is obviously some strange usage of the word "slightly" that I wasn't previously aware of.
Re:News for Nazis (Score:5, Funny)
The United States is three times the size of India.
If you're talking about population. India is by far the world's largest democracy.
If you're talking about land size. Canada is the world's largest democracy. (unless you consider Russia democratic- then it is).
If you're talking about weight of the average person then... yes... in that scenario, the US is the largest democracy.
Re:Now lets see. (Score:5, Interesting)
he is literally just so crazy that it might work.
I'll echo Seth Myers in saying that I've been wrong about him so many times that, if this trend continues, he'll be a great president. He'll certainly be novel. I feel like the marble was just set in motion on our collective roulette wheel.
He's certainly *different* in many ways (Score:5, Interesting)
Trump is certainly *different* from previous Presidents and major candidates in important ways. Some good differences, some bad, and some with both good and bad aspects. We'll see what happens. I've been wrong when I predicted what Obama and Bush Jrs presidencies would be like, so I'm not going to try to predict Trump - we just have to wait and see.
Bad includes his seemingly impulsive Twitter comments to "fight back" against criticism. He probably should have ignored Meryl Streep, for example.
Good includes the fact that he's not dependent on campaign contributors like almost all major politicians are.
We'll just see where the roulette ball lands. I'll oppose any bad policies he proposes and support any good ones.
Re:He's certainly *different* in many ways (Score:5, Insightful)
> He probably should have ignored Meryl Streep, for example.
I imagine he fought Meryl Streep because she was given so much prime time. There were many others who said a lot worse about Trump but who were not prominent. In a way he was battling the media, not the actress.
Fighting the media has been working for Trump so far, unbelievable as it may have seemed to us.
Re:He's certainly *different* in many ways (Score:5, Interesting)
Good includes the fact that he's not dependent on campaign contributors like almost all major politicians are.
Yea he said that, you believed him apparently but he still raised funds, he still holds the $500 a plate "dinners" and cavorts with all the same people. Your belief in his outsiderness is misplaced.
Re:Now lets see. (Score:4, Interesting)
People have been wrong about how voters react to him, not really wrong about the man himself.
As far as what he'll actually do in office, we still don't really know. It's like getting in line for a roller coaster covered up with sheets. We don't even know if it's fully constructed yet.
For example, he wants tax cuts, larger military, and infrastructure spending. Together these will likely exasperate the budget deficit. He hopes he can grow the economy enough to expand tax revenue to pay for it all, BUT if the optimistic plan fails, what will he give up to keep the budget in line, or will he just blow the budget, setting us up for a crash without enough in the tank for an emergency stimulus?
The real test of a leader is not when their plans go right, but how they adjust when they fail.
On trade, what if trade-wars start and it becomes clear after a while those wars are hurting our economy? Will he back down, and double down?
And what will he do if Russia invades more territory? If he keeps ignoring it, we may get Soviet Union 2.0. Those were scary days with too many close calls; we don't want them back.
Add to that his ability to agitate countries and ethnic groups.
Spock impression: "This is a fascinating experiment in leadership. I just hope we can watch it from a safe distance, Captain."
Re:Now lets see. (Score:5, Interesting)
Those are my sentiments. For the first time I can remember, we've elected a President with no political experience, but a lot of business experience. Ross Perot got somewhat close in 1992 I suppose. It could spell doom, or, we might discover that most politicians are as full of shit as we always joked or suspected that they were, and things actually get better with a non-politician in charge. We'll see.
Re:Now lets see. (Score:4, Insightful)
You are assuming the President of the United States is All powerful.
Work on your local government and your State's Representatives and Senators to make sure the crazy is limited.
Re:Now lets see. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would we want to do that? We want all power up at the top, not at the bottom, and invested in one man. We almost got there with Obama, and all the sycophantic supporters who saw no wrong in anything he did, until Trump got elected, promising to do ... the exact same things Obama did.
People like their tyrants, and hate the other guy's tyrants. I hate tyrants, and don't want all powerful government power pushed to one guy. But that seems to be what the Republicrats and Demicans keep pushing for.
Re:Now lets see. (Score:5, Interesting)
You might be interested in reading "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America", by Colin Woodard. The author argues that there are 11 distinct cultures in North America, which don't align neatly with state (or even national) boundaries, and that US politics is primarily a competition between two shifting coalitions of these 11 cultures, coalitions anchored in the Yankee culture (Democrats) and the Deep South culture (Republicans). One value that both of those cultures hold in common is authoritarianism, though of very different forms.
Yankeedom is built around and values a communitarian form of authoritarianism, derived largely from its Puritanical heritage. Even though the religious aspects of Yankee Puritanism have gone away, they've been replaced by a secular form of the same thing, which is the notion that while it's critical that the people as a whole have "independence", meaning they can form their own assemblies and regulate themselves, the individual should willingly subjugate his or her own will to that of the community. In Puritan days, this was severe; almost any form of disagreement with the community's religious and social values resulted in severe punishment. Individual freedom was not valued, and tolerance for alternative views was extremely low. Also, Yankeedom reveres education, and therefore the fruits of education, including progressiveness.
The Deep South is built around and values a hierarchical form of very strict authoritarianism, derived from that region's slaveholding culture, which enabled it to establish an essentially feudal model of lordly manors occupied by elegant idlers, supported by masses of lower classes. The southern planters placed tremendous value on "liberty" but it was the old Greek and Roman notion of liberty, which is available only to those at the top. The south took the "lower classes" notion a bit further than feudal lords with their serfs, but the southern class-based society wasn't just "planters" and "slaves", there was also a large underclass of what we might now call white trash, which was also expected to be subservient. What's perhaps odd about the old Deep Southern notions of hierarchy is that they were so deeply embedded in the society that although the underclasses chafed a bit, they also grew to expect a strong hierarchy and to respect their aristocratic leaders.
So, the two core cultures around which our political battles revolve are both authoritarians. Their allied cultures are less authoritarian, but it's the core cultures that hold the whip hand. In particular the left coast is very big on individual freedom and self-realization, but also has its roots in Yankeedom, including the trust in education and progress, which makes is a natural ally of the Yankee culture even though they disagree on individual freedom. Similarly, the far west culture is very libertarian but allies with the deep south because of its opposition to Yankeedom, rather than because it likes the southern authoritarianism.
Anyway, that's a flavor of what's in the book. You probably won't agree with all of it (I don't), but a lot of it makes a great deal of sense and I found that it really illuminates my understanding of the major political dynamics in the US, and has helped me understand why there is this strong streak of authoritarianism in a country that purportedly values freedom and independence.
Re:Its good for the grass on the national mall (Score:4, Funny)
All his supporters had to work today.
Re:America sucks (Score:4, Insightful)
I was going to respond by correcting every point since you didn't manage to get anything right but... instead I'll just say I hope you can find someone to give you a hug today. Good luck! Hope you feel better soon!
Violent crime is at an all-time (Score:3, Informative)
No really. Some people think America is great because, but it really is a shit hole. I mean really, mass shootings are a regular occurrence, crime is high despite having the largest prison population in the world.
Violent crime is pretty much at an all-time low. Reading the news is a bit misleading on this score.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Crime_Victim_Chart.gif
Re:Yawn (Score:5, Funny)
I switched on the radio to hear the evening PM programme (I live in the UK).
You didn't need to tell us where you lived. We knew by your ridiculous spellinge.
Re: I thought state and religion were separate in (Score:3)
Get over it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Rather than use the phrase "I've got you by the balls!", we should instead use "I'm grabbing your pussy!"
Re:Just a few weeks from being sworn back out. (Score:5, Insightful)
For those that don't know what that is, here is the entirety of the text of that clause
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.
Trump is NOT in violation of this clause. And it is a hillarious claim coming from anyone that voted for Hillary, who would have been actually in violation of this clause, with the Clinton Foundation.
Typically, all "Gifts" from foreign heads of state are property of the US Government and are placed in the public trust.
What this poster is trying to say, is that Trump cannot rent his hotel rooms out to people because that is a "gift".
Here is the definition:
a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office.
I wonder where all these people were when Hillary was SoS and Bill was being paid by all those rich Arab Princes and Kings for giving speeches. Why suddenly they are "horrified" that Trump owns a business that might rent a hotel room to a prince, but said nothing for 4 years while the Clinton's enriched themselves.
Hypocrites.