Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 LumenPraebeo wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
He will have the best speech writers.

It's obvious that in the past 10 days the GOP regulars managed to get hold of the closing stage of the campaign and rein in Trump's wild spirits, e.g. cutting him off from his Twitter account. This will continue and Trump's speeches will be a lot more scripted than before.

His acceptance speech was pretty good for example.

True, but do you hear him? he repeats phrases constantly. He has no focus, not even for something as trivial as talking!

Yes, I know, yet apparently he can be very charming in person. His set pieces speeches will be carefully scripted and delivered from autocue, I am sure.

...I just woke up. What happened? I was assured two months ago by Dakka that this was impossible.

 Ketara wrote:
...I just woke up. What happened? I was assured two months ago by Dakka that this was impossible.

Go back to sleep... I know I am, I just realized it's 5:30 AM...

This is what I posted the other day, and in a sense, I've been vindicated, even though I didn't want to be vindicated:

I can assure you that the same thing will happen on Tuesday. 'Shy' Trump supporters, keeping quiet, sitting on the fence, and slipping under the radar of the polling companies.

These are people who haven't voted for years, but will be out on Tuesday, because like our Brexit vote, they will think that for the first time in a long time, their vote may actually be worth a damn....

Clinton should be careful of this....

It's Brexit all over again.

The political elites, the polling companies, the experts, are so far detached from ordinary people, they could not imagine that Brexit and Trump could happen, but it has....

I was shot down in flames when I said this

but unfortunately I've been proven right.

I know a lot of American dakka members are fearful, but please, don't worry. I like America, I love American history, and that history has taught me this:

You are a strong nation, with a love of freedom and respect for the rule of law. Your institutions are strong. Your 1st amendment is one of the great works of human civilization IMO. You survived a civil war, two world wars, the 1960s and all the troubles, and Nixon.

The USA will survive Trump.

I know people are hurting, and there is talk of a divided nation, but we had two massive referendums in the UK, and the nation was supposed to be divided, but we came back together and reconciled. America will do the same.

As for Clinton, well I think she'll be looking over her shoulder for a long time. It's open season on Clinton from now on.

The scandals, the emails, the whiff of corruption. Democrats will turn on her with fury, because she lost to Donald Trump, and that stigma will be with her all her life....

As for the GOP, they have the congress and the house, but they insulted Trump, they failed to back him, and the GOP leadership was miles away from the base.

It could be very awkward....

As a British Prime Minister famously said: "a week is a long time in politics..."

Who knows what the future holds.....

 Buzzsaw wrote:
What monsters these people are... Why, what civilized nation doesn't fine people for refusing to acquiesce to the abasement of the place of worship! It's like the dark ages!

Yeah stepping on basic human rights is soooooo good. Especially funny as that violates also the supposed gods word in the bible. You could even say anybody who is against LGBT is against gods word and you would be 100% correct if you assume bible is gods word(and if not then using up bible against LGBT is even more silly)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I know people are hurting, and there is talk of a divided nation, but we had two massive referendums in the UK, and the nation was supposed to be divided, but we came back together and reconciled. America will do the same.

Yea right. Not seeing much of reconciling in the UK. Rather country looking to split even more what with movement in Scotland to get rid of the UK.

I doubt the Supreme Court will step on human rights. They actually have been pretty good at upholding the constitution whatever their political make-up.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt the Supreme Court will step on human rights. They actually have been pretty good at upholding the constitution whatever their political make-up.

Soooo. Are they going to repel SB101 then? That's allowing discriminating over sexual preference.

And here I had been hoping we might get out of dark ages one of these days but things are moving back toward it again.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt the Supreme Court will step on human rights. They actually have been pretty good at upholding the constitution whatever their political make-up.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Gay marriage passed by a 5-4 decision with strong opposition from the conservative side, and the court is about to be 5-4 in the other direction. With stuff like NC's bathroom law headed for the courts I'm pretty worried about the outcome.

Isn't that because they've been evenly balanced between D and R?

The worry is that with a seat up for a pick and potentially 2 D leaning justices on the way out, it's going to end up a 7-2 in favour of the R's

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I doubt the Supreme Court will step on human rights. They actually have been pretty good at upholding the constitution whatever their political make-up.

Justice Scalia being a prime example when he said that people have a 1st amendment right to burn the American flag....

No, it's because high-ranking judges actually have a respect for the processes of the law, the obiter dicta, precedents, and so on. The gay marriage law is unlikely to be reversed, because it has already been found constitutional by the court.

The Democrats have to have a long, hard look at themselves for picking Clinton. The party machinery did everything its power to get her the nomination, but as an outsider, it seems that nobody really trusted her.

It's easy to be wise after the event, but if you look at the Sanders Vs. Trump ratings, Sanders wins....

America has no problem with a female president IMO, they just didn't want Clinton....

Any woman but her seemed to be the cry....

I've said it many times previously but it bears repeating; if you want to understand why this happened, read Scott Adam's blog on the subject of mass hypnosis and persuasion.

He's been right for almost 14 months.

 Peregrine wrote:
There was no conflict of duty unless you believe that Muslims are all terrorists and need to be kept out for our safety. The whole refugee "controversy" was nothing more than scaring angry white people into voting for the guy who promised to keep all those icky brown people out of good Christian America.

Well, Democrats can make sure to continue calling all Americans who aren't enthusiastic about accepting refugees or illegal immigrants racists, I guess. It seems to do an excellent job of driving working-class whites to the polls. They don't vote for Democrats, but they vote.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Democrats have to have a long, hard look at themselves for picking Clinton. The party machinery did everything its power to get her the nomination, but as an outsider, it seems that nobody really trusted her.

It's easy to be wise after the event, but if you look at the Sanders Vs. Trump ratings, Sanders wins....

America has no problem with a female president IMO, they just didn't want Clinton....

Any woman but her seemed to be the cry....

ding ding ding. we have a winner.

Seaward wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
There was no conflict of duty unless you believe that Muslims are all terrorists and need to be kept out for our safety. The whole refugee "controversy" was nothing more than scaring angry white people into voting for the guy who promised to keep all those icky brown people out of good Christian America.

Well, Democrats can make sure to continue calling all Americans who aren't enthusiastic about accepting refugees or illegal immigrants racists, I guess. It seems to do an excellent job of driving working-class whites to the polls. They don't vote for Democrats, but they vote.

I think it's this sort of attitude that got a fool like Pauline Hanson with her One Nation party 4% of the vote in Australia (enough to get 4 Senate seats). For those who don't know Pauline Hanson is an imbecile who wants to have zero net immigration, is against Islam and against multiculturalism... that's not what makes her an imbecile though, she has shown herself to be ignorant and bigoted.

Labelling people as racist because they are against accepting large numbers of refugees, illegal immigrants or in Australia's case large numbers of legal immigrants as well... it pushes them to vote for people they might not even like themselves but feel it's the only way they'll get their counter-balancing viewpoint in.

 Vankraken wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
[i]
All overreactions to nothing. Dubya didn't suspend elections and become the Eternal President of America (or Hitler, as he was so often called). Obama didn't march everyone into FEMA death camps to be forcibly converted to Communist Islam whilst stealing all their guns!!! Trump isn't going to start launching nukes at Mecca.

The issue isn't so much a Trump presidency but that the GOP has control of every branch of the government. That much control means they can pass whatever the party wants and there is little to nothing the Dems can do to stop it. Affordable Care Act is gone 100% (there goes my health insurance) and we will probably see bills passing that attack LGBT rights, women's reproductive rights, environmental regulation, worker rights, funding for social services, etc.

Wrong. The Republicans don't have a super majority they have a narrow majority in the Senste. The Republicans have less than 60 seats in the Senate so they aren't filibuster proof and they are going to need virtually every Republican in the Senate to vote in unison among party lines to pass legislation which is much harder to do than you think.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
This is what I posted the other day, and in a sense, I've been vindicated, even though I didn't want to be vindicated:

I can assure you that the same thing will happen on Tuesday. 'Shy' Trump supporters, keeping quiet, sitting on the fence, and slipping under the radar of the polling companies.

These are people who haven't voted for years, but will be out on Tuesday, because like our Brexit vote, they will think that for the first time in a long time, their vote may actually be worth a damn....

Clinton should be careful of this....

It's Brexit all over again.

The political elites, the polling companies, the experts, are so far detached from ordinary people, they could not imagine that Brexit and Trump could happen, but it has....

I was shot down in flames when I said this

Spoiler:

sebster

but unfortunately I've been proven right.

Good call.

It occurred to me also that the whole "Trump can't win" attitude simply wasn't objective. Once I started looking at it from the other side, I realised that Trump was likely to mobilise a lot of voters, and exceed expectations, while Hillary just didn't have enough of an edge in the polls, or the popularity to absorb it. The more I thought about it, the more I realised that a Trump victory was not only possible, but quite likely. I was so confident Trump would win, I decided to put my money where my mouth is, and place a bet, which is unusual because I don't gamble, but his chances were being massively undervalued.

 danjbrierton wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The Democrats have to have a long, hard look at themselves for picking Clinton. The party machinery did everything its power to get her the nomination, but as an outsider, it seems that nobody really trusted her.

It's easy to be wise after the event, but if you look at the Sanders Vs. Trump ratings, Sanders wins....

America has no problem with a female president IMO, they just didn't want Clinton....

Any woman but her seemed to be the cry....

ding ding ding. we have a winner.

A winner? The only winner is Donald Trump, and the Democrats gave him a sniff of victory by nominating somebody with a cloud of mistrust permanently hanging over her.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Smacks wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
This is what I posted the other day, and in a sense, I've been vindicated, even though I didn't want to be vindicated:

I can assure you that the same thing will happen on Tuesday. 'Shy' Trump supporters, keeping quiet, sitting on the fence, and slipping under the radar of the polling companies.

These are people who haven't voted for years, but will be out on Tuesday, because like our Brexit vote, they will think that for the first time in a long time, their vote may actually be worth a damn....

Clinton should be careful of this....

It's Brexit all over again.

The political elites, the polling companies, the experts, are so far detached from ordinary people, they could not imagine that Brexit and Trump could happen, but it has....

I was shot down in flames when I said this

Spoiler:

sebster

but unfortunately I've been proven right.

Good call.

It occurred to me also that the whole "Trump can't win" attitude simply wasn't objective. Once I started looking at it from the other side, I realised that Trump was likely to mobilise a lot of voters, and exceed expectations, while Hillary just didn't have enough of an edge in the polls, or the popularity to absorb it. The more I thought about it, the more I realised that a Trump victory was not only possible, but quite likely. I was so confident Trump would win, I decided to put my money where my mouth is and place a bet on it, which is unusual because I don't gamble, but his chances were being massively undervalued.

Spoiler:

I take no pleasure in predicting a Trump victory, but our 'political elites' seem to have their heads so far up their rears, it's no wonder they didn't see this coming.

The polling companies must have speaking to traffic cones or something.

One American dakka member assured me that Brexit couldn't happen again in the USA, because American polling companies were better than British polling companies....

Of course they are....

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I take no pleasure in predicting a Trump victory, but our 'political elites' seem to have their heads so far up their rears, it's no wonder they didn't see this coming.

The polling companies must have speaking to traffic cones or something.

One American dakka member assured me that Brexit couldn't happen again in the USA, because American polling companies were better than British polling companies....

Of course they are....

Heh, yeah I also heard talk of how it couldn't happen in America because America has more diversity than the UK. But the question then became, would that diversity turn out to vote for Hillary, like it did for Obama? I didn't expect it would, and evidently it didn't.

I also really didn't want to Trump to win, I think Hillary would have been a fantastic president, and I'm kind of wishing it were possible to just move to another planet right now. But I guess it is what it is.

Well, you can see my predictions a few pages back, and I am not afraid to say that I was dead wrong. It had been a long run of success since H.W. Bush v. W.J. Clinton. That is over now.

I am going to read some Upton Sinclair now.

 Smacks wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I take no pleasure in predicting a Trump victory, but our 'political elites' seem to have their heads so far up their rears, it's no wonder they didn't see this coming.

The polling companies must have speaking to traffic cones or something.

One American dakka member assured me that Brexit couldn't happen again in the USA, because American polling companies were better than British polling companies....

Of course they are....

Heh, yeah I also heard talk of how it couldn't happen in America because America has more diversity than the UK. But the question then became, would that diversity turn out to vote for Hillary, like it did for Obama. I didn't expect it would, and evidently it didn't.

I also really didn't want to Trump to win, I think Hillary would have been a fantastic president, and I'm kind of wishing it were possible to just move to another planet right now. But I guess it is what it is.

Me and a friend are currently discussing moving to the Andromeda Galaxy, if you're interested. Currently deciding what board games will be most suitable to play in a zero-g environment. So far we have Twister and Jenga. Zero-g Battlefleet Gothic would be pretty damn cool though, could actually play it with 3-dimensional movement.

So she won tge popular but lost the EC? It's crazy that this has happened twice in the last two decades. You'd almost think that it's ans outated system thwt no longer works...

Just to elaborate on the impact this election has and will continue to have: Here in Germany, lots of people in my social circle stayed up all night, watching the polls. There was no other topic this morning in the university either, with reactions ranging from vague apprehension to people fuming and ranting and bein at a loss for words. So far, I haven't seen or talked to anyone here that wanted Trump to become president. People here care a lot, because everyone is aware of the large impact the POTUS has on global politics and alliances.

After the Brexit vote, I realized that a Trump presidency was not completely far off. Many countries in the Western world seem to have large blocks of frustrated voters, taking any candidate or proposal to challenge "the system". I'm just hoping our newly emerged far-right party here in Germany (AfD) won't be able to continue in this direction during the next elections, too...

I liked Stephen Colbert's youtube video that was uploaded two hours ago or so. I recommend watching it, especially after two years of political campaigns breathing down your neck.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
So she won tge popular but lost the EC? It's crazy that this has happened twice in the last two decades. You'd almost think that it's ans outated system thwt no longer works...

It's not outdated, it was deliberately designed that way to stop the 'fury of democracy,' the mob rule, from engulfing the new Republic.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
[i]
All overreactions to nothing. Dubya didn't suspend elections and become the Eternal President of America (or Hitler, as he was so often called). Obama didn't march everyone into FEMA death camps to be forcibly converted to Communist Islam whilst stealing all their guns!!! Trump isn't going to start launching nukes at Mecca.

The issue isn't so much a Trump presidency but that the GOP has control of every branch of the government. That much control means they can pass whatever the party wants and there is little to nothing the Dems can do to stop it. Affordable Care Act is gone 100% (there goes my health insurance) and we will probably see bills passing that attack LGBT rights, women's reproductive rights, environmental regulation, worker rights, funding for social services, etc.

Wrong. The Republicans don't have a super majority they have a narrow majority in the Senste. The Republicans have less than 60 seats in the Senate so they aren't filibuster proof and they are going to need virtually every Republican in the Senate to vote in unison among party lines to pass legislation which is much harder to do than you think.

Repealing Obamacare has been the GOP's big target legislation for years and any Republican that doesn't vote for that will condemn themselves to being a party traitor. Same for a good deal of other platform issues as well. Dems can only Filibuster so much before it hurts their popularity and set themselves up for a tougher time during midterm elections. Only hope for the senate is that the rift in the GOP that Trump caused disrupts that unity and we have senators willing to reach across the aisle. In the end either party having majority control in all 3 branches is not good for the country.

 Smacks wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I take no pleasure in predicting a Trump victory, but our 'political elites' seem to have their heads so far up their rears, it's no wonder they didn't see this coming.

The polling companies must have speaking to traffic cones or something.

One American dakka member assured me that Brexit couldn't happen again in the USA, because American polling companies were better than British polling companies....

Of course they are....

Heh, yeah I also heard talk of how it couldn't happen in America because America has more diversity than the UK. But the question then became, would that diversity turn out to vote for Hillary, like it did for Obama? I didn't expect it would, and evidently it didn't.

I also really didn't want to Trump to win, I think Hillary would have been a fantastic president, and I'm kind of wishing it were possible to just move to another planet right now. But I guess it is what it is.

I think Trump will be a one term president. The nation will tire of his bombast, and his supporters will turn on him when his unrealistic goals meet cold, hard, political reality.

AS for Clinton, I think her foreign policy would have been a disaster. With Trump, who knows?

 Just Tony wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Well, 4 more years of not going Socialist.

Which was going to happen, no matter what. Clinton is not a socialist.

Centralized government with subsidized control over healthcare, housing, transportation, AND the overtax method that leads to people needing more government assistance, which leads to more taxes and MORE government assistance. Breaking to the point that whatever you WOULD earn is simply collected by the government and what you need is doled out to you, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Doesn't sound like Socialism at all.

I guess it sounds like socialism if your definition of socialism is "When the government does stuff in the economy". If we go by that definition then my favorite socialist countries would be the Roman Empire with all their publicly built infrastructure and the 1960's USA when the War on Poverty was initiated

 Vankraken wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
[i]
All overreactions to nothing. Dubya didn't suspend elections and become the Eternal President of America (or Hitler, as he was so often called). Obama didn't march everyone into FEMA death camps to be forcibly converted to Communist Islam whilst stealing all their guns!!! Trump isn't going to start launching nukes at Mecca.

The issue isn't so much a Trump presidency but that the GOP has control of every branch of the government. That much control means they can pass whatever the party wants and there is little to nothing the Dems can do to stop it. Affordable Care Act is gone 100% (there goes my health insurance) and we will probably see bills passing that attack LGBT rights, women's reproductive rights, environmental regulation, worker rights, funding for social services, etc.

Wrong. The Republicans don't have a super majority they have a narrow majority in the Senste. The Republicans have less than 60 seats in the Senate so they aren't filibuster proof and they are going to need virtually every Republican in the Senate to vote in unison among party lines to pass legislation which is much harder to do than you think.

Repealing Obamacare has been the GOP's big target legislation for years and any Republican that doesn't vote for that will condemn themselves to being a party traitor. Same for a good deal of other platform issues as well. Dems can only Filibuster so much before it hurts their popularity and set themselves up for a tougher time during midterm elections. Only hope for the senate is that the rift in the GOP that Trump caused disrupts that unity and we have senators willing to reach across the aisle. In the end either party having majority control in all 3 branches is not good for the country.

But it has happened before, and the country has survived.

100 years ago this day, Woodrow Wilson was elected as President on the back of a very bitter campaign about keeping the USA out of World War 1.

There were issues over voting and vote counting.

And yet, here we are, 100 years later.

I'll probably bang this drum quite a lot, but the USA is strong, it will survive Trump.

Trump is not the first idiot, nor is he the last idiot, to be elected US president....

The American people just gave a big middle finger to washington DC. By electing Trump and rejecting Clinton part Deux, they just took a political baseball bat to the political class.

The people on here that are bemoaning the election of Trump dont really understand the anger and frustration the American people hold right now.

GG