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.

Protests in Oakland turn violent. Yea, what was that nonsense from the left about Trumpsters being violent if he lost?
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Anti-Trump-protests-in-Oakland-turn-violent-10605621.php

tneva82 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
After looking at some of the stats, was surprised to learn that turnout dropped to nearly 50%

and that almost 100 million Americans never voted

Perhaps rumours of Trump's popularity are greatly exaggerated?

Then again, I'm coming off the back of a Scottish independence referendum 85% turnout

2015 General Election 60% turnout

and a EU Referendum 73% turnout, so maybe I'm too used to the heady days of high turnouts

Of those 3 only 1st would cause high-five's here. Remaining ones would be "oh damn it's low". It's been low but still around the 70% ballmark. 50% would be horrible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Her military advisors and strategists would be the same people at the DoD that moved from GW Bush, to Obama, and would then latch on to Clinton.

She'd be signing off drone strikes from day 1.

G'Bay would still be there, serving as a reminder to retreat of American values.

She'd be diving into Syria and talking about a no fly zone

and there would be lip service paid to the economy, and the average American man and woman...

And Trump bombing the area like he has said he would do is better...How? Only difference would be that potential for nukes to be employed(after all according to him they should have been already used).

And Trump's economic plans are totally nuts as anybody who thinks for a second will realize.

Turnouts across the Western World have been dropping these past years, and I'm willing to bet that Finland is no exception.

As for Trump's economic policy, let's hope it doesn't end up like one of his failed golf courses

On a serious note, Trump's willingness to at least sit down and talk with Putin is 1000 times better than anything that Clinton and her team would ever come up with.

Trump's foreign policy, if executed properly, is exactly what the USA needs at this time IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Protests in Oakland turn violent. Yea, what was that nonsense from the left about Trumpsters being violent if he lost?
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Anti-Trump-protests-in-Oakland-turn-violent-10605621.php

Meh, I've seen worse in your average British city on a Saturday night

On a serious note, low level disorder like that was to be expected, but if it's nothing more than some minor property dmage, with hopefully nobody getting hurt, I think it'll blow over.

If young Democrats are smart, they'll mobilize to effectively combat a Trump administration, by using all peaceful and legal means at their disposal.

Civil disobedience is what I would recommend.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
On a serious note, Trump's willingness to at least sit down and talk with Putin is 1000 times better than anything that Clinton and her team would ever come up with.

Trump's foreign policy, if executed properly, is exactly what the USA needs at this time IMO.

The idea they are in good terms is actually not that accurate. They disagree on pretty much every topic except being conservative anti-LGBT. China, Syria etc you name it they disagree with.

Whole idea that Putin thinks Trump is good started when he described Trump as "colourfull person" and this got misinterpreted as good. So it's more like Trump is "yey yey Putin. He's strong leader". On actual politics they disagree with.

Don't expect USA/Russian relationships to get any warmer. Well except warmed by mutual bombing.

The pessimist in me wants to say Obama got so many votes because of his skin color but Hillary's lack of testicles wasn't enough to get her over the line

 Piston Honda wrote:
First time I voted and did not vote Democrat. I voted 3rd party.

After watching these protests, the things people are saying, "People have to die", the complete hypocrisy I see unfolding before me as well as all the assaults I have seen committed against Trump voters I don't think I'll vote Democrat ever again. Democrats have become everything they hated in the Republicans in the early 2000s.

Never thought I would see the day that Democrats/liberals acted like jackbooted thugs.

Anyone want to start a viable 3rd party?

Evidently lots of tweek messages calling for Trump assassination. But the Trumpsters are the violent ones. Almost worth it to see this. Mmm your tears are so sweet yesss


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think Trump won as such. I think the other side lost.

It was definitely both. It's no use denying that HRC's campaign totally failed. At the same time, we have to acknowledge that Trump's campaign definitely succeeded. That is, the votes were not merely against Hillary - although that certainly played an important role.

There were voters voting purely against Hillary, don't kid yourself. Find me a Trump supporter who can make the argument without including "Hillary BAD."

tneva82 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
On a serious note, Trump's willingness to at least sit down and talk with Putin is 1000 times better than anything that Clinton and her team would ever come up with.

Trump's foreign policy, if executed properly, is exactly what the USA needs at this time IMO.

The idea they are in good terms is actually not that accurate. They disagree on pretty much every topic except being conservative anti-LGBT. China, Syria etc you name it they disagree with.

Whole idea that Putin thinks Trump is good started when he described Trump as "colourfull person" and this got misinterpreted as good. So it's more like Trump is "yey yey Putin. He's strong leader". On actual politics they disagree with.

Don't expect USA/Russian relationships to get any warmer. Well except warmed by mutual bombing.

Trump and Putin don't have to like each other, but a solid working relationship over things like fighting ISIL, would be good for both nations IMO.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I really don't understand how he won given all we heard over here. Educate me please!

There are more deplorables and gullible people than polls and analysis anticipated. The deplorables love him for obvious reasons, the gullible people somehow thought that a billionaire who was born into wealth and privilege and has a history of screwing over middle-class workers is somehow the champion of the masses who will give them their jobs back. So it turns out that if you yell racism and zero-substance nationalism loud enough you can win an election despite having policy positions that range from "not possible" to "sheer raving lunacy".

Yes, its just this sort of view that helped Trump win, compeltely blinding you to how utterly awful your candidate was.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

In a way though, I don't blame people for voting Trump, because I know how a Clinton administration plays out.

Her military advisors and strategists would be the same people at the DoD that moved from GW Bush, to Obama, and would then latch on to Clinton.

She'd be signing off drone strikes from day 1.

G'Bay would still be there, serving as a reminder to retreat of American values.

She'd be diving into Syria and talking about a no fly zone

and there would be lip service paid to the economy, and the average American man and woman...

In short, another 8 years of Obama, and I don't think people wanted that...

Trump is a 100-1 shot, I think most people know that in their hearts, but that they'd rather gamble and lose on Trump, then stick with Hilary, speaks volumes....

It would be pretty hilarious if Trump of all people became the one to close down Guantanamo, where 'Nobel Peace Price Laureate' Obama kept it going for all eight years of his presidency

 Smacks wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Perhaps rumours of Trump's popularity are greatly exaggerated?

Well, let me put it this way... He got fewer votes than Romney, McCain, and (ironically) Hillary Clinton, and they all lost.

Exactly. Trump didn't win. Hillary lost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zywus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

In a way though, I don't blame people for voting Trump, because I know how a Clinton administration plays out.

Her military advisors and strategists would be the same people at the DoD that moved from GW Bush, to Obama, and would then latch on to Clinton.

She'd be signing off drone strikes from day 1.

G'Bay would still be there, serving as a reminder to retreat of American values.

She'd be diving into Syria and talking about a no fly zone

and there would be lip service paid to the economy, and the average American man and woman...

In short, another 8 years of Obama, and I don't think people wanted that...

Trump is a 100-1 shot, I think most people know that in their hearts, but that they'd rather gamble and lose on Trump, then stick with Hilary, speaks volumes....

It would be pretty hilarious if Trump of all people became the one to close down Guantanamo, where 'Nobel Peace Price Laureate' Obama kept it going for all eight years of his presidency

"Only Nixon could go to China"
-ancient Vulcan proverb.

sirlynchmob wrote:
If you believe that, you might want to take some time for some reflection. I don't need any self reflection on this, I just call it as I see it.

This is the most immature thing I've ever read in the OT, and I've read 100% of my own posts.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord of Nonsensical Crap wrote:
Slightly off topic, but out of curiosity, how do you all think that Trump will get along with Canada, or that his policies will affect Canada? I write this as a concerned observer from the frigid north. I know that Trudeau pledged a while back to work with whoever won, but given Trump's boasts of how he was going to shred NAFTA, I think it's a given that there's going to be plenty of friction in that relationship.

"I love Canada. There are some great people from Canada. Really, the best. I'm going to use NAFTA to leverage all of the lumber and maple syrup I can. And their going to pay me to do it. And then turn what's left of it into a tremendous theme park. There will be polar bears and koala bears and panda bears and rice crispy bears. Really, a great place!"

Canada and Mongolia are the greatest military powers the world has ever seen.

Canada has never lost a war, and has repelled numerous invasions from those damn Yankees!

Trump and American dakka members would do well to remember the fate of those who dared to lock horns with Canada

 Frazzled wrote:
Protests in Oakland turn violent. Yea, what was that nonsense from the left about Trumpsters being violent if he lost?
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Anti-Trump-protests-in-Oakland-turn-violent-10605621.php

Always remember Fraz:

1. Right Wing Loonies = Representatives of the entire right side of politics.
2. Left Wing Loonies = Don't actually exist, and are just a boogeyman made up by the right... who are all Right Wing Loonies as established in point 1.

That's what a few here keep implying - Perry - no matter how demonstrably false it is.

Posting my reply on recently closed topic:

Obama did not meet my expectations. At first, he seemed a man who wants to do a things better for his country and around the world. But he went on a same course to destroy the Arabic countries and destroy USA-Russian relations.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Canada and Mongolia are the greatest military powers the world has ever seen.

Canada has never lost a war, and has repelled numerous invasions from those damn Yankees!

Trump and American dakka members would do well to remember the fate of those who dared to lock horns with Canada

Wait...thats...true actually.
*1812
*WWI
*WWII
*The Maple Leaf-Taco Wars of the 1970s

They're hard core up there. I guess you can be polite when you're the mightiest military power the earth has seen in the last 100 years.

Anyway, he's my assessment of the Obama years:

The initial hope and promise quickly gave way to cold, hard political reality in the form of a Congress that was anti-Obama.

He spent a lot of time and political capital in order to obtain his ACA.

I think this difficult passage knocked the stuffing out of him.

Domestically, his economic recovery, whilst looking good on the balance sheet, failed to help those at the bottom that needed it. I believe that real time wage increases stagnated on his watch, despite the recovery....

His foreign policy was a continuation of the failure that preceded him, and often utilized the advice of those who had ill-advised GW Bush.

His failure to close down G'Bay, the number of civilians killed in his drone strikes, and of course, the shredding of the 4th amendment on his watch, are fail marks against his legacy...

Candidate Obama was a first class organizer and orator, but alas, that initial promise failed to transform into real political capital.

He made history as the first African-American to become President, and to be fair to him, brought dignity and class to the role of President, especially when he faced down the appalling and racist abuse from those who believed he was non-American, especially from one Donald Trump....

And I suppose he got Bin laden,

but all in all, I would have to rate Obama as solid, but unspectacular, but perhaps sometimes a nation needs that.

Final rating 3/5


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Canada and Mongolia are the greatest military powers the world has ever seen.

Canada has never lost a war, and has repelled numerous invasions from those damn Yankees!

Trump and American dakka members would do well to remember the fate of those who dared to lock horns with Canada

Wait...thats...true actually.
*1812
*WWI
*WWII
*The Maple Leaf-Taco Wars of the 1970s

They're hard core up there. I guess you can be polite when you're the mightiest military power the earth has seen in the last 100 years.

The maple leaf taco wars?

Sounds like a bad 1970s sci-fi film

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Posting my reply on recently closed topic:

Obama did not meet my expectations. At first, he seemed a man who wants to do a things better for his country and around the world. But he went on a same course to destroy the Arabic countries and destroy USA-Russian relations.

Putin has not met the expectations of the western world either.
The opposition in Russia is suppressed and the Krim and Ukraine invasions cannot be accepted by the western countries.
I guess Trump will see it in the same way.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I really don't understand how he won given all we heard over here. Educate me please!

There are more deplorables and gullible people than polls and analysis anticipated. The deplorables love him for obvious reasons, the gullible people somehow thought that a billionaire who was born into wealth and privilege and has a history of screwing over middle-class workers is somehow the champion of the masses who will give them their jobs back. So it turns out that if you yell racism and zero-substance nationalism loud enough you can win an election despite having policy positions that range from "not possible" to "sheer raving lunacy".

Yes, its just this sort of view that helped Trump win, compeltely blinding you to how utterly awful your candidate was.

Yeah, go look your family in the eye and tell them your country is now being run by a child rapist.

 Buzzsaw wrote:


It's endlessly frustrating to hear Democrats/Progressives proclaim their shock at how Democrats/Progressives are acting badly. Many of the most grotesque abuses of the American people in the 20th century were the direct actions of Progressives/Democrats, yet it seems the sins that sprang explicitly from Progressives are simply "American" sins, while the GOP owns its own sins forever.

Those are the remnants of the Dixiecrats. You know, the fething guys that ALL defected to the Republican Party when Democratic President Johnson continued the desegregation work.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good rant.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I really don't understand how he won given all we heard over here. Educate me please!

There are more deplorables and gullible people than polls and analysis anticipated. The deplorables love him for obvious reasons, the gullible people somehow thought that a billionaire who was born into wealth and privilege and has a history of screwing over middle-class workers is somehow the champion of the masses who will give them their jobs back. So it turns out that if you yell racism and zero-substance nationalism loud enough you can win an election despite having policy positions that range from "not possible" to "sheer raving lunacy".

Yes, its just this sort of view that helped Trump win, compeltely blinding you to how utterly awful your candidate was.

Yeah, go look your family in the eye and tell them your country is now being run by a child rapist.

That makes it even worse. HRC couldn't defeat an "alleged" child rapist. You suck epic levels of hard when you lose to that.

I will repeat:
"Don't blame me. I voted for the Dopehead"
-Frazzled

 Frazzled wrote:
Protests in Oakland turn violent. Yea, what was that nonsense from the left about Trumpsters being violent if he lost?
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Anti-Trump-protests-in-Oakland-turn-violent-10605621.php

It's a shame we'll never know how trumpers would have handled the loss. They were the ones openly calling for hillarys assassination, and threatening armed rebellion, and trump would have been urging them on with his "I'm a crybaby loser it was all rigged" routine.

The Left always says the Right is going to do something, but its always the Left doing the actual looting.

sirlynchmob wrote:
It's a shame we'll never know how trumpers would have handled the loss.

Meanwhile, we do know that it's a shame how many Clinton supporters are handling the loss.

Seaward wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
It's a shame we'll never know how trumpers would have handled the loss.

Meanwhile, we do know that it's a shame how many Clinton supporters are handling the loss.

Define "many", and how do we know who they supported?

 Frazzled wrote:
The Left always says the Right is going to do something, but its always the Left doing the actual looting.

You're exalted.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Seaward wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
It's a shame we'll never know how trumpers would have handled the loss.

Meanwhile, we do know that it's a shame how many Clinton supporters are handling the loss.

Define "many", and how do we know who they supported?

Look on the news.

I suspect I know the answer, but I'm going to ask anyway.

Why for Trumps rhetoric are we reading between the lines "build a wall" apparently just means tough on immigration. But when Hilary says "no fly zone over Syria" we take her at her word and we're going to re-enter the cold war?

Why is taking Trump at his word just "you silly lefties, over reacting to hot air" but it's all serious and going to happen for anything Hilary said.

Because if we take him at his word we have an expensive publics work project. If we take her at her word we have global thermonucelar war.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
I suspect I know the answer, but I'm going to ask anyway.

Why for Trumps rhetoric are we reading between the lines "build a wall" apparently just means tough on immigration. But when Hilary says "no fly zone over Syria" we take her at her word and we're going to re-enter the cold war?

Why is taking Trump at his word just "you silly lefties, over reacting to hot air" but it's all serious and going to happen for anything Hilary said.

I can pretty positively state that the number of people who cast their vote based on the prospect of a Syrian no-fly zone is under 10.

Anti-Trump Rallies

It is their right to complain though. It's a free country after all.

 sebster wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
There are more deplorables and gullible people than polls and analysis anticipated. The deplorables love him for obvious reasons, the gullible people somehow thought that a billionaire who was born into wealth and privilege and has a history of screwing over middle-class workers is somehow the champion of the masses who will give them their jobs back. So it turns out that if you yell racism and zero-substance nationalism loud enough you can win an election despite having policy positions that range from "not possible" to "sheer raving lunacy".

Add to this the evangelicals turned out in favour of Trump 81 to 16, because they've have basically submitted themselves to whomever the Republican party put up as a candidate, for reasons that I can best describe as a shared commitment to form a collective delusion. Reading my cousin and his friend's facebook discussion on why they all agree Trump was interesting because he was a billionaire but also a man of the people, and man who was publicly shallow but privately so generous... it kind of gave me a scientology vibe.

Trump's victory has more to do with Hilary being a terrible candidate than with any favorable attribute that Trump might have. Hillary got about 60 million votes, that's about 10 million fewer votes than Obama got in 2008 and 7 million fewer votes than Obama got in 2012. Where did all those voters go and why didn't they vote for Hillary? Hillary lost states like Florida, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin because of low turnout and that speaks volumes about the inability of Hillary to win over Obama voters and motivate Democrats. I don't see what Trump did that could explain the atrocious turnout for Hillary.