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.

It's a shame for Hillary, but the Democrats need to spend the next two to four years breeding up some new talent.

 LordofHats wrote:
Losing a presidential run has been the death blow to many political careers.

These days it seems you only get one shot at the presidency. The last person to run, lose and then run again was Nixon. It seems since the parties, or the people, or maybe the candidates themselves decided that once was enough. It's probably not just coincidental that the end of repeat campaigners stopped with the rise of the modern primary system and then the televised, 6 month long general election campaign.

In most cases though, it seems losing an presidential election might stop a candidate's desire to be president, but not their desire to be part of politics. McCain went back to his senate seat. Kerry, and now possibly Romney have moved in to Sec of State roles. Gore grew a beard and convinced people a powerpoint presentation was a documentary movie.

It wouldn't be unusual for Clinton to take up a position within the DNC, or work her back in to the senate somehow. But it also makes sense she doesn't want that. Her career, even from her time as First Lady, always seemed to be about getting herself in the Oval Office. That ain't gonna happen now, it makes sense she'd see little value in hanging around to see if she could score another term as Sec of State or anything like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's a shame for Hillary, but the Democrats need to spend the next two to four years breeding up some new talent.

Speaking of which, Pelosi was just returned as House Minority leader, winning a bit over 2/3 of the vote. She beat Tim Ryan, who I know nothing about except that he's about 30 years younger than Pelosi.

One the one hand this is good, because otherwise we'd have House Majority Leader Ryan meeting with House Minority Leader Ryan, and that'd just be annoying.

But on the other hand, man is the DNC leadership long in the tooth with Obama gone. House Minority Leader is not exactly the place that will launch you in to prominence, but it still couldn't hurt to shake the party leadership up a bit.

 feeder wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To be frank I think it is a pretty good idea to prevent future mass murderers from entering the USA. To take it a logical step further, we ought also to throw out any future mass murderers who currently are resident in the country.

Was he vetted? How'd that work out?

Do you really think we can "vet" out future potential mass killers? Unless this guy was FB friends with Bin Laden.

Really, I don't think there's anything we can do to stop this type of lone wolf attack.

Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

Sarah Palin is under consideration for secretary of veterans affairs, a close Palin aide and a top Donald Trump transition official told ABC News.

.. OH America


http://www.pid.gov.pk/?p=30445

PR No. 298 PM TELEPHONES PRESIDENT-ELECT USA Islamabad: November 30, 2016

Print
Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif called President-elect USA Donald Trump and felicitated him on his victory. President Trump said Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif you have a very good reputation. You are a terrific guy. You are doing amazing work which is visible in every way. I am looking forward to see you soon. As I am talking to you Prime Minister, I feel I am talking to a person I have known for long. Your country is amazing with tremendous opportunities. Pakistanis are one of the most intelligent people. I am ready and willing to play any role that you want me to play to address and find solutions to the outstanding problems. It will be an honor and I will personally do it. Feel free to call me any time even before 20th January that is before I assume my office.



On being invited to visit Pakistan by the Prime Minister, Mr. Trump said that he would love to come to a fantastic country, fantastic place of fantastic people. Please convey to the Pakistani people that they are amazing and all Pakistanis I have known are exceptional people, said Mr. Donald Trump.

new game for 2017 : spot the direct quotes from a Trump conversation.

A potential Secretary Palin makes me realize that I transferred just in the nick of time.

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

Oh right. Let's just block anybody entering the US.

Of course seeing how much cash tourists bring in that's not likely entirely feasible. Can US survive economically with nobody coming into US? And obviously they need to increase border control to ensure nobody slips in by foot, boat or plane(well planes are tad harder to sneak unnoticed).

I mean what would prevent me for example going to US pretending to be tourists and then starting all hell? I doubt getting permission to visit US is too hard for me. Albeit never been interested going there and never have been so don't know. But Japan it's show passport, give fingerprints and be photographed, hand in prefilled paper, done. Not going to stop me from say renting car and driving over innocents.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

Also, when you make a screening system for filtering terrorists (such as focusing on Muslims), all it does is provide the terrorists with an easy way to circumvent your system (don't use obvious Muslims). That's why random searches at airports are more effective than profiling. Even though it can seem absurd at times, when you see a 96 year old woman getting frisked, while Pablo Escobar waltzes though unchallenged, it means that no one is above suspicion.

 whembly wrote:
Great image:

Yep, that's pretty damn good.

No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

No. Stop immigration from problem countries would have worked just fine for this guy, San Bernardino, and Florida. We also have over 100 people charged with ISIL related crimes. Would be interesting to see how many would have been weeded out.

If you stop all immigration from India and China, it might cause some problems with tourism, university applications, and recruitment of engineers.

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

 Easy E wrote:

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

Its nice to feel superior, however considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC at least something is being done. I know people on the coasts don't seem to give a gak, but then again thats why they've lost nearly everything.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

Arresting leaders of a religion for what they preech. I see no possible way that could backfire or incite riots. /s

 jreilly89 wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

Arresting leaders of a religion for what they preech. I see no possible way that could backfire or incite riots. /s

On the other hand, I'm sure the same standards will be applied to christian churches and groups who incite hatred and violence against LGBT members of society.

 Frazzled wrote:
considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC

That is utter crap and you should know better.

 Frazzled wrote:
at least something is being done.

"Well they killed my kids with pipe irons and had anal sex with me unexpectedly, without lube, but at least they did something." That doesn't argument doesn't really hold water. What people do is actually important not just that they did something.

Speaking of, it seems odd that the person constantly arguing about how they don't care about others suddenly wants to yell at others about how they care about others. Make up your mind.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

 Easy E wrote:

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

The electorate stopped caring about politicians' and parties' principles years ago. Here's an old interview between John Cusack and Jonathan Turley that raises some good points about that. People keep voting for the lesser of two evils because its become ingrained in them that the other party is always the greatest evil. We're voting out of spite and turning elections into pyrrhic victories.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/11264-john-cusack-and-jonathan-turley-on-obamas-constitution

 Ustrello wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

But that would interfere with the Islamophobic "bedrock" upon which much of this attempt at an argument stands!

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC

That is utter crap and you should know better.

I disagree. Its why Trump won. Look at WAPO, NYT etc. both the stories and the comments.

What people do is actually important not just that they did something.

Such wisdom cannot be refuted.

Speaking of, it seems odd that the person constantly arguing about how they don't care about others suddenly wants to yell at others about how they care about others. Make up your mind.

Just making a point, plus I get to yell, so its win / win.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Sure there is. If he was no't in the country he couldn't have done the terrorist attack.

And unless you deport the entire population (except for me, because I'm too awesome to leave) you can't guarantee that terrorists will never be in the country. No screening process can detect someone who doesn't become a terrorist until after they have (legally) entered the country, so the only solution is to assume that every single person in the US is guilty of being a potential terrorist and get them out.

You can monitor the mosques that breed radical Islamic terrorist beliefs. I'd like to see multilingual DHS agents periodically checking the nature of the discussion that occurs at these mosques and, if necessary, arrest the leadership who incite violence. It's not exactly a secret either - Jamaat al Fuqra is NY is a community known to cultivate violent Islamic ideology, for example.

Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

Houston subpoened the sermons of local churches who came out against the local transbathroom ordnance.

 Frazzled wrote:
Its nice to feel superior, however considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC at least something is being done. I know people on the coasts don't seem to give a gak, but then again thats why they've lost nearly everything.

What exactly is being done? The gesture was insignificant, and unsustainable on a national level. And that idea that only "people on the coasts" have lost, is really the best case scenario. The prosperity of people in rural America is hardly at odds with the prosperity of people in urban areas. I'm as liberal as they come, but If I even half believed that all those "white without a college education" people, that voted for Trump, were going to "win" somehow out of this (economically)... well then hand me fething "I <3 Trump" T-shirt right now!

However, he ran on promises that he A: can't feasibly keep, B: likely doesn't intend to keep, and C: are completely at odds with his economic plan, and the people he's appointed to implement it. If anyone other than billionaires and cronies prospers of this, I'd be mightily surprised.

 Ustrello wrote:


Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

Absolutely. Assembly for the purpose of inciting violence is not protected under law, and violent Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Spaghetti Monster cultists should all be held to that same standard.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

Absolutely. Assembly for the purpose of inciting violence is not protected under law, and violent Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Spaghetti Monster cultists should all be held to that same standard.

Well, good for you. There are plenty of countries where the government intervenes on the pulpit that I'm sure you would feel quite at home in.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

Its nice to feel superior, however considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC at least something is being done. I know people on the coasts don't seem to give a gak, but then again thats why they've lost nearly everything.

Yeah. People on the coasts "lost nearly everything.". Those clumps of professionals that are college educated and employed in 21st century-relevant jobs lost everything. Sure they did.

The people that lost in this election are the ones that slit their own throats, i.e. the uneducated and unskilled who, through sheer desperation, threw in their lot with a carnival barker. They're being shown a "utter lack of concern"? No, they're just becoming irrelevant in this day and age and need to wake up and adapt. Automation, NOT MOVING JOBS TO MEXICO, is replacing them in droves. A high school degree doesn't get you jack nowadays. We, the USA, are manufacturing more now than any time in the last 40 years. But we simply don't use the bodies that we used to because the processes have been automated. Rather than adapt to the new reality, certain sectors of the population continue to hold out for some false prophet to come along and tell them that he'll "Make America Great Again" conjuring visions of $35./hr. manufacturing jobs with unbelievable benefits and pension plans for life. Welcome to Fantasy Island!

Since 1975, manufacturing in the USA has more than doubled, employment in manufacturing is down by over 30%. Meanwhile, as I type, over 1.5 million high-tech, engineering, science, etc. related job openings remain unfilled. At what point does someone just tell the saddle maker that cars are here to stay, go and become a mechanic!

https://www.mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output-vs-jobs-1975

 Ustrello wrote:

Good then we can monitor Christian churches as well because we damn well know there is a lot of violent rhetoric coming from them

Well... no. Because if you do it to mosques, that's just good investigating. If you do it to the Christians, that's oppression and continuing the "war on Christianity" /s

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

Its nice to feel superior, however considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC at least something is being done. I know people on the coasts don't seem to give a gak, but then again thats why they've lost nearly everything.

Yeah. People on the coasts "lost nearly everything.". Those clumps of professionals that are college educated and employed in 21st century-relevant jobs lost everything. Sure they did.

The people that lost in this election are the ones that slit their own throats, i.e. the uneducated and unskilled who, through sheer desperation, threw in their lot with a carnival barker. They're being shown a "utter lack of concern"? No, they're just becoming irrelevant in this day and age and need to wake up and adapt. Automation, NOT MOVING JOBS TO MEXICO, is replacing them in droves. A high school degree doesn't get you jack nowadays. We, the USA, are manufacturing more now than any time in the last 40 years. But we simply don't use the bodies that we used to because the processes have been automated. Rather than adapt to the new reality, certain sectors of the population continue to hold out for some false prophet to come along and tell them that he'll "Make America Great Again" conjuring visions of $35./hr. manufacturing jobs with unbelievable benefits and pension plans for life. Welcome to Fantasy Island!

Anyone with half a brain knows most of the rust belt jobs thay have been lost are not coming back. That is why when HRC was calling for them to switch to renewable energy jobs it was one of their best options (seeing as how it is the wave of the future and creates more jobs than fossil fuels) but nope they want to mine coal just like granpappy and get black lung like him

 Ustrello wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 sebster wrote:
Did anyone else follow Trump's announcement that he saved jobs from that air conditioner company moving to Mexico.

It turns out Trump has had his running mate Mike Pence offer up a pile of incentives to get Carrier to keep half the jobs in Mexico. So Trump the great deal maker ended up signing off on a deal to have government pay, while 1,000 jobs still went to Mexico. That's the art of negotiation, apparently.

It also opens the door for any company in the future who decides it wants to offshore some jobs. If they wanted to offshore 5,000 jobs, why wouldn't they claim they wanted to offshore 10,000, get Trump to hand over umpteen million in government dollars, and still offshore the 5,000 positions they originally planned for?

That said, saving 1,000 jobs makes a difference to some families. But to really get an idea of how much this deal was just a piddly thing on the national scale, here's a couple of comparisons. Since 2000 about 5.2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the US. For Trump to recover manufacturing back to that peak, he would need to make another 5,200 deals equal to the Carrier deal. Or to compare to Obama, who's auto-bailout saved 1.5 million jobs, Trump would need to make another 1,500 Carrier sized deals, just to equal Obama's auto bailout.

And remember, Republicans hated the auto bailout. But now Trump is pouring money into PR stunts that save a tiny number of jobs, and it's Trump the great dealmaker. Suddenyly government money to prop up industry is okay again. I personally am shocked about this reversal.

Sebs.... you forgot one key point. It feels good to the base. There is no arguing about the Feelz. It's what plants crave!

I saw the headline article, and didn't read the article. From the headline alone most people's immediate thought was probably.... "huh, maybe is going to try and do something for the working class". I am guessing that is the exact reaction he wanted from his base too. We are in post-modern politics now. it is nto about governance, it is about showmanship. There has always been an element of this showmanship in politics, but I have a feeling it is about to go to 11. I mean, we are being led by a professional showman!

Its nice to feel superior, however considering the utter lack of concern by the previous Presidents and HRC at least something is being done. I know people on the coasts don't seem to give a gak, but then again thats why they've lost nearly everything.

Yeah. People on the coasts "lost nearly everything.". Those clumps of professionals that are college educated and employed in 21st century-relevant jobs lost everything. Sure they did.

The people that lost in this election are the ones that slit their own throats, i.e. the uneducated and unskilled who, through sheer desperation, threw in their lot with a carnival barker. They're being shown a "utter lack of concern"? No, they're just becoming irrelevant in this day and age and need to wake up and adapt. Automation, NOT MOVING JOBS TO MEXICO, is replacing them in droves. A high school degree doesn't get you jack nowadays. We, the USA, are manufacturing more now than any time in the last 40 years. But we simply don't use the bodies that we used to because the processes have been automated. Rather than adapt to the new reality, certain sectors of the population continue to hold out for some false prophet to come along and tell them that he'll "Make America Great Again" conjuring visions of $35./hr. manufacturing jobs with unbelievable benefits and pension plans for life. Welcome to Fantasy Island!

Anyone with half a brain knows most of the rust belt jobs thay have been lost are not coming back. That is why when HRC was calling for them to switch to renewable energy jobs it was one of their best options (seeing as how it is the wave of the future and creates more jobs than fossil fuels) but nope they want to mine coal just like granpappy and get black lung like him

Saw a statistic yesterday that sums the situation up. There are approximately 70K Coal Mining Jobs in the entire US, while there are over 500K Clean Energy Jobs in California alone! There is a reality here that just doesn't register and the desperate that cling to a dying industry, rather than face the facts around them, are the ones who are losing. Hard truths need to be told and real options, that provide a future to move toward, understood. Being lied to and lead on by a pandering politician is almost cruel.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
A high school degree doesn't get you jack nowadays.

I dunno, all I have is a high school diploma and I seem to have done well for myself. My wife and I far exceed the median household income for our county, Loudoun, which has the highest median household income in the country, and it's mainly due to my job (I make about double what my wife does).

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
A high school degree doesn't get you jack nowadays.

I dunno, all I have is a high school diploma and I seem to have done well for myself.

I was going to say...

There's an alarming view that you can only succeed if you have a college degree... that there's this backhanded insults to blue-collar jobs.

I know of two professional welders (with HS diplomas only), that are making as much, if not more than me (a college graduate). The single guy.... he has a lot of fething toys!