Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[dholliday]

There you go spouting rubbish again. Landslide win? Hardly.

it was a landslide...won by 50 points, quite the thrashing considering the bias of the mainstream media.

 

[Bluser]

You are slandering him. He's not a convicted rapist nor proven racist.

I suppose you call Assange a rapist too: i.e. acusations from those with agendas similar to your own is enough proof for you?

Are you sure?

 

[abelard]

it was a landslide...won by 50 points, quite the thrashing considering the bias of the mainstream media.

I gather you like playing contrarian, but that's a bit much.

Fair enough, the Electoral College was the system everyone agreed on, the time to change it had Democrats actually cared would have been after 2008, and complaining now isn't very credible.

But none of that changes the fact that he got 2 million fewer votes than she did (and counting) and that many of the "50 points" you claim - which, by the way, is the lowest winning total in 12 years and one of the lower margins ever - were won by a relative handful of votes in a few key states.

 

[tsubaki]

I gather you like playing contrarian, but that's a bit much.

Fair enough, the Electoral College was the system everyone agreed on, the time to change it had Democrats actually cared would have been after 2008, and complaining now isn't very credible.

But none of that changes the fact that he got 2 million fewer votes than she did (and counting) and that many of the "50 points" you claim - which, by the way, is the lowest winning total in 12 years and one of the lower margins ever - were won by a relative handful of votes in a few key states.

You do sort of miss dholliday's point there; yes she got more votes than he did (which is not surprising given that she won NY and CA) but then again she did outspend him by nearly two to one, had far more people on the ground in nearly every state and there was an overwhelming support for her candidacy across nearly every platform of the media. Trump shouldn't have finished anywhere near her, never mind actually winning the thing.

In fact even to talk about the contrast between the popular vote and the electoral college does sort of ignore the elephant in the room, which is that the main reason Trump won is not because of the flaws in the EC but rather because the Clinton campaign was so utterly awful as to defy anyone to make any parallels with it in modern politics. I am not old enough (or American enough) to have experienced Mondale's run in 84 but even that cannot have been as bad as Clinton's was.

 

[neil999]

Thats your right, yes.

I admit in the light of earlier presidental wins Trump win doesnt necessarily look like landslide but from the perspective of under dog it can be seen as one.

Talking about rhetorics.....Russians....o my word x

When all the cards have been used...there was one extra card left....
...ladies and gentlemen may I present to you ....
THE RUSSIAN CARD

Your gonna have to accept the reality at some point re russia

 

[TheFinnFan]

Your gonna have to accept the reality at some point re russia

First it was Bernie, then white supremacists then Comey then fake news and then.....

The evil Russians

..you just couldnt make it up

 

[tsubaki]

Your gonna have to accept the reality at some point re russia

McCarthyite allegations aside, why wouldn't the Russians have wanted to intervene? One of the candidates was proposing something that would have vastly increased the risk of war with them.

 

[dholliday]

I gather you like playing contrarian, but that's a bit much.

Fair enough, the Electoral College was the system everyone agreed on, the time to change it had Democrats actually cared would have been after 2008, and complaining now isn't very credible.

But none of that changes the fact that he got 2 million fewer votes than she did (and counting) and that many of the "50 points" you claim - which, by the way, is the lowest winning total in 12 years and one of the lower margins ever - were won by a relative handful of votes in a few key states.

It depends how we define "landslide". Trump thrashed Clinton when comparing previous Republican win margains from Bush vs Gore/Kerry. But Obama thrashed McCain/Romney by even more.

It's a semantic argument, I guess. But we can all agree it was a comfortable win. As Tsubaki also pointed out, there's the media agenda to consider, and as you say yourself: them's the rules. Winning the popular vote means nothing and it shouldn't be used as a stick to beat Trump with. It's frankly not fair, when even Obama and Clinton are calling for unity and for everyone to get behind the man voted in as the President of every American.

But when fellows like @ilikecheese refuse to do this on tribalistic ideological grounds then it will only spell more social trouble ahead for this land which likes to think of itself as the greatest in the world.


Hilary was very fond of this whole fact-checking business. What are the biggest sticks used to beat Trump with?

He will deport 3 million illegal immigrants. Obama did that too, what's the difference?
He will build a wall. There already is a wall/fence along parts of the border, and if there's a significant problem of influxing illegal immigrants, then what's the problem?
He abused women. Innocent until proven guilty is one of the greatest concepts modern Western society has come up with, shame if we dump it.
He's a mysogonist at least. Ok, maybe. Arguably so was Bill Clinton. Why isn't he villified the same way? Is it because Bill is in the correct tribe?
He's installing racists in senior positions. Sauce? A lot of this is part of the fake news phenomenon which has many people for example believing Trump welcomes KKK members during his speeches while hounding out black protestors (the opposite is true, if you watch unedited footage).
Conflict of interests/nepotism. Possibly, we'll have to wait 'n see on this.
He lost the popular vote. As already said, them's not the rules.


Let's be kind and optimistic for a second and focus on at least one potential good thing coming up in a Trump presidency, namely this:

Donald Trump: 'We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes'



Donald Trump has laid out a US military policy that would avoid interventions in foreign conflicts and instead focus heavily on defeating Islamic State militancy.

“We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn’t be involved with,” the president-elect said on Tuesday night in Fayetteville, near Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina.

“Instead our focus must be on defeating terrorism and destroying Isis, and we will.”



“We don’t want to have a depleted military because we’re all over the place fighting in areas that we shouldn’t be fighting in. It’s not going to be depleted any longer,” he said.

Trump said any nation that shared his goals would be considered a US partner.

“We don’t forget. We want to strengthen old friendships and seek out new friendships,” he said. But the policy of “intervention and chaos” must come to an end.

While US armed forces are deployed in far-flung places around the globe, they are only involved currently in active combat in the Middle East – Iraq and Syria for the most part.

“We will build up our military not as an act of aggression, but as an act of prevention,” he said. “In short we seek peace through strength.”

Trump used similar rhetoric during the election campaign when he railed against the war in Iraq. Unusually for a Republican, Trump not only loudly expressed his dismay at George W Bush’s 2003 intervention but falsely claimed that he opposed it at the time and accused Bush of lying about the presence of weapons of mass destruction.

Trump has long expressed his skepticism about US foreign intervention in activities that he has labeled “nation building.”

He told the Guardian in October 2015: “We’re nation-building. We can’t do it. We have to build our own nation. We’re nation-building, trying to tell people who have [had] dictators or worse for centuries how to run their own countries.

“Assad is bad,” Trump added of the Syrian president. “Maybe these people could be worse.”

This is from a liberal anti-Trump/pro-Clinton paper, so no agenda for Trump at all, yet everything he's saying here is surely fantastic news. It could mean less innocent victims dying and in the long run US may no longer be seen as the great evil, which is surely what everyone wants.

Can't we get behind Trump when he has good ideas?

 

[everton2004]

In accordance with the voting system in the US - Trump won by a landslide. Fact - get over it.

The Leave camp won the referendum by a margin of 52%/48%. Fact - get over it.

Seems to be a new fashion whereby when a result is delivered that doesn't fit the ideals of the liberal middle classes then they whine and bitch about it - "It's not fair", "they're a bunch of racists".....blah blah blah. It is called Democracy - the electorate are asked to vote and the votes are counted accordingly to arrive at a result.

 

[Clint Planet]

You are slandering him. He's not a convicted rapist nor proven racist.

I suppose you call Assange a rapist too: i.e. acusations from those with agendas similar to your own is enough proof for you?

All that birther stuff is racist, mate. And Ivana said in a sworn deposition that he raped her. And then there are all those sexual assaults that came out in the autumn - behaviour consistent with what Ivana said in the deposition.

 

[everton2004]

All that birther stuff is racist, mate. And Ivana said in a sworn deposition that he raped her. And then there are all those sexual assaults that came out in the autumn - behaviour consistent with what Ivana said in the deposition.

None of which has been proven in a court of law. That's why we have the "innocent until proven guilty" system of law.

 

[dholliday]

Seems to be a new fashion whereby when a result is delivered that doesn't fit the ideals of the liberal middle classes then they whine and bitch about it - "It's not fair", "they're a bunch of racists".....blah blah blah. It is called Democracy - the electorate are asked to vote and the votes are counted accordingly to arrive at a result.

These are genuine non-satirical Guardian headlines after Brexit/Trump:

Why elections are bad for democracy

Think democracy means the people are always right? Wrong

 

[Clint Planet]

Talking about rhetorics.....Russians....o my word x

When all the cards have been used...there was one extra card left....
...ladies and gentlemen may I present to you ....
THE RUSSIAN CARD

It's not rhetoric - it's being reported in the news, mate. Why would the CIA make it up?

 

[Clint Planet]

None of which has been proven in a court of law. That's why we have the "innocent until proven guilty" system of law.

Do you think all those women are lying, mate? Do you think Ivana Trump lied under deposition?

 

[dholliday]

It's not rhetoric - it's being reported in the news, mate. Why would the CIA make it up?

It's important to maintain perspective on these reports. Don't jump on them to try to make them support an argument you already have in your head, i.e. Trump won unfairly thus should be unseated.