2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

aloyisious

Whatever about Don fulfilling his statement about Hillary, I don't reckon he'd try anything in the end. It'd end up in massive street protests making whats going on now seem like a kids party. Even the SC judges might feel inclined to offer opinions about illegality of actions based on political bias.

daithi7

RobertKK wrote: »

John Podesta is blaming Comey and the media for Hillary's lossr.

Frankly Comey and the FBI are coming out of this election really, really badly imho.

Fine, opening an investigation (based on info leaked by the KGB mind) into the email server, and then concluding that there was nothing untoward here, I don't have an issue with that. And to be clear, if they decided there was something untoward there and they substantiated that, I wouldn't have any issue with that either. But to then reopen the investigation in the middle of an election in response to more KGB supplied info is just plain nuts. Of course they should have kept a 'watching brief', but been smart enough to realise that at best they were now being played by the Putin& the KGB, or at worst, being played by a conspiracy between Putin, the KGB and the now president elect of the USA! YIKES!!!

And the subsequent reopening of the investigation led to another finding of nothing untoward going on from HRC after all. No surprise there then!

I find this shocking tbh. The now president elect of the USA, now owes a huge favour to Russia& the KGB, (as they won him his election), he has already publicly thanked them (Russia, Putin & by extension the KGB) for their very effective espionage of the democratic parties'( Sanders ) affair during the campaign, and he has also publicly praised Putin, who is probably the USA's most powerful enemy. This fiasco has all sorts of really nasty potential results. World watch out!!!

And back to the FBI & Comer, frankly I don't see how his position is now tenable. He should be gone, cos at best he has been played like a fool, or worse, there may be something even more sinister going on with him. Also the whole role and adherence to protocol by the FBI in this fiasco should be subject to intense scrutiny imho. I mean most rightfully recoil from police/military states like Russia, Syria & North Korea say, so the last thing most free world lovers want is for the USA to even flirt with going down that very dark & murky road imho.

FISMA.

Brexit - Goodbye EU

Brexit 2.0 - Hello Trump.

Brexit 3.0 - Auf Wiedersehen Frau Merkel!

alastair

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm curious: was he "telling it like it is" when he promised to completely repeal the ACA on his first day in office, or when he decided that he'd keep it after all?

For someone who tells it like it is, he seems awfully vague on what "it" is.

Prepare for an avalanche of pivots.

K-9

RobertKK wrote: »

The Grubhub CEO had to backtrack after a backlash for the email saying his original email was misconstrued, but he had associated voting for Trump as hate politics.
He only backtracked as #BoycottGrubhub was trending on twitter.

So like Trump back tracking on his comments about the protestors.

Brian?

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not legitimate as in 'has no moral value', but as in 'the question is based on a questionably inappropriate perspective.' Asking the question "how democratic is it" implies to me that the standard is supposed to be a democracy to begin with. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say it's a democracy or intended to be one. No historian or political scientist has ever defined it as a democracy, but is a federated representative republic. If the founders of the country wanted a single-body democracy, they'd have made one. The question is really attacking the nature of the country itself, not the electoral process.

You're almost correct. I wasn't attacking the nature of the country though. I was questioning whether the current system is fit for purpose. Is it a system that's democratic enough. I don't think it is, even as a federated Republic the system could be tweeted to better represent minority opnion. Bit that's just my opinion

Jawgap

RobertKK wrote: »

He said after talking to Obama that he wants to keep the law that people with pre-existing conditions are not excluded from health insurance and that children can remain on their parents plans until age 26.

If that is the reason, then it shows what a bloody good negotiator Obama is......30 minutes of talks and that was enough to get Trump to backslide on what was a fairly key plank of his platform.

Manic Moran

daithi7 wrote: »

RobertKK wrote: »

John Podesta is blaming Comey and the media for Hillary's lossr.

Frankly Comey and the FBI are coming out of this election really, really badly imho.

Fine, opening an investigation (based on info leaked by the KGB mind) into the email server, and then concluding that there was nothing untoward here, I don't have an issue with that. And to be clear, if they decided there was something untoward there and they substantiated that, I wouldn't have any issue with that either. But to then reopen the investigation in the middle of an election in response to more KGB supplied info is just plain nuts. Of course they should have kept a 'watching brief', but been smart enough to realise that at best they were now being played by the Putin& the KGB, or at worst, being played by a conspiracy between Putin, the KGB and the now president elect of the USA! YIKES!!!

And the subsequent reopening of the investigation led to another finding of nothing untoward going on from HRC after all. No surprise there then!

I find this shocking tbh. The now president elect of the USA, now owes a huge favour to Russia& the KGB, (as they won him his election), he has already publicly thanked them (Russia, Putin & by extension the KGB) for their very effective espionage of the democratic parties'( Sanders ) affair during the campaign, and he has also publicly praised Putin, who is probably the USA's most powerful enemy. This fiasco has all sorts of really nasty potential results. World watch out!!!

And back to the FBI & Comer, frankly I don't see how his position is now tenable. He should be gone, cos at best he has been played like a fool, or worse, there may be something even more sinister going on with him. Also the whole role and adherence to protocol by the FBI in this fiasco should be subject to intense scrutiny imho. I mean most rightfully recoil from police/military states like Russia, Syria & North Korea say, so the last thing most free world lovers want is for the USA to even flirt with going down that very dark & murky road imho.

I really don't see how Comey had a choice.
The man had gone in front of Congress, and told them "OK, we're shutting down the investigation, we think she was careless, but don't believe there's anything to merit a criminal prosecution." That situation changed with the Wiener investigation. What he had told Congress, and the public at large, was no longer true. He had two choices: Sit on the information, or be open about it. It's a rare time that a government body is lambasted for transparency.

gosplan

Manic Moran wrote: »

I really don't see how Comey had a choice.
The man had gone in front of Congress, and told them "OK, we're shutting down the investigation, we think she was careless, but don't believe there's anything to merit a criminal prosecution." That situation changed with the Wiener investigation. What he had told Congress, and the public at large, was no longer true. He had two choices: Sit on the information, or be open about it. It's a rare time that a government body is lambasted for transparency.

Or he could have just looked through them first. Given it only took a few days anyway.

Manic Moran

gosplan wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

I really don't see how Comey had a choice.
The man had gone in front of Congress, and told them "OK, we're shutting down the investigation, we think she was careless, but don't believe there's anything to merit a criminal prosecution." That situation changed with the Wiener investigation. What he had told Congress, and the public at large, was no longer true. He had two choices: Sit on the information, or be open about it. It's a rare time that a government body is lambasted for transparency.

Or he could have just looked through them first. Given it only took a few days anyway.

Knowledge available with hindsight. The initial information was that they would not be able to have it completed until after the election.

gosplan

Manic Moran wrote: »

Knowledge available with hindsight. The initial information was that they would not be able to have it completed until after the election.

Well then he interfered in an election without doing the necessary checking first.

I mean they got it done no problem.

He really really should have had more foresight before dropping a bomb into the last two weeks of the election.

But he only comes out of it looking bad if you're objective or a democrat.

Suryavarman

Manic Moran wrote: »

Knowledge available with hindsight. The initial information was that they would not be able to have it completed until after the election.

There really wasn't any reason to believe the Wiener emails would throw up anything new anyway. Most of the emails would just have been duplicates of what they had already seen when first investigating Clinton.

Akrasia

RobertKK wrote: »

The sun is the main heater of the planet which in turn affects the climate. Humans are causing effects which are above what the sun does.
Put it this way, which has a bigger effect on the climate of Earth- the sun dies and becomes a white dwarf, or if humans go the way of the dinosaurs?

Are you going to say humans have a bigger effect than the sun?

Do you actually find this argument convincing?

There are lots of different factors that affect global climate. It's a dynamic system that was in relative balance (it cycles between hotter and colder periods, but over tens of thousands of years)


Humans have altered the balance by changing the atmospheric composition so that less heat is radiated out of the planet.

You're argument is no different to saying that turning on the heating system is what heats the house, so it makes no difference if we leave all the windows and doors open, because without the heating on, it'll be cold anyway.

That's clearly a terrible argument. The sun is delivering a steady and constant amount of energy to the earth. The temperature of the earth is just as dependent on the earths capacity to retain that heat, as it is on the sun's capacity to deliver it to us.

Akrasia

Jawgap wrote: »

If that is the reason, then it shows what a bloody good negotiator Obama is......30 minutes of talks and that was enough to get Trump to backslide on what was a fairly key plank of his platform.

It also shows that Trump hadn't put any thought at all into what he would replace obamacare with if he hadn't thought about the needs of people with preexisting conditions or children still in education.

Akrasia

Manic Moran wrote: »

I really don't see how Comey had a choice.
The man had gone in front of Congress, and told them "OK, we're shutting down the investigation, we think she was careless, but don't believe there's anything to merit a criminal prosecution." That situation changed with the Wiener investigation. What he had told Congress, and the public at large, was no longer true. He had two choices: Sit on the information, or be open about it. It's a rare time that a government body is lambasted for transparency.

nothing changed with the weiner investigation. The FBI didn't even have a warrant to read those emails when he sent that mail to congress. All he had was a suspicion that there may be some evidence, but he goes and throws a feckin hand grenade into the election and almost certainly caused enough of a shift to hand the election to Trump

Comey will go down in history as the Franz Ferdinand of the 21st century. A relatively small character that somehow caused a global catastrophe

Skylinehead

RobertKK wrote: »

The sun is the main heater of the planet which in turn affects the climate. Humans are causing effects which are above what the sun does.
Put it this way, which has a bigger effect on the climate of Earth- the sun dies and becomes a white dwarf, or if humans go the way of the dinosaurs?

Are you going to say humans have a bigger effect than the sun?

Where's the proof that the sun is having a bigger effect on climate change (note change) than humans? And I'm not talking five billion years from now, obviously.

TheOven

RobertKK wrote: »

The sun is the main heater of the planet which in turn affects the climate. Humans are causing effects which are above what the sun does.
Put it this way, which has a bigger effect on the climate of Earth- the sun dies and becomes a white dwarf, or if humans go the way of the dinosaurs?

Are you going to say humans have a bigger effect than the sun?

Oh...the sun?


Nobody thought to include the sun in their models! Thanks, your PhD is in the post for this discovery. The planet is saved thanks to dr Robert.

RobertKK

Jawgap wrote: »

If that is the reason, then it shows what a bloody good negotiator Obama is......30 minutes of talks and that was enough to get Trump to backslide on what was a fairly key plank of his platform.

Since the election is over he has also been full of praise for the Clinton's and Obama.
I don't think it is a case of Obama being a good negotiator as much as Trump being so flexible with his positions. I think Trump did what we are use to with politicians, as Pat Rabbitte said you say stuff in election campaigns to get elected.
Now he doesn't have to worry about votes he can be flexible, keep some, change other areas.

RobertKK

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'll ask again: can you link to the scientific consensus that the sun is affecting the global climate more than human activity is?

Akrasia wrote: »

Do you actually find this argument convincing?

There are lots of different factors that affect global climate. It's a dynamic system that was in relative balance (it cycles between hotter and colder periods, but over tens of thousands of years)


Humans have altered the balance by changing the atmospheric composition so that less heat is radiated out of the planet.

You're argument is no different to saying that turning on the heating system is what heats the house, so it makes no difference if we leave all the windows and doors open, because without the heating on, it'll be cold anyway.

That's clearly a terrible argument. The sun is delivering a steady and constant amount of energy to the earth. The temperature of the earth is just as dependent on the earths capacity to retain that heat, as it is on the sun's capacity to deliver it to us.

Skylinehead wrote: »

Where's the proof that the sun is having a bigger effect on climate change (note change) than humans? And I'm not talking five billion years from now, obviously.

TheOven wrote: »

Oh...the sun?


Nobody thought to include the sun in their models! Thanks, your PhD is in the post for this discovery. The planet is saved thanks to dr Robert.

I was asked if the sun was affecting the climate more than humans. The scientific fact is the sun is the driver of the climate on earth.
The question did not include man made climate change, which would be above what the sun does, but the sun is the single biggest effect on the Earth and the climate.
The question asked is the sun affecting global climate more than humans?
The answer is yes, the question was not - are humans affecting the climate above what the sun does? Where the answer would also be yes.

Fr Tod Umptious

RobertKK wrote: »

Since the election is over he has also been full of praise for the Clinton's and Obama.
I don't think it is a case of Obama being a good negotiator as much as Trump being so flexible with his positions. I think Trump did what we are use to with politicians, as Pat Rabbitte said you say stuff in election campaigns to get elected.
Now he doesn't have to worry about votes he can be flexible, keep some, change other areas.

And I for one am not surprised.
Trump is no clown and knows how to negotiate, and knows that he will have to negotiate, and home and abroad.

But what's interesting and not surprising is that the other side are still going on about things he said in his campaign, moths ago, and using them as the yard stick, while ignoring the last few days news.

Skylinehead

RobertKK wrote: »

I was asked if the sun was affecting the climate more than humans. The scientific fact is the sun is the driver of the climate on earth.
The question did not include man made climate change, which would be above what the sun does, but the sun is the single biggest effect on the Earth and the climate.
The question asked is the sun affecting global climate more than humans?
The answer is yes, the question was not - are humans affecting the climate above what the sun does? Where the answer would also be yes.

The sun is a constant. I have no idea why you went off on a tangent about what affects the climate as a whole, when obviously the subject is about climate change.

daithi7

Skylinehead wrote: »

The sun is a constant. I have no idea why you went off on a tangent about what affects the climate as a whole, when obviously the subject is about climate change.

Are you really sure of that?

Have you heard of sunspots??

RobertKK

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

And I for one am not surprised.
Trump is no clown and knows how to negotiate, and knows that he will have to negotiate, and home and abroad.

But what's interesting and not surprising is that the other side are still going on about things he said in his campaign, moths ago, and using them as the yard stick, while ignoring the last few days news.

Yeah we will never hear him say Crooked Hillary Clinton again.
Like we haven't heard of lying Ted Cruz, little Marco or low energy Jeb Bush. He put slogans on people he saw as a threat. Then when no longer a threat, he isn't there holding a grudge and continuing the name calling.

With the country split it gives him an opportunity to be more flexible. We have to wait and see, but so far he has appeared as a person who is open to other people, as he showed with the discussions he had with Obama.
As he said about the Clinton's where he would not rule out seeking counsel from them. He doesn't seem to be open to cut off his nose despite his face.

RobertKK

Skylinehead wrote: »

The sun is a constant. I have no idea why you went off on a tangent about what affects the climate as a whole, when obviously the subject is about climate change.

I answered the question correctly. I was not asked if human behaviour caused effects above what the sun does. I was asked if the sun has bigger effects on the climate of Earth than humans.
Totally different questions.

I will ask you, which would have a bigger effect on the climate?
The sun dies and becomes a white dwarf?
Humans go extinct like the dinosaurs?

I was asked to prove the sun has a bigger impact on the climate than humans. nothing more, nothing less.

Billy86

RobertKK wrote: »

As he said about the Clinton's where he would not rule out seeking counsel from them. He doesn't seem to be open to cut off his nose despite his face.

Safe to assume you're extremely unhappy with that? After all, if I recall your claim throughout the election was that you weren't mad on Trump but the number one thing you wanted to was the Clinton as far away from power or the white house as humanly possible.

RobertKK

Billy86 wrote: »

Safe to assume you're extremely unhappy with that? After all, if I recall your claim throughout the election was that you weren't mad on Trump but the number one thing you wanted to was the Clinton as far away from power or the white house as humanly possible.

No, as I don't think he will be asking her about invading countries. He is not stupid to not see how disastrous that policy that Hillary always went for has been.
He has also not ruled out seeking counsel from Obama, who angered Hillary over not attacking Syria when the so called red line was deemed to have been breached.

Trump is new to the job, he knows now is the time to be conciliatory, you don't want to be making things harder than they need to be.
What he is doing is basic common sense.

daithi7

RobertKK wrote: »

Yeah we will never hear him say Crooked Hillary Clinton again.
Like we haven't heard of lying Ted Cruz, little Marco or low energy Jeb Bush. He put slogans on people he saw as a threat. Then when no longer a threat, he isn't there holding a grudge and continuing the name calling.

With the country split it gives him an opportunity to be more flexible. We have to wait and see, but so far he has appeared as a person who is open to other people, as he showed with the discussions he had with Obama.
As he said about the Clinton's where he would not rule out seeking counsel from them. He doesn't seem to be open to cut off his nose despite his face.

To be fair, I think there is a fair bit of truth in that. Also you've gotta remember this guy is really a long time Democratic party supporter, who just switched to the Republican party relatively recently. So at heart, (if he really has one ) , he's a politician from the American centre/centre right really.

One of my major concerns about the Trump administration though, is that he has appealed to very dark forces and elements in America (& elsewhere I.e. Russia/Putin/Kgb) ito get elected, and he has energised these nasties to feel they now have a genuine stake in the running of the US and hence the free world, as we know it. So he has done deals with all sorts of devils, as it were. They're now gonna be looking for payback, and I fear we're gonna see that in isolationist, nationalistic, divisive policies, funded by hugely unsustainable debt, several unnecessary wars, a globe dominated by fear, (remember Rumsfeld, Cheney & the 'axis of evil' ?) ,ultimately leading to another massive crash and outright depression in The USA and hence, the western world.

I accept this view may be slightly pessimistic and the reality may not turn out to be quite as apocalyptic, but I don't see this ending well at all.

P.s. on a more positive note we still live in a great little country, that is young, outgoing, liberal and safe , and thankfully we are not too directly influenced by the NRA, Kkk or even Putin& The Kgb,. Thank heaven for large mercies!! :-)

Jawgap

RobertKK wrote: »

Since the election is over he has also been full of praise for the Clinton's and Obama.
I don't think it is a case of Obama being a good negotiator as much as Trump being so flexible with his positions. I think Trump did what we are use to with politicians, as Pat Rabbitte said you say stuff in election campaigns to get elected.
Now he doesn't have to worry about votes he can be flexible, keep some, change other areas.

Hang on, gutting the the ACA was a significant, even core, part of what drove people to vote for him......and even before he's had a chance to look at the books, he's already backsliding on it?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a welcome reversal of his position but I also think it's shaping up to be a good example of how he is going to hugely disappoint people!

It's easy being a hurler on the ditch (which is effectively what we're all doing on this thread) quite another matter to be on the pitch.

I think one of the JFK's favourite quotes will now be resonating with Trump.....

Bullfight critics, ranked in rows
Crowd the enormous plaza full.
But only one is there who knows,
And he’s the man who fights the bull

.....it's a lot easier to be a critic than a matador

Jawgap

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

And I for one am not surprised.
Trump is no clown and knows how to negotiate, and knows that he will have to negotiate, and home and abroad.

But what's interesting and not surprising is that the other side are still going on about things he said in his campaign, moths ago, and using them as the yard stick, while ignoring the last few days news.

where is the evidence for that?

He is a fantastic self-promoter, but his business success is mediocre at best.....do you think someone who over-borrows to the point of bankruptcy 6 times is a good business person?

FatherTed

RobertKK wrote: »

No, as I don't think he will be asking her about invading countries. He is not stupid to not see how disastrous that policy that Hillary always went for has been.
He has also not ruled out seeking counsel from Obama, who angered Hillary over not attacking Syria when the so called red line was deemed to have been breached.

Trump is new to the job, he knows now is the time to be conciliatory, you don't want to be making things harder than they need to be.
What he is doing is basic common sense.

Yes Politicians do that, amazing. The say one thing to get elected and once elected backtrack. But Trump supporters have been telling us they voted for him because he's not like the other establishment politicians. So what makes him different to any other politician now if he's keeping fundamental parts of Obamacare, if the Wall was just a symbol, not locking up Clinton etc?

daithi7

Jawgap wrote: »

Hang on, gutting the the ACA was a significant, even core, part of what drove people to vote for him......and even before he's had a chance to look at the books, he's already backsliding on it?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a welcome reversal of his position but I also think it's shaping up to be a good example of how he is going to hugely disappoint people!

It's easy being a hurler on the ditch (which is effectively what we're all doing on this thread) quite another matter to be on the pitch.

I think one of the JFK's favourite quotes will now be resonating with Trump.....

Bullfight critics, ranked in rows
Crowd the enormous plaza full.
But only one is there who knows,
And he’s the man who fights the bull

.....it's a lot easier to be a critic than a matador

Love it, yes indeed. And my own pet theory on this is that Trump didn't expect to get elected at all, in fact he had actually himself nicely set up to launch a right wing tv channel like Fox say, which would have far more suited his skill set imho, and he could have a fortune being that big, loud attention seeking hurler the ditch.

Now that he actually won, he is like a rabbit caught in the headlights. The full responsibilities of trying to run the western world are now dawning on him, his family and all of those around him.....


Most business people and especially owners, generally find the tedium of politics overwhelming, frustrating and very unfulfilling. That may well be Trump's fate, I just wish he had' practiced ' first, by becoming a mayor or senator, before trying to learn the skills & art of politics in the biggest bloody political job on the planet!! YIKES!!!


P.s. I also hope he doesn't get the keys of his Twitter machine mixed up with the code entering device of nuclear Armageddon, when he's having one of his rant fests with some unhappy ex beauty pageant contestant at 3 AM some morning )) funny, but frightening all the same

RobertKK

Jawgap wrote: »

Hang on, gutting the the ACA was a significant, even core, part of what drove people to vote for him......and even before he's had a chance to look at the books, he's already backsliding on it?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a welcome reversal of his position but I also think it's shaping up to be a good example of how he is going to hugely disappoint people!

It's easy being a hurler on the ditch (which is effectively what we're all doing on this thread) quite another matter to be on the pitch.

I think one of the JFK's favourite quotes will now be resonating with Trump.....

Bullfight critics, ranked in rows
Crowd the enormous plaza full.
But only one is there who knows,
And he’s the man who fights the bull

.....it's a lot easier to be a critic than a matador

I think it was on Anderson Cooper's show last night where it was said most of the media and the critics of Trump took everything he said literally and most of the supporters didn't, so things like the access Hollywood video, or things like the Muslim ban or some of the Mexicans illegals are rapists, murderers etc registered low on the bigger scheme of things.
Being neglected and voting for the same people who are guaranteed to change nothing is what did register. Look at Wisconsin, the Democrats took it for granted and did not campaign there, and this is where you have to look at Trump and admire him, he was clever enough to go there and campaign, it showed enough people there that 'well he isn't expected to win here, but at least he cared enough to show his face around these parts'.
There are always people disappointed but I think people need to remember you may run as a candidate for maybe half the electorate, but you have to govern for all. Given how divided that country is, he will have to piss off a lot of people and compromise, so he can get things he wants done and get things done that puts people's minds at rest.

aloyisious

RobertKK wrote: »

Since the election is over he has also been full of praise for the Clinton's and Obama.
I don't think it is a case of Obama being a good negotiator as much as Trump being so flexible with his positions. I think Trump did what we are use to with politicians, as Pat Rabbitte said you say stuff in election campaigns to get elected.
Now he doesn't have to worry about votes he can be flexible, keep some, change other areas.

I listened to republicans on RTE ah hour ago and they were saying they voted for him as he was honest and spoke his mind, plus he was a businessman, not a politician. If Don keeps flip-flopping on issues, they're likely to be upset.

Fr Tod Umptious

Jawgap wrote: »

where is the evidence for that?

He is a fantastic self-promoter, but his business success is mediocre at best.....do you think someone who over-borrows to the point of bankruptcy 6 times is a good business person?

No one builds the business empire like he did without being a good negotiator.

And as for the 6 bankrupties, if a person believes that bankruptcy is a decision that yields a better return in the long run then an astute business person will go that route.

A bit like cashing out on a losing bet, do you lose some of the stake now and save something or stick it out and possibly lose the whole stake.

aloyisious

Re the bankruptcies, the record shows Trump Co's went that way 6 times. Does this mean that Don was a bankrupt himself? I listened to the interview he had with Sean O'Rourke during which he said he was never bankrupt, but he did buy out bankrupt Co's.

alastair

RobertKK wrote: »

I think it was on Anderson Cooper's show last night where it was said most of the media and the critics of Trump took everything he said literally and most of the supporters didn't, so things like the access Hollywood video, or things like the Muslim ban or some of the Mexicans illegals are rapists, murderers etc registered low on the bigger scheme of things.
Being neglected and voting for the same people who are guaranteed to change nothing is what did register. Look at Wisconsin, the Democrats took it for granted and did not campaign there, and this is where you have to look at Trump and admire him, he was clever enough to go there and campaign, it showed enough people there that 'well he isn't expected to win here, but at least he cared enough to show his face around these parts'.
There are always people disappointed but I think people need to remember you may run as a candidate for maybe half the electorate, but you have to govern for all. Given how divided that country is, he will have to piss off a lot of people and compromise, so he can get things he wants done and get things done that puts people's minds at rest.

Hillary campaigned in Wisconsin in March, April and September. Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Tim Kaine campaigned there, on behalf of the Hillary ticket, in October and November.

daithi7

aloyisious wrote: »

Re the bankruptcies, the record shows Trump Co's went that way 6 times. Does this mean that Don was a bankrupt himself? I listened to the interview he had with Sean O'Rourke during which he said he was never bankrupt, but he did buy out bankrupt Co's.

Nope, I'm pretty sure he went very close to personal bankruptcies but never actually had to declare himself bankrupt (More's the pity now ).

Several of his business ventures floundered in chapter 11, and several others went completely bust. But he himself stayed in tact (financially) afaik.

If he had out his inheritance into a simple index s&p 500 tracker, he would now be worth significantly more than he is. So on that measure he's a below average business man.

If he runs America like he has run many of his businesses over the years, we are likely to be in for a debt fuelled, over hyped, bubble (say 3-4 years) ultimately ending in the mother of all financial crashes. (& probably an ensuing depression) Watch out world!!

aloyisious

This is a two question post.

Re Obama-care, or the house bill reference number it had when it was voted through by the House of Congress and The Senate, as it was voted through by the majority of politicians, doesn't it mean that they are as culpable as Obama in regard to it's content and the way the health insurance co's are screwing the paying public in increased fees.

Is it possible, given that Don & the republicans control the law-passing process, that the parts of the existing law worthy of retention can be kept, and the parts which are being "ab"used by the health insurance co's can be dropped and replaced by parts better suited to those Don & republican voters paying the charges?

The bill, as passed eventually, seems to be a cobbled-together creation of two different bills, one which failed in Congress and one which passed in the Senate, and were merged to pass muster and get signed into law by Obama. If that's correct, then a bit of good work in fixing obvious faults (the fee-charging sections) should be possible in the new overall Republican-controlled Washington, helping Don keep his word to the ordinary joe voter who put him in office.

26000 Elephants

RobertKK wrote: »

[ ]....Trump being so flexible with his positions.

Which is code for "He will lie and say whatever he needs to get what he wants and backtrack later"

He is a consummate liar and has taken you for a fool. He won the election by promising the workers of the rust belt that he is bringing jobs back from Mexico. That is never going to happen, and he knows it.And you know it as well. Any intelligent person could have seen that, but people with little hope will hang on to anything. Thats what is so disturbing about his election.

And indeed about those who defend him in the face of such compelling evidence of his duplicity.

26000 Elephants

RobertKK wrote: »

I was asked if the sun was affecting the climate more than humans.

You are being deliberately obtuse at this point. You were asked about Climate Change, not climate.

Only a fool would think they were being asked if Humans effect climate more than the sun!

alastair

aloyisious wrote: »

This is a two question post.

Re Obama-care, or the house bill reference number it had when it was voted through by the House of Congress and The Senate, as it was voted through by the majority of politicians, doesn't it mean that they are as culpable as Obama in regard to it's content and the way the health insurance co's are screwing the paying public in increased fees.

Is it possible, given that Don & the republicans control the law-passing process, that the parts of the existing law worthy of retention can be kept, and the parts which are being "ab"used by the health insurance co's can be dropped and replaced by parts better suited to those Don & republican voters paying the charges?

I suspect that the 'terrific' alternative plan to Obamacare Trump was proposing was in fact the core existing plan with the prefix chopped off and replaced with 'Trump'. Because the obvious better option; a single payer system, isn't going to wash with the GOP base, any more under him than any other presidency.

alastair

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

And I for one am not surprised.
Trump is no clown and knows how to negotiate, and knows that he will have to negotiate, and home and abroad.

But what's interesting and not surprising is that the other side are still going on about things he said in his campaign, moths ago, and using them as the yard stick, while ignoring the last few days news.

Trump doesn't need to negotiate with Obama over healthcare reform. Obama has no say once his office ends. There's no-one to negotiate with. Trump merely unilaterally ditched his campaign promise, because, like most of his commitments, they were windbaggery - of a level that would embarrass any career politician.

There will be no wall, no locking up Hillary, no ban on muslims entering the country, no mass deportations, and no returning heavy industry to the rust belt. Most of the juicy, if vague, a Trump platform is going to turn into the same mutton dressed as lamb that represents the Trump brand.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

FatherTed

alastair wrote: »

Trump doesn't need to negotiate with Obama over healthcare reform. Obama has no say once his office ends. There's no-one to negotiate with. Trump merely unilaterally ditched his campaign promise, because, like most of his commitments, they were windbaggery - of a level that would embarrass any career politician.

There will be no wall, no locking up Hillary, no ban on muslims entering the country, no mass deportations, and no returning heavy industry to the rust belt. Most of the juicy, if vague, a Trump platform is going to turn into the same mutton dressed as lamb that represents the Trump brand.

Under Obama 2.5 million illegals have been deported so Trump will continue with this and say look at what a great job I'm doing... About refugees coming in there is already a vetting process with ICE, same thing, this will continue with little change. It's really all about what message is sold to the American public and Trump is a tremendous salesman.

RobertKK

alastair wrote: »

Hillary campaigned in Wisconsin in March, April and September. Bill Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Tim Kaine campaigned there, on behalf of the Hillary ticket, in October and November.

On CNN they were saying it was a mistake that Hillary had not campaigned in the state, maybe they meant in the weeks leading up to the vote.

aloyisious

alastair wrote: »

I suspect that the 'terrific' alternative plan to Obamacare Trump was proposing was in fact the core existing plan with the prefix chopped off and replaced with 'Trump'. Because the obvious better option; a single payer system, isn't going to wash with the GOP base, any more under him than any other presidency.

I see what you mean by SPS. Two separate sections, the medical care provider section and the finance admin section.

Is it really a plan thought up and through by actual hands-on doctors? I can see why politicians wouldn't go for it, on a "not our brainchild" basis.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjQ7M-Wr6PQAhWmCcAKHYIQClkQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pnhp.org%2Ffacts%2Fwhat-is-single-payer&usg=AFQjCNFcJUqpGqzFfFRRjE1NkZsW9AuvJw

Edit.... I don't suppose there are Republicans in the SPS group who can drop a copy to Don on the QT.

Stheno

New York times reporting that Trump is trying to work out if he can live part time in the white house

Fr Tod Umptious

alastair wrote: »

Trump doesn't need to negotiate with Obama over healthcare reform. Obama has no say once his office ends. There's no-one to negotiate with. Trump merely unilaterally ditched his campaign promise, because, like most of his commitments, they were windbaggery - of a level that would embarrass any career politician.

There will be no wall, no locking up Hillary, no ban on muslims entering the country, no mass deportations, and no returning heavy industry to the rust belt. Most of the juicy, if vague, a Trump platform is going to turn into the same mutton dressed as lamb that represents the Trump brand.

So Trump is not a racist, bigot then as people have been telling us he is all along ?

aloyisious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

So Trump is not a racist, bigot then as people have been telling us he is all along ?

In one word... transition!

RobertKK

alastair wrote: »

Trump doesn't need to negotiate with Obama over healthcare reform. Obama has no say once his office ends. There's no-one to negotiate with. Trump merely unilaterally ditched his campaign promise, because, like most of his commitments, they were windbaggery - of a level that would embarrass any career politician.

There will be no wall, no locking up Hillary, no ban on muslims entering the country, no mass deportations, and no returning heavy industry to the rust belt. Most of the juicy, if vague, a Trump platform is going to turn into the same mutton dressed as lamb that represents the Trump brand.

That is true, but then Trump said there are parts he likes when it comes to Obamacare.

At least some of the wall will be built, the US has spent $7 billion on fencing and other measures along the border up to 2014, and apparently the improvement in the fencing is an ongoing thing.
He said there would be no ban on Muslims during the campaign when he backtracked then but instead there would be some form of extreme vetting from countries with a terrorist problem.
I don't think he will go after Hillary either, because I don't think he is this boogie man that some people choose to believe he is.

Obama didn't give us change we can believe in, Trump likewise won't live up to his promises, but I still 100% believe Hillary Clinton was by far the more dangerous candidate, and would make a decision to go to war much quicker than Trump would, and that is why and I hope I am right, that Trump is far less the warmonger than Hillary - that is one campaign issue he needs to keep, but I think he knows the US people are fed up of war.