RugbyRebels

rowan wrote:

Digby wrote:

jared_7 wrote:
Accepting moral corruption as OK almost guarantees nothing will ever be done about it.

Thing with this is I wouldn't accept Clinton is morally corrupt. I don't especially take to her, I'd agree with her on some things and disagree on others, but I don't have concerns that by the standard of those who want their finger on the button that she's a reasonable person.

83% of Americans polled believed Clinton was corrupt. But Digby doesn't. Ooookay....

http://www.dailywire.com/news/10609/pol ... el-qazvini#

Do you have an algorithm guiding your cherry picker or does it just go straight for the lowest hanging fruit?

TV news reporting somebody opened fire at a Californian election centre...

rowan wrote:TV news reporting somebody opened fire at a Californian election centre...

Election violence in a religious fundamentalist country, where one of the candidates is the wife a former president barred by term limits from running again and the other candidate is a billionaire who is very secretive about his financial dealings.

Where are the independent international observers?

They're really going that extra mile to pretend that Trump is more than a stooge...

morepork wrote:

rowan wrote:

Digby wrote:
Thing with this is I wouldn't accept Clinton is morally corrupt. I don't especially take to her, I'd agree with her on some things and disagree on others, but I don't have concerns that by the standard of those who want their finger on the button that she's a reasonable person.

83% of Americans polled believed Clinton was corrupt. But Digby doesn't. Ooookay....

http://www.dailywire.com/news/10609/pol ... el-qazvini#

& that's why she didn't get it. Congratulations, America!

It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

Well, they voted for him I suppose and that's democracy for you. Still if there were a political trophy the equivalent of the Raeburn Shield for the best example of fucktard voting then the UK certainly held it for a short while over Brexit, the US has now comfortably taken the title, and they may hold it for some while unless perhaps France elects Le Pen.

It would seem(too) many people no longer want facts or policies, and simply want someone to bang the nationalistic drum, whether in building walls or imposing massive trade barriers. And really anyone in favour of building the wall should only look at countries like Australia or even the UK which have massive walls of water that don't really seem to stop people from arriving, and frankly the wall is a better idea than a 35% tariff.

Digby wrote:Well, they voted for him I suppose and that's democracy for you. Still if there were a political trophy the equivalent of the Raeburn Shield for the best example of fucktard voting then the UK certainly held it for a short while over Brexit, the US has now comfortably taken the title, and they may hold it for some while unless perhaps France elects Le Pen.

It would seem(too) many people no longer want facts or policies, and simply want someone to bang the nationalistic drum, whether in building walls or imposing massive trade barriers. And really anyone in favour of building the wall should only look at countries like Australia or even the UK which have massive walls of water that don't really seem to stop people from arriving, and frankly the wall is a better idea than a 35% tariff.

The problem is its the same facts or policies that has seen inequality skyrocket, real wages stagnate or fall for 60% of the population over the last 20 years, and house prices double or triple. People are worse off. Thats the problem. But the political establishment and urban elite refuses to accept that is the case, they are completely out of touch.

The solutions or target of the anger are completely and utterly wrong; mainly blaming immigrants, building walls, banning religions. Of course this is scapegoating, its racism, its sad.

But until people start accepting the problem, there is going to be a bunch of educated city dwellers with decent jobs acting flabbergasted that this happens again, and again, and again.

rowan wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

At least for now anyway... Power does funny things to people.

rowan wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but [1] at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, [2] and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

[1] - However, in 6 months I'm pretty sure we will. The only reason Trump isn't a war criminal is that he's never had the opportunity.
[2] - Not convinced that process has significantly slowed down; but certainly sped up the possibility of WWIII elsewhere (eg. Eastern Europe or the Korean peninsular)

Big D wrote:

rowan wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

At least for now anyway... Power does funny things to people.

And this president elect is already weirder than most

Really frightening. Especially since the Republicans hold both of the houses.

Incredible how the hard-working poor have voted for someone so unlike them, and so unlikely to improve their situation.

The "Democrats" should take a hard look at themselves and a selection process that rejected Sanders and left them with such an unpalatable candidate as Clinton.

Global warming can only accelerate now. How long before Trump sells his NY real estate and moves to higher ground?

Great stuff. The world has dodged a bullet.

I'm not sure Sanders would've been a better candidate than Clinton. He would do fine in some countries but the US would look a long shot for someone who rightly or wrongly would be tagged as a socialist.

And yes there were polls that said Bernie would've had a bigger lead over Trump, but there were one or two polls which had Clinton beating Trump.

Which Tyler wrote:

rowan wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but [1] at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, [2] and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

[1] - However, in 6 months I'm pretty sure we will. The only reason Trump isn't a war criminal is that he's never had the opportunity.
[2] - Not convinced that process has significantly slowed down; but certainly sped up the possibility of WWIII elsewhere (eg. Eastern Europe or the Korean peninsular)

Quite. Either Trump gets involved globally, in which case he will soon b doing the stuff that certain quarters hate Hillary for, or he will become isolationist. If it is the latter then other states will take advantage. Trump has already publically stated his admiration for Putin and that he would not automatically support a fellow Nato country that was invaded, so expect some very nervous people in the Baltic states and Poland, whilst Ukraine and Georgia wont be too happy either.

Hopefully, now he has to take the job seriously, he will get some foreign policy advisors who actually understand the environment, rather than rely on the dubious views of the alternative media. Perhaps once he starts to receive the TS intelligence briefings, his view of the world might change. Then again, it might not. I think we are in for an interesting 4 years and I can only hope that Trump becomes a second Reagan.

Digby wrote:I'm not sure Sanders would've been a better candidate than Clinton. He would do fine in some countries but the US would look a long shot for someone who rightly or wrongly would be tagged as a socialist.

And yes there were polls that said Bernie would've had a bigger lead over Trump, but there were one or two polls which had Clinton beating Trump.

Sanders had less baggage internally than Clinton, but did he have the wider appeal? Not so sure. Polls are fickle and it was only a fortnight ago that Clinton had this in the bag, allegedly. I wonder if the FBI investigation is what did for her or whether those polls were just outliers?

Which Tyler wrote:

rowan wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:It would seem the puppet has become the puppeteer

Indeed. A little of my faith in the American democratic system has been restored. I'm not a fan of the puppeteer, but [1] at least we won't have a war criminal in the White House, [2] and at least we're probably not headed for WWIII in the Middle East.

[1] - However, in 6 months I'm pretty sure we will. The only reason Trump isn't a war criminal is that he's never had the opportunity.
[2] - Not convinced that process has significantly slowed down; but certainly sped up the possibility of WWIII elsewhere (eg. Eastern Europe or the Korean peninsular)

And suddenly Abe's moves to remove Article 9 from the Japanese constitution suddenly seems like a reasonable proposition considering the neighbours.

Digby wrote:I'm not sure Sanders would've been a better candidate than Clinton. He would do fine in some countries but the US would look a long shot for someone who rightly or wrongly would be tagged as a socialist.

And yes there were polls that said Bernie would've had a bigger lead over Trump, but there were one or two polls which had Clinton beating Trump.

This wasn't an election about policies, it was an election for change. Sanders funnily enough appealed to middle america, he offered a vision for the workers disenfranchised in the rust belt, the backwaters. All of the Democrats would have stuck with Sanders, like they did Clinton, but he had much more chance of bringing in new members from either the republicans or undecideds by offering something different.

The problem with both Brexit and the US election was Remain and the Democrats didn't offer anything new. They basically said everything is fine and we are going to continue doing what we are doing; that message just doesn't resonate with the vast masses feeling the pinch. If they too had offered change, just in a different direction, they would have won.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:Really frightening. Especially since the Republicans hold both of the houses.

Incredible how the hard-working poor have voted for someone so unlike them, and so unlikely to improve their situation.

The "Democrats" should take a hard look at themselves and a selection process that rejected Sanders and left them with such an unpalatable candidate as Clinton.

Global warming can only accelerate now. How long before Trump sells his NY real estate and moves to higher ground?

Yep.

jared_7 wrote:

Digby wrote:I'm not sure Sanders would've been a better candidate than Clinton. He would do fine in some countries but the US would look a long shot for someone who rightly or wrongly would be tagged as a socialist.

And yes there were polls that said Bernie would've had a bigger lead over Trump, but there were one or two polls which had Clinton beating Trump.

This wasn't an election about policies, it was an election for change. Sanders funnily enough appealed to middle america, he offered a vision for the workers disenfranchised in the rust belt, the backwaters. All of the Democrats would have stuck with Sanders, like they did Clinton, but he had much more chance of bringing in new members from either the republicans or undecideds by offering something different.

The problem with both Brexit and the US election was Remain and the Democrats didn't offer anything new. They basically said everything is fine and we are going to continue doing what we are doing; that message just doesn't resonate with the vast masses feeling the pinch. If they too had offered change, just in a different direction, they would have won.

Id agree with that, and the fact that the alternative didn't seem as scary as it was made out to be.

Sandydragon wrote:

jared_7 wrote:

Digby wrote:I'm not sure Sanders would've been a better candidate than Clinton. He would do fine in some countries but the US would look a long shot for someone who rightly or wrongly would be tagged as a socialist.

And yes there were polls that said Bernie would've had a bigger lead over Trump, but there were one or two polls which had Clinton beating Trump.

This wasn't an election about policies, it was an election for change. Sanders funnily enough appealed to middle america, he offered a vision for the workers disenfranchised in the rust belt, the backwaters. All of the Democrats would have stuck with Sanders, like they did Clinton, but he had much more chance of bringing in new members from either the republicans or undecideds by offering something different.

The problem with both Brexit and the US election was Remain and the Democrats didn't offer anything new. They basically said everything is fine and we are going to continue doing what we are doing; that message just doesn't resonate with the vast masses feeling the pinch. If they too had offered change, just in a different direction, they would have won.

Id agree with that, and the fact that the alternative didn't seem as scary as it was made out to be.

Lets not forget Obama won on a platform of change. Yes we can.

People just want to know politicians hear their very real concerns, rather than saying "everything is fine, whats your problem?".

I've said it for a while now, but I can't wait for him to put his promises into action. That will be comedy gold. Then, his dealings with vastly more intelligent people than himself (I'm aware he considers himself a genius) should be equally entertaining. Trade deals, agreements and the like should also provide much fun, although I'm sure he can pull out of certain deals without negotiating or needing the support of the house.

At the end of the day, I'm not expecting any major changes regardless of his rhetoric. The only way to make America 'great' is at the expense of other countries and other countries are already suffering that fate.

jared_7 wrote: They basically said everything is fine and we are going to continue doing what we are doing; that message just doesn't resonate with the vast masses feeling the pinch.

Of course if you could choose a time to be born in the history of the US this would be it, education, health, wealth - none of these are perfect nor for me even perfect in their design and distribution, but really people have never had it so good. And yet there's the ongoing dialogue of America in crisis, which would seem an absurd notion to the overwhelming number of people on this planet.