Trump Watch

Maybe it's a good thing HRC didn't win. What sort of mess would she have made on the world stage if she couldn't even properly rig an election against Trump ?

Went down the wrong road in the last days anyway. Grans in Nebraska don't really care what a 20 year old immigrant rapper advises them to do. When the time for serious campaigning came about she just rolled out her bling army.

Went down the wrong road in the last days anyway. Grans in Nebraska don't really care what a 20 year old immigrant rapper advises them to do. When the time for serious campaigning came about she just rolled out her bling army.

Agree and when was tweeting noble intentions about healthcare, tuition fees and equality when these fat fckin yanks just want to have loads to eat and play with their guns and have confirmation they live in teh best most powerful country on the planet..

A typical Facebook timeline this week (and I will see many like this);

 

Saturday - Out wiv da girls #bubbles #Fun #girls #laugh (and endless selfies)

Sunday - OMG I NEVA WANNA GO OUT AGAIN

Sunday - OMG Ull neva guess what?

Monday - #Mondayblues #hatework #WhyIsItNotFriday (endless sad looking selfies and pictures of a work desk)

Tuesday - OMG its only Tuesday, life is sooooooo unfair, hate work #Tuesdayblues (picture of desk and work calendar)

Wednesday - Wow, 2016 is so messed up, why have all these racists voted in Trump and ruined my children's lives? Are these people really stupid? Wish we could reboot 2016, it's an utter joke #fuming

Thursday - OMG FRIDAY tomorrow #getonit #TFIF

Friday - GET IN, its the weekend. OMG out wiv da girls #prosecco #bubbles #FridayFuntime

 

Sigh.

You know what I did this morning? I updated facebook with my outrage then I apologised to my son for having him in this era. I've never been so ashamed to be a human being.

Then went back to playing candy crush.

I see HC is winning the popular vote by 1%.

Popular vote? given the popularity of both candidates, that is one hell of an oxymoron!

I see HC is winning the popular vote by 1%.

 

Popular vote? given the popularity of both candidates, that is one hell of an oxymoron!

Is it really 1% or nearer 0.1%. Anyway it counts for little, the battleground states were where it was important and Trump won nearly all of them. Got his campaigning right it would seem, putting money and ressources where it counted and not worrying about a handful of votes in states where he'd already won or lost. Bad campaign from the Dems. 2 bad candidates but one got the campaign wrong as well.

I've been worried all along that some ugly, overbearing, narcissistic megalomaniac with a history of dodgy dealings would win the White House ... Still, worked out okay in the end as Trump won!

I would imagine Nick Clegg, Nicola Sturgeon, Tony Blair, Owen Smith, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine are demanding they have another presidential vote.

I would imagine Nick Clegg, Nicola Sturgeon, Tony Blair, Owen Smith, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine are demanding they have another presidential vote.

Well the French 2 round system avoids these situations. If the first round result is not pleasing to you, you can always participate in a bit of electoral jiggery pokery with your rivals and allies alike to make sure you keep the status quo in the end after the second round.

And conversely will make him a worryingly powerful president

Maybe not. There are many Republicans that don't support his more extreme policies and should water things down. And there is the judicial branch if needed. Will test the checks and balances built into the system.

Although peso is very weak now. I assume Mexicans are paying for it?

USA and Mexico play a world cup qualifier on Friday. Will they build a wall to defend free-kicks?

Apparently Trump was watching the Olympics. He wanted to see how high the Mexican pole vaulters could go.

Maybe not. There are many Republicans that don't support his more extreme policies and should water things down. And there is the judicial branch if needed. Will test the checks and balances built into the system.

Maybe not, but maybe. Paul Ryan is pretty out there too.

Maybe not, but maybe. Paul Ryan is pretty out there too.

True. It will be interesting to see how they work together. I don't think Ryan ever endorsed Trump. No love lost there.

True. It will be interesting to see how they work together. I don't think Ryan ever endorsed Trump. No love lost there.

Many Republicans never wanted him and will be worried about being tarnished by extreme and untenable policies.

I am sure a plan to impeach if necessary is in place.

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

Many Republicans never wanted him and will be worried about being tarnished by extreme and untenable policies.

 

I am sure a plan to impeach if necessary is in place.

I think their fears about being tarnished will have been eased by the results. Trump didn't hurt the party down-ticket, and he was elected on extreme and untenable policy.

They really need to shorten their election period - best part of a year is ****ing ridiculous.

Make that the best part of 3 years (including primaries). ****ing ridiculous indeed.

So Hilary spends a staggering $1.3 billion on her election campaign (twice as much as trump) and fails. Just goes to show that throwing money at things doesn't guarantee success.

Drumpf had a staggering billion dollars of free media exposure.

Maybe not. There are many Republicans that don't support his more extreme policies and should water things down. And there is the judicial branch if needed. Will test the checks and balances built into the system.

Not many now. The Republican/Tea Party is now infested with extremists, who make Thatcher look like a bleeding heart liberal.

I think their fears about being tarnished will have been eased by the results. Trump didn't hurt the party down-ticket, and he was elected on extreme and untenable policy.

The republican party has seen a rise in votes from the Hispanic's in the US compared to 2012. who would have thought (according to Sky News)

I wonder if there will be another debate in the commons about banning trump from the UK?

You know what I did this morning? I updated facebook with my outrage then I apologised to my son for having him in this era. I've never been so ashamed to be a human being.

 

Then went back to playing candy crush.

This is hilarious. I wonder if you could post this on the ugly inside website as well. Repeatedly.

There's been a lot of comment in the US today about how the constitution's checks and balances will protect from the worst and most irrational of a President's behaviour.

Where there are few meaningful checks and balances is in foreign policy - and above all in the ultimate foreign 'policy', initiating nuclear war.

The President has sole and, in the last instance, unchallengeable power to start a nuclear attack. From his decision to enter the launch codes to the missiles themselves launching is around five minutes.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-nuclear-weapon-launch/

Don't be such a pussy, he's not going to launch nukes. He's a bit of an idiot with a **** haircut, not a mass murdering maniac.

I don't agree with many of his policies, but as in Brexit, I applaud the Yanks for telling the establishment to go do one.

Don't be such a pussy, he's not going to launch nukes. He's a bit of an idiot with a **** haircut, not a mass murdering maniac.

 

I don't agree with many of his policies, but as in Brexit, I applaud the Yanks for telling the establishment to go do one.

Spot on.

Democracy is a wonderful thing

There's been a lot of comment in the US today about how the constitution's checks and balances will protect from the worst and most irrational of a President's behaviour.

 

Where there are few meaningful checks and balances is in foreign policy - and above all in the ultimate foreign 'policy', initiating nuclear war.

 

The President has sole and, in the last instance, unchallengeable power to start a nuclear attack. From his decision to enter the launch codes to the missiles themselves launching is around five minutes.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-nuclear-weapon-launch/

We'll be fine. There's no way that could Trump remember a code that must be between 8 and 16 characters long and contain at least one upper case letter, one lowercase letter, one numeral and one special character, unless it's > .... boom.

A typical Facebook timeline this week (and I will see many like this);

 

Saturday - Out wiv da girls #bubbles #Fun #girls #laugh (and endless selfies)

Sunday - OMG I NEVA WANNA GO OUT AGAIN

Sunday - OMG Ull neva guess what?

Monday - #Mondayblues #hatework #WhyIsItNotFriday (endless sad looking selfies and pictures of a work desk)

Tuesday - OMG its only Tuesday, life is sooooooo unfair, hate work #Tuesdayblues (picture of desk and work calendar)

Wednesday - Wow, 2016 is so messed up, why have all these racists voted in Trump and ruined my children's lives? Are these people really stupid? Wish we could reboot 2016, it's an utter joke #fuming

Thursday - OMG FRIDAY tomorrow #getonit #TFIF

Friday - GET IN, its the weekend. OMG out wiv da girls #prosecco #bubbles #FridayFuntime

 

Sigh.

Brilliant

What is it with lefties , so called " progressives " & trendy youngsters? They lecture the rest of us on morals, humanity & respect but are totally incapable of embracing the very thing that underpins society , democracy. It only seems to apply when the "right" side wins.

What is it with lefties , so called " progressives " & trendy youngsters? They lecture the rest of us on morals, humanity & respect but are totally incapable of embracing the very thing that underpins society , democracy. It only seems to apply when the "right" side wins.

All in your own mind pal. Who is not accepting it? Pockets of protesters in Seattle and NYC?

it seems there were enough of them to make the BBC news, mate. Was it all in their mind?

it seems there were enough of them to make the BBC news, mate. Was it all in their mind?

Yep did you hear some of them ' some of my friends on social media are going to be affected,' lol

Yep did you hear some of them ' some of my friends on social media are going to be affected,' lol

We'll be fine. There's no way that could Trump remember a code that must be between 8 and 16 characters long and contain at least one upper case letter, one lowercase letter, one numeral and one special character, unless it's > .... boom.

Boom indeed. While everyone's attention is diverted by Syria, Trump's two big positions in the Middle East are the unprecedented American support for moving the capital of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and tearing up the nuclear agreement with Iran. Both have been reconfirmed since his election.

In Israel, this has already resulted in the far-right - who remember are in power - declaring that the two-state solution is dead, and that the Palestinians can kiss goodbye to ever seeing meaningful self-rule. And the Iran decision, which will involve among other things the removal of inspectors, will restart the Ayatollahs' nuclear warheads programme.

Too bad Clinton won't be jailed but you can't have it all. Now, let's see what kind of f*ck ups Trump will present. Newt Gingrich, Steven Mnuchin (Goldman Sachs) and Carl Icahn as candidates for his cabinet is a nice start.

I'm not what you would call Russell Brand's biggest fan, but a lot of what he says here about how people have reacted to the Trump victory is quite perceptive IMO...

Looking forward to QT tonight, the sight of lefties crying and whinging from the audience will be great viewing.

It was mentioned by the BBC. After a bit of digging, total spend was $1.3 billion.

 

Hillary spent $500m and Trump spent $250m.

So they use Pompey maths. $500m + $250m =$1.3billion

I'm not what you would call Russell Brand's biggest fan, but a lot of what he says here about how people have reacted to the Trump victory is quite perceptive IMO...

 

Had exactly the same reaction myself.

Still, its all words. Russell Brand's mind is 100% closed to the idea that immigration and globalisation present any kind of issues whatsoever because any criticism of either is 'racist'. As such, he won't offer any solutions, because he, like many others, is married to the idea that (even if both are a net benefit), they entail absolutely no problems whatsoever and absolutely no-one doesn't benefit from them.

It looks like the centre/right has again given the finger to the liberal establishment. I'm looking forward to the raft of General Elections in the EU next year. The elite could be in for a hammering. What are the odds now for a breach in the EU dam if Germany, Holland, France, Austria go anti establishment and EU. Interesting times, the elite have been ****ing up the world for too long it's good that the people are kicking them out.

So they use Pompey maths. $500m + $250m =$1.3billion

$550m was 'other' spend

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

It looks like the centre/right has again given the finger to the liberal establishment. I'm looking forward to the raft of General Elections in the EU next year. The elite could be in for a hammering. What are the odds now for a breach in the EU dam if Germany, Holland, France, Austria go anti establishment and EU. Interesting times, the elite have been ****ing up the world for too long it's good that the people are kicking them out.

This is such addled analysis that it makes your Frazier Richardson/sweeper stuff look positively informed.

What is it with lefties , so called " progressives " & trendy youngsters? They lecture the rest of us on morals, humanity & respect but are totally incapable of embracing the very thing that underpins society , democracy. It only seems to apply when the "right" side wins.

I've hardly seen anyone disputing the result, though you have to expect some discontent when Clinton won the popular vote. People will continue to oppose Trump's bigotry. The only reason you dislike that, it seems, is that you support Trump. Justify that instead of targeting his opponents.

I've hardly seen anyone disputing the result, though you have to expect some discontent when Clinton won the popular vote. People will continue to oppose Trump's bigotry. The only reason you dislike that, it seems, is that you support Trump. Justify that instead of targeting his opponents.

Yep. None of that olde worlde first past the post colonial nonsense for the yanks.

Yep. None of that olde worlde first past the post colonial nonsense for the yanks.

???

First-past-the-post also means that a government can form without a majority of the popular vote.

???

 

First-past-the-post also means that a government can form without a majority of the popular vote.

Or zero in the case of May.

I'm not what you would call Russell Brand's biggest fan, but a lot of what he says here about how people have reacted to the Trump victory is quite perceptive IMO...

 

Brand is spot on as usual. In the US, like here with Brexit, if people feel they have nothing to lose then might as well just roll the dice. The remoaners should watch this.

Or zero in the case of May.

I remember your protests about Brown who was inflicted upon us, without a vote being cast, despite the economic armageddon on his watch ;-)

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Brand is spot on as usual. In the US, like here with Brexit, if people feel they have nothing to lose then might as well just roll the dice. The remoaners should watch this.

It would be OK if it was accurate pal.

Exit poll data show that as a whole those on lower incomes (whether defined as under $30,000 or $50,000 a year) favoured Clinton (52%-41%). By contrast, every income group above $50,000 a year, including those on more than $250,000 favoured Trump. A defining factor was race i.e. being white. Trump drew support from not only noncollege educated whites but also college-educated whites.

None of this squares easily with Brand's argument that those who had nothing to lose voted for Trump. A simple message for simple minds.

It would be OK if it was accurate pal.

 

Exit poll data show that as a whole those on lower incomes (under $50,000 a year) favoured Clinton (52%-41%). Only when when you factor in race i.e. being white did support for Trump go up. Also note that college-educated whites and whites on over $50,000 a year favoured Trump. None of this squares easily with Brand's argument that those who had nothing to lose voted for Trump. A simple message for message minds.

Those stats don't prove anything. I expect the Republican candidate will always have a high percentage of high earners as voters - that doesn't mean that ****ed off working class in certain states didn't swing it to Trump.

A bit like how the usual swivel-eyed Tories backed Brexit but it was the votes from the usual Labour voting areas which really made the difference.

Those stats don't prove anything. I expect the Republican candidate will always have a high percentage of high earners as voters - that doesn't mean that ****ed off working class in certain states didn't swing it to Trump.

 

A bit like how the usual swivel-eyed Tories backed Brexit but it was the votes from the usual Labour voting areas which really made the difference.

Those on lower incomes -whether defined as those under $30,000 and $50,000 a year favoured Clinton by double-digits. Sorry pal if the facts don't sit well with your preconceptions.

Those on lower incomes -whether defined as those under $30,000 and $50,000 a year favoured Clinton by double-digits. Sorry pal if the facts don't sit well with your preconceptions.

Those stats still don't mean that more working class who usually vote democrat decided to vote republican in the rust belt areas.

Those stats still don't mean that more working class who usually vote democrat decided to vote republican in the rust belt areas.

Nobody is denying there was a shift but let's not overstate it - it remains that lower income groups (leaving aside the race dimension) still overwhelmingly favoured Clinton and those on higher incomes favoured (albeit by a small margin) Trump. None of this is acknowledged by Brand's manichean, reductive posturing.

Nobody is denying there was a shift but let's not overstate it - it remains that lower income groups (leaving aside the race dimension) still overwhelmingly favoured Clinton and those on higher incomes favoured (albeit by a small margin) Trump. None of this is acknowledged by Brand's breathless, reductive posturing.

Do you really think a racist nut job like Trump would have won if there were not huge amounts of ****ed off people? Some of the rust belt States havn't voted republican since the 80's. Brand was spot on, they voted Trump because they wanted change and overlooked his obvious flaws.

Do you really think a racist nut job like Trump would have won if there were not huge amounts of ****ed off people? Some of the rust belt States havn't voted republican since the 80's. Brand was spot on, they voted Trump because they wanted change and overlooked his obvious flaws.

Any half-credible Democratic politician other than Clinton would have beaten Trump. To non-Americans like Brand and yourself, its hard to understand these contingencies.

Whilst I fully understand Trump represents the incoherent rage against neoliberal globalisation, what I don't like is that it’s found a home in racialised nationalism. IMHO, the left, in all of its guises, is equally to blame as it ignored the concerns of the voters who voted "Out" in the UK and Trump in the States.

The racism and intolerance that has undoubtedly been unleashed by these votes should be condemned by all. That is hasn't, that's the biggest disappointment to me.