[worry]

The Ben Carson thing is STILL unclear though. I know you're sick of him, but I get a kick out of how weird he makes every single situation he's in.

[Tiste Simeon]

Do you think Trump's main vision is looking at how screwed up this country is with Brexit etc and he's going "please, anything Britain can do, I can do better..."

[EmperorMagus]

 Tiste Simeon, on 24 November 2016 - 07:24 AM, said:

Do you think Trump's main vision is looking at how screwed up this country is with Brexit etc and he's going "please, anything Britain can do, I can do better..."

Honestly, at this point I'm not even sure Brexit or a Trump presidency are THAT bad.

I mean the NY stock exchange seems to like Trump, and the pound is slowly recovering...
Except for all the racist "incidents", the end of the world doesn't seem so near anymore.

[worry]

The end of your world doesn't, maybe. And I don't mean that snarkily -- I really hope you do get to live well in the upcoming years -- but that blanket statement is both premature and dismissive imo. For one thing, the stock market is among the least humane thermometers of a nation's health. And let's remember, it's only been a couple weeks since the election. Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet. This hasn't even started. We're still going up the initial incline of this roller coaster of human misery. So I guess my point is: I think you can feel relief for yourself -- and bless you if it's warranted -- w/o dismissing the boots that are still raised above other people's throats.

[Silencer]

 EmperorMagus, on 24 November 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

 Tiste Simeon, on 24 November 2016 - 07:24 AM, said:

Do you think Trump's main vision is looking at how screwed up this country is with Brexit etc and he's going "please, anything Britain can do, I can do better..."

Honestly, at this point I'm not even sure Brexit or a Trump presidency are THAT bad.

I mean the NY stock exchange seems to like Trump, and the pound is slowly recovering...
Except for all the racist "incidents", the end of the world doesn't seem so near anymore.

Lol. Bear in mind neither of those things have actually happened yet.
Like, at all.

And at least for Trump, it will be a while before the effects are felt because of how long legislation takes to pass.

It's the problem with both scenarios that the initial lull after the stress of the campaigns makes it all seem like an overreaction. It wasn't.

[EmperorMagus]

 death rattle, on 24 November 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

The end of your world doesn't, maybe. And I don't mean that snarkily -- I really hope you do get to live well in the upcoming years -- but that blanket statement is both premature and dismissive imo. For one thing, the stock market is among the least humane thermometers of a nation's health. And let's remember, it's only been a couple weeks since the election. Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet. This hasn't even started. We're still going up the initial incline of this roller coaster of human misery. So I guess my point is: I think you can feel relief for yourself -- and bless you if it's warranted -- w/o dismissing the boots that are still raised above other people's throats.

You need to read my post again worry. I said it doesn't seem "THAT bad", as in "nuke people who talk shit about my hand size" bad. A Trump presidency is going to be terrible for a lot of groups on the US, and there is no denying that.

Similarly, I think the effects of Brexit are going to be minuscule compared to what four years of Trump/Pence are going to do to the US. That doesn't mean Brexit is not going to be extremely painful to the people inside the UK.

I'm not dismissing people's misery, and If I sound like I am then I apologize. I do think it's important to realize that it probably isn't going to be as bad as we all imagined it would be like when the election results first came in. It's all relative.

This post has been edited by EmperorMagus: 24 November 2016 - 09:04 AM

[Tapper]

 EmperorMagus, on 24 November 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

 Tiste Simeon, on 24 November 2016 - 07:24 AM, said:

Do you think Trump's main vision is looking at how screwed up this country is with Brexit etc and he's going "please, anything Britain can do, I can do better..."

Honestly, at this point I'm not even sure Brexit or a Trump presidency are THAT bad.

I mean the NY stock exchange seems to like Trump, and the pound is slowly recovering...
Except for all the racist "incidents", the end of the world doesn't seem so near anymore.

With regards to the pound: the British government still seems completely unsure on how to approach Brexit, Boris Johnson is quickly exhausting any good faith British diplomacy might have in Brussels and the Guardian reported the government estimating a 59 billion black hole in government finances due to Brexit, which Brexiteers call unfounded and a fantasy, while Remainers and financial experts say that deficit might actually be optimistic.

[Malankazooie]

Just think, a year from now it is going to be Trump who pardons the turkey. How do you think he will handle it? I just think he will walk up to the podium and say "you're fired" and walk away while "For the of Money" plays. https://www.youtube....h?v=GXE_n2q08Yw

[Darkwatch]

The question I have is: have Republican legislators realised that they have a pretty good set up in front of them?
Granted not all of them back Trump, nor do they like him, but Trump doesn't want to manage things. So chances are he'll leave that up to legislators and his cabinet that he's filling with a lot of republican boiler plates (not all, such as Banon, but a lot).
As long as they give him the few legislative initiatives he actually wants (opening of libel laws for instance) they can do basically anything they want as long as it doesn't effect him or his bottom line (or he wakes up a bit more cantankerous one morning, but that is a transient problem). If they play it smart they can even make sure that he profits almost ensuring he will sign anything.
He'll give them their SCOTUS pick and delegate a lot to the states most likely as well as a lot of other laws they've been looking to push through, like Ryan's Nu-Deal (couldn't think of a better name).
I know a few republicans will refuse, but most don't care as long as they can get their policies through (Ryan, again is a prime example) and the "Freedom Caucus" will be enthusiastic backers. Also, unless specific republican legislators won their election on denouncing Trump, most can't speak out against him since he can literally denounce their next election putting them in serious peril. Chances are most will simply stick to backing him and keeping their head down.

Unless I'm reading this all wrong.

[worry]

 EmperorMagus, on 24 November 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

 death rattle, on 24 November 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

The end of your world doesn't, maybe. And I don't mean that snarkily -- I really hope you do get to live well in the upcoming years -- but that blanket statement is both premature and dismissive imo. For one thing, the stock market is among the least humane thermometers of a nation's health. And let's remember, it's only been a couple weeks since the election. Trump hasn't even been sworn in yet. This hasn't even started. We're still going up the initial incline of this roller coaster of human misery. So I guess my point is: I think you can feel relief for yourself -- and bless you if it's warranted -- w/o dismissing the boots that are still raised above other people's throats.

You need to read my post again worry. I said it doesn't seem "THAT bad", as in "nuke people who talk shit about my hand size" bad. A Trump presidency is going to be terrible for a lot of groups on the US, and there is no denying that.

Similarly, I think the effects of Brexit are going to be minuscule compared to what four years of Trump/Pence are going to do to the US. That doesn't mean Brexit is not going to be extremely painful to the people inside the UK.

I'm not dismissing people's misery, and If I sound like I am then I apologize. I do think it's important to realize that it probably isn't going to be as bad as we all imagined it would be like when the election results first came in. It's all relative.

I see what you mean, but I guess I was never scared of nuclear war being the fallout. Everything else I've been scared of with him he has matched or chosen worse.

But if we're talking the literal end of the world, I offer you this: https://www.washingt...imate-research/
Trump adviser proposes dismantling NASA climate research

Quote

Climate research has been “heavily politicized” and NASA doesn’t need to conduct “politically correct environmental reporting,” Walker told the Guardian. Walker is not alone in his point of view.

In 2015, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, chaired by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), introduced a spending bill that would have slashed NASA’s Earth science program by more than $300 million.

The article ends on a note of "wait and see/we don't know yet what Trump wants with NASA", but I'm pretty sure we know what a GOP-dominated Congress wants, and we know Trump thinks climate change is a hoax, so the "wait and see" part rests on whether high ranking military and intelligence officials can convince him it's real and vital to combat.

[worry]

Maybe I'm being too negative in response though. I have seen lots of good, encouraging things lately too. It's just that they've been in resistance to the new regime (or similar forces). So I refuse to think of them as silver linings on a dark cloud, so much as cloudbusters, a different source of power and energy all together. So while I'd say Trump is every bit of awful (or worse) as I expected, the groundswell of resistance has been more encouraging than I expected as well.

[MTS]

 Darkwatch, on 24 November 2016 - 07:45 PM, said:

The question I have is: have Republican legislators realised that they have a pretty good set up in front of them?
Granted not all of them back Trump, nor do they like him, but Trump doesn't want to manage things. So chances are he'll leave that up to legislators and his cabinet that he's filling with a lot of republican boiler plates (not all, such as Banon, but a lot).
As long as they give him the few legislative initiatives he actually wants (opening of libel laws for instance) they can do basically anything they want as long as it doesn't effect him or his bottom line (or he wakes up a bit more cantankerous one morning, but that is a transient problem). If they play it smart they can even make sure that he profits almost ensuring he will sign anything.
He'll give them their SCOTUS pick and delegate a lot to the states most likely as well as a lot of other laws they've been looking to push through, like Ryan's Nu-Deal (couldn't think of a better name).
I know a few republicans will refuse, but most don't care as long as they can get their policies through (Ryan, again is a prime example) and the "Freedom Caucus" will be enthusiastic backers. Also, unless specific republican legislators won their election on denouncing Trump, most can't speak out against him since he can literally denounce their next election putting them in serious peril. Chances are most will simply stick to backing him and keeping their head down.

Unless I'm reading this all wrong.

Nope, I think you've pretty much nailed it. Look at all the Republicans that denounced Trump during the primary and general, and yet have meekly fallen in line - Cruz, Christie, Romney, Ryan, Priebus, Chaffetz, Walker etc. Political calculation usually trumps principle, especially if they see it as the lesser of two evils.

What makes this scenario even more plausible is that there have been indications Trump will delegate massively to Pence, who is a much more mainstream Republican (and thus easier to rally behind).

[amphibian]

Really good piece by Tressie McMillan-Cottom called "Racism with No Racists: The President Trump Conundrum": https://tressiemc.co...rump-conundrum/

The second half bogs down a bit in the NY Times data analysis, but her points do have serious validity to my thinking.

[Mezla PigDog]

Is there much in US news about how Trump could trigger a constitutional crisis if he doesn't sell his stakes in his businesses? He'll figure out a way to sell them to his kids if he has to I'm sure but it kind of makes a mockery of the Drain The Swamp rhetoric. Do you think people won't care? One corrupt "self made" family is ok if they clean out the stale vested interests?

Guardian link

[worry]

Not really. I've seen a bit of comedy focusing on his "the President can't have conflicts of interest" and "the people knew who they were voting for" claims, and some coverage in smaller media sources, but no major focus on this in any meaningful way. And if you're seeking Trump supporters who will be turned off by anything he does, no matter how corrupt it is or how much it may hurt them personally, it's just not gonna happen (at least this early).

Meanwhile, he isn't slowing down:

[MTS]

I find it very surprising that Democrats aren't exploding over this, and threatening impeachment and suchlike if something isn't done. The fact that Trump can make decisions that personally benefit his bottom line (e.g. Dakota Access pipeline) because his holdings aren't in a blind trust is outrageous.

The fact the media has been so silent on this is also bizarre, because it came up a couple of times in the debates (primary and general).

[HoosierDaddy]

I think Democrats and liberals in general have just exited the building. Every time you think you've hit rock-bottom, Trump proves you oh so wrong.

[MTS]

Indeed. The problem in any opposition party is that they have to remain united in order to maintain any sort of resistance to legislation from across the aisle. Republicans were crazy effective at voting in a bloc even when they didn't control both houses. I can't see the Democrats being nearly as effective in stopping Republican legislation this time round, even with so many important issues coming to the fore this term (Supreme Court nominations, for example).

The frustration I have with the Democratic Party is that their opposite number have always shown a penchant for shameless political ruthlessness (i.e. McConnell saying the Republican Senate's one job was to make Obama a one-term president), and in 6 years of trying, they've never found an effective message or counter strategy to block them. That doesn't bode well for this term.

This post has been edited by MTS: 28 November 2016 - 04:55 AM

[Tapper]

 MTS, on 28 November 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

Indeed. The problem in any opposition party is that they have to remain united in order to maintain any sort of resistance to legislation from across the aisle. Republicans were crazy effective at voting in a bloc even when they didn't control both houses. I can't see the Democrats being nearly as effective in stopping Republican legislation this time round, even with so many important issues coming to the fore this term (Supreme Court nominations, for example).

The frustration I have with the Democratic Party is that their opposite number have always shown a penchant for shameless political ruthlessness (i.e. McConnell saying the Republican Senate's one job was to make Obama a one-term president), and in 6 years of trying, they've never found an effective message or counter strategy to block them. That doesn't bode well for this term.

Maybe the actual effective counter is to make this really a Trump government asap, giving him nowhere to hide?
Let him make decisions, let him then implement them, see the public effect and probably, watch him (and the GOP) stumble.
He has a very ambitious list of things he wants to achieve, many of which fringes of the Republican party feel uncomfortable about (including foreign policy, which is what Presidents usually withdraw to if they mess up on the domestic front).
If the Dems manage to block some measures with a changing coalition of Reps, the Dems' opposition will likely be the scapegoat Trump will use for his failed budgets - approve them, work with him, just offering amendments and suggestions, and he'll be accountable and responsible. Pelosi is suggesting just this with the infrastructure projects (which were on Obama's 2008 agenda), the Dems can claim successes here and there, bring the divisions in the GOP to the fore (who stopped the infrastructure for example on account of decreasing spending) Hopefully, Trump will then be exposed by the mid-terms.

He has made so many promises with such a short term for success, expectations are thus sky-high, especially with the disenfranchised.
Hence, the disappointment will be huge as well when it shows that trickle down economics still do not work, taxes for almost everyone go up while the government debt increases, Syria and Afghanistan aren't magically solved, the threat of terrorism doesn't change and the feeling of safety does not increase, looser gun laws immediately lead to more accidents and the wall is not being built, and certainly not with Mexican money - wouldn't surprise me if the white disillusioned voter deserts him in the same droves that flocked to him next election - we saw it here as well the one time the populist right 'endorsed' a cabinet: they were halved in the next election.

[Silencer]

^this.

It will likely be more painful and difficult to fix in the short term, but in the long run it gets Trump done with faster and hopefully squashes the support he and the Republicans have.
Bonus? It gets money invested in infrastructure and allows the Democrats to take the high road.