American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS (Archive)

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Minnie

Kellyanne inauguration outfit.


]

Definitely the Nutcracker.

[Minnie]

The buttons on the coat? Are cats.

[Hockeyboy2]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Definitely the Nutcracker.

No way, Paddington Bear hands down!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Delgar

Here's a link to the complete speech:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politi...ess/index.html

Items I find appalling:

"Today's ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another -- but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People."

Was he dressed like this?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Locke

Was he dressed like this?

"that comes later"

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by photon

"We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny." is a little bit chilling coming from an authoritarian.

No shying from the protectionist stance, even using the word. "Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength."

"We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world -- but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first." which every nation does of course, but to feel it important to emphasize that tells the rest of the world "America First" means just that.

I guess the first one that you picked up is a bit too jingoistic for my tastes, and while I hate to Godwin any discussion, it does remind me of how Hitler and Stalin and Tojo and other dictators used to sprinkle their speeches with statements like destiny and glory and other things.

As for the protectionist leanings we knew he was going to go hard in that direction. Right now the other economies of the world that are heavily dependent on trade imbalances with the States or selling things into the States at a cheaper cost then America can build them are pooping their pants liberally.

I don't think the third statement that you put in was all that surprising either. Its a given that American sentiment in any negotiation should be America first, he's just making it extremely clear.

Basically I think that the viewpoint is that protectionism can be successful at least initially until the World Economy realizes that it can survive without you, then its doubly hard to get into other markets because they will probably protect their own markets a lot harder.

I'm actually on board with the concept of trade is trade but it has to be fair. China has pretty much closed their markets to goods and the ones that they allow are made artificially noncompetitive with Chinese goods in their markets. At the same time they flood the markets with their own stuff. They also work very hard to keep their currency devalued. I would expect that the proper thing to do is reciprocate in terms of protecting their own market. It makes sense and its smart in a way.

However on the other side, ripping up NAFTA I think is more political then it is smart, just because all three countries are so interlinked now, pulling apart or changing those threads is going to be incredibly destructive to Canada and Mexico.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

No the points scored in the game are electoral college votes. Comparison is quite Apt. US politics reward touchdowns over yards.

Except that the points are not distributed in the same fashion, quarter-to-quarter, and one team likes to change the dimensions of the playing to benefit their style of play (you can't pass down field, you can't run inside the tackles, and we get to take away half your roster as we approach the big game).

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Definitely the Nutcracker.

Which one of the nutcrackers?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by New Era

Except that the points are not distributed in the same fashion, quarter-to-quarter, and one team likes to change the dimensions of the playing to benefit their style of play (you can't pass down field, you can't run inside the tackles, and we get to take away half your roster as we approach the big game).

In football the yards you gain in the middle of the field aren't as valuable as the yards gained at each end of the field. The point expectation value per yard is not consistent. It's an amazingly apt comparison.

Also none of these Things listed make the statement that Trump didn't even win the popular vote useful. All of the criticisms exist whether he won 47 or 51%. The list
Of concerns you identify are the real problems. Him not winning the popular vote is not.

[HotHotHeat]

Anyone know if the unskilled white people in the bible belt have their six figure salaries yet?

[lambeburger]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

The reality is states mostly voted as they always do except a few that flipped red when Trump's populist message struck a chord with the poorly educated white voter. The protest vote piece is vastly overblown.

Kinda funny how we label people these days.

When you want their vote: "working class Americans"

When you don't get their vote: "poorly educated white voters"

[photon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think the third statement that you put in was all that surprising either.

Oh for sure, none of his speech was surprising at all, I think it's just more that these were the things he chose to put into his inauguration speech which the world watches just as closely as US citizens. I think everyone already knew Trump has a world view closer to the dog eat dog take what you can get of Russia and China, but to hear it put so directly really puts it into reality for everyone.

[DuffMan]

I like it. He has to be called out on his businesses. Still can't believe he refuses to show his tax returns, and got elected

The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is already underway.
At the moment the new commander in chief was sworn in, a campaign to build public support for his impeachment went live at ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org, spearheaded by two liberal advocacy groups aiming to lay the groundwork for his eventual ejection from the White House.
The organizers behind the campaign, Free Speech for People and RootsAction, are hinging their case on Trump’s insistence on maintaining ownership of his luxury hotel and golf course business while in office. Ethics experts have warned that his financial holdings could potentially lead to constitutional violations and undermine public faith in his decision-making.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politi...cxo?li=AAggNb9

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by lambeburger

Kinda funny how we label people these days.

When you want their vote: "working class Americans"

When you don't get their vote: "poorly educated white voters"

Nope, it was pretty clearly demonstrated post election that race and education were a stronger dividing line in voting than economic class this time around.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...der-education/

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

In football the yards you gain in the middle of the field aren't as valuable as the yards gained at each end of the field. The point expectation value per yard is not consistent. It's an amazingly apt comparison.

Also none of these Things listed make the statement that Trump didn't even win the popular vote useful. All of the criticisms exist whether he won 47 or 51%. The list
Of concerns you identify are the real problems. Him not winning the popular vote is not.

I don't really give a rip about the popular vote. I care that the part of the country that generates the might of the nation, was completely dismissed. You Albertans are always so pissed that the election is decided by the Maritime provinces, Quebec and Ontario, and your economic might is under-represented. This is a situation where the vast majority of the industrial capacity of the United States voted one way, and lost. That is mind numbingly stupid and a sure sign the system is not broken, its been shattered into the million pieces that the Republicans used to redistrict and gerrymander the country.

[photon]

Trump left up the We The People petition part of the whitehouse.gov website, first couple of petitions are predictable.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/

[opendoor]

Is the notion that the strength of a leader's mandate is influenced by how much he/she wins an election by that controversial?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by lambeburger

Kinda funny how we label people these days.

When you want their vote: "working class Americans"

When you don't get their vote: "poorly educated white voters"

I don't think I've ever referred to working class Americans. Sorry, would you feel better if I said "non college educated white voters"? It's a pretty well documented fact that education was the dividing line in voting for Trump.

I thought we were in the non politically correct land of truthiness now? I shall endeavour to more accurately describe groups so as to not give the appearance of unfair denigration moving forward.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by photon

Oh for sure, none of his speech was surprising at all, I think it's just more that these were the things he chose to put into his inauguration speech which the world watches just as closely as US citizens. I think everyone already knew Trump has a world view closer to the dog eat dog take what you can get of Russia and China, but to hear it put so directly really puts it into reality for everyone.

I don't think it was a surprise to the other nations listening in. I would expect they've already analyzed the crap out of how Trumps protectionist policies are going to harm or hurt their economy.

China right now has the most to lose. with a trade imbalance of over $350 billion dollars, I would expect that American's are going to have to break their addiction to cheap Chinese goods.

I also believe that if the American's successfully tarrif China other nations with the same issues are going to follow suit.

I think that the other area that the US is going to go after China is in terms of patent stealing. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump actively tried to ban Chinese products that are shipped to the States that incorporate stolen Patents.

I would also expect that a similar fate will hit Nafta as the trade imbalance combined is close to $85 billion dollars.

Even if the States managed to reduce the trade imbalances for Nafta and China in half that would represent nearly half of their defense budget

[GGG]

Originally Posted by New Era

I don't really give a rip about the popular vote. I care that the part of the country that generates the might of the nation, was completely dismissed. You Albertans are always so pissed that the election is decided by the Maritime provinces, Quebec and Ontario, and your economic might is under-represented. This is a situation where the vast majority of the industrial capacity of the United States voted one way, and lost. That is mind numbingly stupid and a sure sign the system is not broken, its been shattered into the million pieces that the Republicans used to redistrict and gerrymander the country.

Then why did you start responding to a post about bringing up the popular vote being stupid