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

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I think that there's an important point here. I believe that in a lot of ways, Hillary lost because of the Hollywood and other elites, and when she was viewed as inbed with these celbrities and her attack on people that weren't with her as deplorable she came across as entitled and out of touch. when combined with a voter base that really seemed ready for a protest vote she lost.

Personally if I was running for public office, I'd be telling Matt Damon and Susan Saranden and Matt Damon and all the others to shut the Fork up until after the election.

I stayed quiet after the election in part out of shock, but in part because I like to read what others say instead of blathering on about my own thoughts so I never gave my thoughts on why Clinton lost. To me, it was more about her not having a message. Her campaign seemed to just be wait for Trump to alienate everyone and mock him.

I often posted in the pre-election threads with anecdotes from all the red state people that surround me. And one of the things that always was apparent was that Trumps messages worked. Harping on the emails became a nice meme here but it was was they felt was important. So many could tell me all about crooked Hilary but not much else about politics. They could tell me all about Benghazi but nothing else about international issues.

So while I think that the Hollywood thing was a big factor, I think most of the reason we are now talking about President Trump (barf) is because he, and republicans in general, stay on message better. Right now they are better campaigners. Personally, I feel that in 2 years after they have shown how terrible they are as leaders, it won't matter and we will see power shift the other way.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by troutman

Van Jones did a documentary for CNN interviewing voters about why they voted the way they did. Overall, there was no one tidy explanation for the Trump victory. He did find that in the Rust Belt, voters there felt like Trump was the only one that listened to them, and that they were ignored by Clinton.

It speaks to the education system in the US that these people were lied to (#trumpgrets anyone) and they still voted.

[Flabbibulin]

[puckedoff]

I have some disturbing predictions for his term as well:

1. Strong American job growth, and wage growth
2. Destabilizaion of EM markets, through strong USD and weak EM currencies
3. Low CAD, as exports to US slow due to border taxes.
4. Canadians missing out on American products, and they have the best products, if you were ever concerned.

[DuffMan]

Sarah Palins pro Trump speech nullified all of the Hollywood pro Hillary speeches.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Absolutely. You have Hillary being propped up by celebrities that have absolutely nothing in common with the average person and then the alternative which is a controversial figure that's not being supported by celebrities but he's promising to make America better by creating jobs and bringing back manufacturing in the US. Really it's not surprising how things ended up. A lot of Americans turned flipped the bird to Hollywood.

To me as soon as Clinton started rolling out the elites and then made the deplorable speech, she created a perfect vortex that made her seem arrogant and also it could be interpreted that she believed that if people weren't on her side they were in her words deplorable.

Trump took that and ran with it. But the architect of her downfall wasn't Trump, it wasn't the people who voted against her. She has to blame herself for her arrogance.

the Democratic Party is in a complete shambles right how. I would expect that the last thing that they want is a impeachment of Donald. They want him in power for what they hope is a long erratic painful four years while they hopefully rebuild the mess they're in so they can not only sweep to power, but they want the entire system to break down and the houses to infight and collapse so they can gain those levers as well.

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Great and again the 50% doesn't matter, he's the president under law and because of that he can set the mandate. He might have gotten less votes then Hillary but clearly Hillary ran a bad and pretty arrogant campaign and turned off the vote major states. But as President Trump doesn't have to worry about Mandates he doesn't have to worry about the popular vote and he can pretty much say that he has the ability and power given to him because of the last election results to say things like I'm giving America back to the people.

I disagree entirely. He has to care because he most likely wants to get re-elected in 4 years. (if there's anything America is good at its worrying about elections years in advance!) He also has to worry about alienating people and causing congress to flip in 2 years and making his job much more difficult. He also has to worry about banking political capital for times he disagrees with the current congress on things.

Obama won 2 elections pretty easily and had to spend most of his presidency grinding for any bit of progress he could. Winning the election is only the introduction to trying to enact an agenda. So all those buzzwords like mandate, optics, etc do matter.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

People need to get over that.

Trump was elected fairly under the US constitution. That he didn't receive the popular vote doesn't matter. It's like the people that complain in Canada that the Prime Ministers party only got 38% of the vote. It doesn't matter.

No, they don't. The system is broken. The only reason the electoral college still keeps Republicans competitive is because districts have been gerrymandered to the point of ridicule. People have every right to be pissed. Their interests are not being represented by the government sworn to do so.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by La Flames Fan

Hollywood isn't even close to why she wasn't elected. Obama had all the same people stumping for him and still won two terms. People didn't like Hillary, and there was anger at the DNC trying to block Bernie and make sure Clinton was the candidate.

"Hollywood" doesn't have the power over people you think it does.

Don't kid yourself. A lot of people didn't like Obama. It's just he didn't have polar opposite running against him like Trump.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by New Era

No, they don't. The system is broken. The only reason the electoral college still keeps Republicans competitive is because districts have been gerrymandered to the point of ridicule. People have every right to be pissed. Their interests are not being represented by the government sworn to do so.

Maybe I'm missing what you're trying to say here, but isn't gerrymandering more of a house district issue? Isn't it impossible to gerrymander the electoral college since it's drawn along state lines? (Strongly agree with your 'people have a right to be pissed' perspective, though.)

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

I have some disturbing predictions for his term as well:

1. Strong American job growth, and wage growth
2. Destabilizaion of EM markets, through strong USD and weak EM currencies
3. Low CAD, as exports to US slow due to border taxes.
4. Canadians missing out on American products, and they have the best products, if you were ever concerned.

It things play out that way then you can argue that Trump will be a success from an American point of view.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

To me as soon as Clinton started rolling out the elites and then made the deplorable speech, she created a perfect vortex that made her seem arrogant and also it could be interpreted that she believed that if people weren't on her side they were in her words deplorable.

Trump took that and ran with it. But the architect of her downfall wasn't Trump, it wasn't the people who voted against her. She has to blame herself for her arrogance.

the Democratic Party is in a complete shambles right how. I would expect that the last thing that they want is a impeachment of Donald. They want him in power for what they hope is a long erratic painful four years while they hopefully rebuild the mess they're in so they can not only sweep to power, but they want the entire system to break down and the houses to infight and collapse so they can gain those levers as well.

This may be true...but what a cynical process...American governance is falling apart...oh well it was a nice Republic while it lasted.

Maybe America is going to follow the trajectory of Rome...retrench and stumble into a chaotic dark age.

[Drak]

Great thread title.

I refused to watch that sht show.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by photon

https://twitter.com/potus

That's a picture from Obama's 2009 inauguration on the newly blank POTUS twitter account.

And that's the official twitter presidential image. Is this the same one they'll have hanging in schools everywhere giving nightmares to little kids?

[photon]

For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It things play out that way then you can argue that Trump will be a success from an American point of view.

Yeah until inflation catches up to his protectionism and suddenly it's the 30s all over again.

[La Flames Fan]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Don't kid yourself. A lot of people didn't like Obama. It's just he didn't have polar opposite running against him like Trump.

If the same amount of people who voted for Obama voted for Clinton, she would have won. Doesn't matter now, Trump is POTUS, move on...but to say Hollywood was the reason is ridiculous and deflects from the real reasons she lost.

Are you saying that if Trump ran against Obama, Trump would have won?

[photon]

Heh..

https://www.whitehouse.gov/energy/climate-change

"The requested page "/energy/climate-change" could not be found."

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Yeah until inflation catches up to his protectionism and suddenly it's the 30s all over again.

Yeah, but it won't be on his watch.
Its entirely possible it will be a nearly unprecedented period of growth in the American economy, in the short term.

[La Flames Fan]

As an aside, do I move my money out of US heavy funds?