PGT: President-Elect Donald J Trump

[Baron von Kriterium]

In a couple of weeks, Generation Snowflake will be rampaging at the Apple and Best Buy stores, trying to buy the latest gizmos on Black Friday, having totally forgotten about the election.

[HotHotHeat]

It's probably about time our outrage evolved into laughter. Let's be clear about this: America is going to be the laughing stock of the world under Trump.

Sarah Palin Being Considered for Cabinet

[CliffFletcher]

Imagine the hysteria in the media if thousands of Trump supporters took to the streets in the wake of an election loss to Clinton.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

It's probably about time our outrage evolved into laughter. Let's be clear about this: America is going to be the laughing stock of the world under Trump.

Sarah Palin Being Considered for Cabinet

Yeah, if I lived there I would probably be upset. And I totally hate Trump, but no more today than 10 years ago.

Right now, I am just really interested to see how it turns out and like everyone, I hope for the best. I am not confident though, but I hope the U.S. thrives and Canada is able to take advantage of that. They are a huge market for us after all.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Imagine the hysteria in the media if thousands of Trump supporters took to the streets in the wake of an election loss to Clinton.

You're assuming they wouldn't have. It's a country divided.

I was seeing plenty of social media calls to mobilization in the wake of a Democratic win, don't kid yourself.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

You're assuming they wouldn't have. It's a country divided.

I was seeing plenty of social media calls to mobilization in the wake of a Democratic win, don't kid yourself.

And not just calls to protest, but "git yer guns!".

I have no doubt we'd be seeing worse if Trump had lost. This is why it might better for everyone in the long run. The white angst can now subside and the baby can have its bottle.

[GirlySports]

markets really getting ahead of themselves, dow up another 150

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's a good point.

I might be oblivious because I'm caught in the middle I think. I'm Asian! So where do Asian-American fall in this paradigm? I don't believe the issues you mentioned voter suppression, imprisonment, poverty, police brutality, racism really affect Asian-Americans as much as the other groups. So what would be the reason for that. Are we pretty much white? I don't think I heard Asian-Americans mentioned once in this election.



I just saw this. Are Asians a minority or have we lumped into the majority?

Let's discuss cause this is where i'm caught.

You generally are ignored as you are a small Group relative to Latinos and AA

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...ublican-party/

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...-donald-trump/

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Drummer

I'm watching KTLA live (online feed). Showing live coverage of a mini riot in downtown LA. Hundreds of people blocking the 101 freeway and cars and cops stuck in it and surrounded

Do you think it's safe to travel there next week? It would be a gross over reaction not to go right?

[PsYcNeT]

Not to mention, outside of some existential economic threat (Japan in the 80s, China for the last ~10 years) and vague communist allusions, most Asian stereotypes are "positive" (though have negative impact). The small population percentage plays as well.

I met a guy from Albuquerque a few years ago who came to Calgary on business, and he told me when we were out downtown that he had never seen an Asian person in real life, only on TV and in the movies, until this trip.

Lack of exposure and lack of negative stereotypes makes Asians a non-factor to the average American.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

While I'm still pretty well horrified at everything that happened last night (and more and more waves of the repercussions keep hitting me), I got some reassurance today with regards to Roe v Wade. A president cannot just change an old SCOTUS decision, a large case, with new facts and evidence, would have to come before the SCOTUS, and they would have to explain what it was about that case that would supercede the old cases.

It doesn't stop states from furthering their anti-choice platforms to make abortions harder (or impossible) to obtain, and it doesn't stop the GOP from entirely defunding Planned Parenthood (leaving millions of women in this country without adequate healthcare)--but neither the GOP nor Trump can reverse Roe v Wade.

I'm still just trying to find whatever silver linings I can grasp onto.

Roe v wade isn't even the governing case anymore. The lastest case bases around what is reasonable access and recently struck down some of Texas' admitting privilege and other requirements that was forcing clinics to close. They held that when consider the pool of women affected by a change you had to consider all women that could be in the position not just the single women tryin to get an abortion.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...supreme-court/

There also a link in the article going to another article on how to define undo burden which is worth a read

[Fuzz]

His plan for the first 100 days. Scroll down for the list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451...first-100-days

Well, at least you can't say he is coming in without a plan. But wow. See how much he can actually do. I'm not sure government works the way he thinks it works.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

His plan for the first 100 days. Scroll down for the list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451...first-100-days

Well, at least you can't say he is coming in without a plan. But wow. See how much he can actually do. I'm not sure government works the way he thinks it works.

I like these. They have no chance of course

* FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service;

* FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government;

* SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.

[Red Slinger]

From that article, Mitch McConnell has already indicated that he will not be supporting the very first item on the list: term limits for congress. Surprise, surprise...

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

You're assuming they wouldn't have. It's a country divided.

I was seeing plenty of social media calls to mobilization in the wake of a Democratic win, don't kid yourself.

Oh, I'm sure they would have taken to the streets. I'm just speculating about the wildly different reaction it would have provoked among the media and chattering classes.

[GGG]

That's not as terrible as it could be.

The scariest one might be on education eliminating common core that will allow communities to quit teaching science.

And eliminating environmental restrictions as few as they are on fracking is not good for ground water or our oil industry.

The Supreme Court is a long term problem but as long as the liberal justices live 2 more years it can be mitigated.

His immigration deportation side is just what Obama does now.

His "extreme vetting" is about the least extreme version of his anti Muslim plan.

What he can get through congress is up for debate but as far as republican agendas go it's not as bad as it could be.

These policies should also force the democrats to rethink their approach at the state level. For to long they focused at the top of the ticket while the republicans controlled the states. This decentralization and increased states rights means that all fights for equality will have to occur at state supreme courts and state governments.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I have no doubt we'd be seeing worse if Trump had lost. This is why it might better for everyone in the long run. The white angst can now subside and the baby can have its bottle.

If there's anything positive that came out of this election it's the evidence of the terrible folly of identity politics. It was entirely predictable (and many have been warning about it for years) that when you legitimize an ideology that sees all politics as a struggle between groups of people based on race and gender, that you will eventually provoke a backlash from others rallying under the banners of race and gender. Hopefully the people who have encouraged this folly will change tack and return to the classical liberal individualism that was responsible for all of the genuine progress we made in the last century.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

His plan for the first 100 days. Scroll down for the list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451...first-100-days

Well, at least you can't say he is coming in without a plan. But wow. See how much he can actually do. I'm not sure government works the way he thinks it works.

It would be impressive if he accomplished all that in 8 years.

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Oh, I'm sure they would have taken to the streets. I'm just speculating about the wildly different reaction it would have provoked among the media and chattering classes.

I think a major difference between the two protest/riot scenarios is that Democratic supporters are protesting in major cities as a group whereas the Trumpians would have been on Mainstreet, USA somewhere scattered about in groups of a dozen.

It just looks different, and is different given the relative urban/rural locations.

[killer_carlson]

Another wrinkle is that you have the most heavily armed domestic population on the planet.

If one of these protests escalates between Dem and Rep then it could turn tragic for both sides.