PGT: President-Elect Donald J Trump

[Fuzz]

Well Trump was saying it was rigged before the election. Maybe he was on to something...

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Delgar

Not to defend Trump, but I propose this:

Proposition One: The only CP posters who are posting negatively about Trump about his apparent changes in direction since being elected, were also against him during the campaign.

Proposition Two: Not even one poster who was for him has posted against his change in tone other than to acknowledge it.

Expected Result: The Clinton supporters are mad. Not the Trump supporters.

I think it's important to differentiate between people who voted for Trump and his true core. I don't think Trump had tons of "support" outside his core, he scored 34% approval in exit polls. Lots of people voted for him knowing he's a grifter and awful person. His true core is about 20-25% of voters.

But mostly I don't see many Hillary supporters who are mad about any flip flops. If anything they find it hilarious Trump supporters are watching promises change before inauguration day, plus the usual collection of "We told you so". Usually a POTUS-elect waits until the -elect comes off before he starts changing tunes. But not going after Hillary is one of the three cores of Trump supporters (Wall and Muslims being the others), and while some believe it's part of a more grandiose plan to get her, most are actually pretty bummed and have even whispered a little bit of "looking like maybe not much will change".

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by GGG

Or is it a sign he was intentionally lying all of the time and never sincerely held these positions in the first place and said them because they were popular. It's still concerning, but in general a buffoon or defers to experts is better than a buffoon who charges ahead with what is popular with his base.

I think the media should celebrate when Trump returns to reasonable positions and not ridicule him for breaking his promises.

The media should be above both celebration and ridicule. Unfortunately the fact they're unable to do so is at least part of the reason the US find themselves in the state it's in.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Delgar

Not to defend Trump, but I propose this:

Proposition One: The only CP posters who are posting negatively about Trump about his apparent changes in direction since being elected, were also against him during the campaign.

Proposition Two: Not even one poster who was for him has posted against his change in tone other than to acknowledge it.

Expected Result: The Clinton supporters are mad. Not the Trump supporters.

I don't think it's "mad". Nobody with any sense can be unhappy that he abandoned the stupid wall, and completely changed his tune on torture, as a couple examples.

There is probably a bit of "I told you so..." going on though. His supporters have been swindled, and we all knew he was a swindler.

[nik-]

Told who so though?

Pretty much everyone here wanted him to lose and thought he was full of ####.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by nik-

Told who so though?

Pretty much everyone here wanted him to lose and thought he was full of ####.

More of a general thing, not really a CP-focused comment. I guess. Very few of us here even had a vote, and even fewer of those who did were supporters, so "I told you so" doesn't really fly. Fair enough.

It's in my head though, and that's something!

[photon]

Lol the conflict of interest scenarios just get more and more convoluted. It's Slate but the description of the scenario isn't partisan. This is regarding workers at Trump's Vegas Hotel that voted to join a union.

In the lead-up to the vote, the hotel company spent more than $500,000 on a union-busting consulting firm. After losing the vote, Trump’s company filed 15 complaints about the election, all of which were withdrawn or dismissed by the National Labor Relations Board. Three weeks ago, the NLRB ruled the hotel must recognize the union and that in refusing to do so it had been in violation of federal law. Trump and Ruffin have appealed that ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

The union now finds itself in an unusual position twice over. First, this is the most confrontational stance that Local 226, which has 57,000 members in Nevada, has encountered from a major hotel. Second, its opponent—in court, and across the bargaining table—is the president-elect of the United States.

At a basic level, this will create a conflict of interest between the interests of Donald Trump the president and Donald Trump the businessman.

...

Trump will soon have the power to fill the two vacanct spots on the five-person NLRB, shifting the board’s composition to a Republican majority. He will later have the opportunity to appoint the board’s general counsel, who decides what cases come before the board. Those officials would then be in the position to rule on future disputes between the union and management at his hotel.

“The question for us is: Will Trump as president use the power he has to interfere given he has a financial interest in the outcome?” says Bethany Khan, a spokesperson for the Culinary Workers Union in Las Vegas.
The NLRB is an independent federal agency with no enforcement power. Its ruling that Trump and Ruffin must begin to bargain with the union will be enforced or overturned by the D.C. Court of Appeals. Incidentally, the chief judge on that court is Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court. As a candidate, Trump had encouraged Republican senators not to hold hearings on Garland’s confirmation. Now, Garland will rule on Trump’s hotel while Trump will fill what might have been Garland's place on the Supreme Court.

Trump will also (in time) appoint judges to the D.C. Circuit, which rules on cases brought against federal agencies like the NLRB, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Finally, Trump (the hotel tycoon) could choose to appeal the D.C. Circuit's judgment to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court would probably not agree to hear the case. But if it did, the NLRB would be represented by the Justice Department, whose head would be appointed by Donald Trump (the president of the United States). Trump v. Trump.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...onization.html

[Fuzz]

I just can't see how he makes it 4 years without these conflicts of interest become massive issues. No way his ego won't have him trying to enrich himself in these situations.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't think it's "mad". Nobody with any sense can be unhappy that he abandoned the stupid wall, and completely changed his tune on torture, as a couple examples.

There is probably a bit of "I told you so..." going on though. His supporters have been swindled, and we all knew he was a swindler.

he finally abandoned the wall? last i heard they were still intent on building it, with "fences at some parts"

[Senator Clay Davis]

The wall still seems like it's too much of a waste of money to happen, since we know Mexico isn't paying for it. There's been a little wavering, but whether it happens or not remains one of the many mysteries of what exactly Trump will do.

[2Stonedbirds]

Serious question: When did the term "alt-right" come into existence? I try to gather my news and info from many sources and I had NOT ONCE heard this term until Clinton mentioned it in a speech of hers. Now it's everywhere.

Where/when was the term "alt-right" conceived?

[Lanny_McDonald]

The Alt-right

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-h...ernative-right

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Rigged?



http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...n-results.html

Honest question, how reliable is this source? Because that's a fairly inflammatory allegation.

[missdpuck]

Lol just visited saltydroid.info. Haven't checked it out in a couple of years. Jason has really lost it over this election bleep;bloop


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Honest question, how reliable is this source? Because that's a fairly inflammatory allegation.

The same stuff is being reported in a bunch of places. The issue is whether or not the difference is easily explained by which areas use which type of ballot. If the cities in those states tend to do paper ballots and the rural counties tend to use electronic machines (at least to a degree that could create that difference) then it makes perfect sense. If not, then there might be something to look into.

From what I've read though, once you account for race and education levels in the various precincts, the results make sense if you assume that they follow the same patterns as in other areas.

[photon]

One of the guys Alex Halderman is well respected, but he is a comp sci prof and I don't know his statistics chops. He might have a lot more than what's just being reported, but both Nate Silver and Nate Cohn don't think there's anything there.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/meet...-the-election/

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn

[corporatejay]

Near tears? Grow up.


http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nati...low%3Afacebook

[DuffMan]

There's 2 girls on CNN, right now comparing Trump to Silvio Berlusconi and they are making a lot of sense.
One thing they mentioned was he lobbed out those Hamilton tweets for people to get in a frenzy about, and he left out the back door to go make some deals in Argentina, quietly.
Anyways, the parallels are very interesting, businessmen, rich,,etc.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Near tears? Grow up.


http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nati...low%3Afacebook

Yeah, that is brutal, and seems really disingenuous. There's no way she's truly that upset.

She is (sort of) doing the news, not Sesame Street. It's a word people say, unfortunately. I can understand that kind of reaction and cutting him off if it was said with racist intentions, but it wasn't. The opposite, in fact.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, that is brutal, and seems really disingenuous. There's no way she's truly that upset.

She is (sort of) doing the news, not Sesame Street. It's a word people say, unfortunately. I can understand that kind of reaction and cutting him off if it was said with racist intentions, but it wasn't. The opposite, in fact.

What happens when she listens to a hip hop song? Does she break down in tears?