And in 8 years Pres. Obama did a lot, considering the massive hole we started in and that the Republicans did everything they could to bring everything to a screeching halt. Unfortunately a lot of people are easily fooled apparently. I hate to say this, but just wait for a year and there will be Republicans running ads for the 2018 election blaming the Democrats and there will be stupid people on TV nodding their heads in agreement knowing that people even more stupid will be repeating it the next day. Shameful.
So he promised job growth, but is now delivering, from his Finance minister, "the status quo," with no plan on changing it.
Sure, he is still in his honeymoon period with the rest of the world, but it is about to end especially if he keeps adding to the national debt by $30 billion per year and hoping it will balance itself out.
(if Trump doesn't start a nuclear war before then with Putin).
At least we'll finally get to LARP Fallout. "Grab pop-corn and get ready for lulz" has been a common saying in Russia for a while now, so welcome to the club
I'm hoping Trump will try to implement some campaign finance reforms. He's not a very detail-oriented guy and probably doesn't know what would actually help root out corruption, but as an anti-establishment candidate he'd probably at least be okay with it, if the idea reached him at some point. But the GOP is not likely to suggest it. That's not one of their priorities.
I am trying not to fall into pessimism. Hopefully some good will come of this. But the GOP controlled all branches of government for the first two years of the George W. Bush administration, and that went very poorly. Unless there's some radical change along the way, we will see a repeat of that.
I should also add, this is another reason why polling a week before an election shouldn't happen.
71% chance of Clinton winning was the last number I saw (the day of the election). That number suggests Clinton has it in the bag, so if you were going to vote for her, you really don't have to, because everyone else is going to do it for you. Might as well stay home and make dinner instead of getting take-out on your way home from the polls.
It also motivated Trump voters, who had a over-my-dead-body attitude towards Clinton, to come out in force to make sure the 29% became reality.
Also, the "none-of-above" option did Clinton in. Taking Florida, just adding Johnson's (the Libertarian candidates) numbers to Clinton's, would have allowed her to take the state. Same for Wisconsin. That alone is 39 electoral vote swing leaving it up to Michigan and Minnesota (who once again, has third party Candidates stealing votes) to finalize the election.
71% chance of Clinton winning was the last number I saw (the day of the election). That number suggests Clinton has it in the bag, so if you were going to vote for her, you really don't have to, because everyone else is going to do it for you. Might as well stay home and make dinner instead of getting take-out on your way home from the polls.
It also motivated Trump voters, who had a over-my-dead-body attitude towards Clinton, to come out in force to make sure the 29% became reality.
Over here, that commonly also has the same affect on the opposition as well, so I'm not sure that example works. As comparison, if Clinton had 71% then there's no point trying to vote against her. "My vote isn't going to matter, she'll win anyway."
Also, the "none-of-above" option did Clinton in. Taking Florida, just adding Johnson's (the Libertarian candidates) numbers to Clinton's, would have allowed her to take the state. Same for Wisconsin. That alone is 39 electoral vote swing leaving it up to Michigan and Minnesota (who once again, has third party Candidates stealing votes) to finalize the election.
I'm not sure that was a factor. Usually, the Libertarian candidate draws votes from the Republican, while the Green draws from the Democrat. It's likely that without Johnson, FL and WI would have gone for Trump by a higher margin.
71% chance of Clinton winning was the last number I saw (the day of the election). That number suggests Clinton has it in the bag, so if you were going to vote for her, you really don't have to, because everyone else is going to do it for you. Might as well stay home and make dinner instead of getting take-out on your way home from the polls.
It also motivated Trump voters, who had a over-my-dead-body attitude towards Clinton, to come out in force to make sure the 29% became reality.
Over here, that commonly also has the same affect on the opposition as well, so I'm not sure that example works. As comparison, if Clinton had 71% then there's no point trying to vote against her. "My vote isn't going to matter, she'll win anyway."
True, except it is known that Trump has a die-hard following of supporters, that many candidates don't have the luxury of. (Sanders, if elected would have) Apathy towards the outcome of an election (we lose either way, so why bother, even though I prefer Clinton over Trump) kept people that were polled home. Trump supporters aren't apathetic and were willing to go down swinging.
Clinton (like Gore) has a higher popular vote as well, she just doesn't have it in the right places.
I am uncertain why people are projecting only doom-and-gloom from a Trump Presidency. None of the "omg the world is going to end" scenarios happened when Obama won in 2008 then 2012 so none of the "the world is going to end" scenarios are going to happen now. There isn't going to be a wall, there won't be mass roundups and deportations, and sexism/racism aren't going to skyrocket.
He wasn't my candidate and I didn't vote for him. Trump broke the Republican Party; it is going to be funny to watch the anyone-but-Trump folks come begging to his door. The Democrats should not have been so over-the-top for Clinton, especially to the point where they threw Sanders under the bus by micromanaging the DNC debates to shut him out. Had she really wanted to win she would have picked him for the VP spot.
The resident of the White House has very little impact on people's daily lives. Local elections have significantly more impact.
Ah and the media outfall. End of the world. Downfall of America. Doomsday.
Just like after the Brexit.
Yeah, people here in Denmark have been moaning about WWIII for hours now since the news hit about Trump.
Pardon me, but we were promised a 3rd World War after Brexit. Trump was supposed to be the 4th World War and if Le Pen was elected in France in their election, that was supposed to be the 5th.
You had ONE job, all you doomsayers! ONE JOB! And you blew it! Where is the goddamn World War I was promised after Brexit???
Wonder how much the vapor of the FBI announcement that played for six days prior to the election informed people's opinions. Many people are saying they listened to trumps "I don't know somethings there" conspiracy bs.
America isn't supposed to give in to terrorists but maybe individuals took a look at GOP threats to continue to investigate, stall and block the government, exactly as they did with Obama, and took the easy route and gave in. Or maybe they wanted change so bad they didn't think things can change worse.
Proud that my state voted Hillary and she won the overall popular vote so there's that. How much damage can DT do in 4 years with a GOP house and Senate and Supreme Court? I guess we're about to see.
I'm sad, appalled and disappointed. I feel bad for my eight year old daughter who was excited about getting our first female president. Instead we got the guy who grabs em by the pushy.
I feel bad for my eight year old daughter who was excited about getting our first female president.
I wouldn't feel too badly for her--given that she is only 8 there will be a female President in her lifetime, probably more than one. In fact, it is probably a good thing that it didn't happen now because she won't be able to appreciate it as much as she will when she is 12, or 16, or 20. In fact, she may even *be* the first one--who knows?
In fact, she may even *be* the first one--who knows?
That's what I tried to tell her, that she might be the first one, but she could tell I was lying. She's just a caring sensitive normal kid, she's not looking like a future politican. She doesn't crave the the limelight.
She was upset as it looked like the first female president was going to lose to that terrible man. I told her to keep doing her best and let me worry about grown up stuff. She will have her day to worry about adult things someday. That was the best I could do.
Then after she went to bed I registered on Australias immigration site and poured myself a glass of whiskey. Can anybody there help me out?
Dead serious by the way. Australia, New Zealand, even UK has to be better than this. If you can find info on or know an immigration attorney in one of these countries message me. I'll seriously look in to it.
But the effects on the Supreme Court last decades. That is my one big concern. Appointing judges to the Supreme Court influences it for decades not just 4 years.
The breakdown of the Senate gives the Republicans only a very slim majority; any nominee presented must have Democrat support in order to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. That being said, moving forward into the near future the Court is not going to restrict gun rights or abortion rights so the two primary issues are as secure as they are right now.
Anyone who is thinking that the FBI and DoJ are going to keep going after Hillary over her e-mail server...well, those people need to quit that nonsense right now. She lost the election so her political career is most likely over. Going after her now will only cause the pendulum to swing back the other way at some point in the future and our pendulum is swinging a little too wildly these days--no revenge-seeking and no witch hunts, thank you very much.
So he promised job growth, but is now delivering, from his Finance minister, "the status quo," with no plan on changing it.
Sure, he is still in his honeymoon period with the rest of the world, but it is about to end especially if he keeps adding to the national debt by $30 billion per year and hoping it will balance itself out.
He's still in his honeymoon period in Canada, too. If an election was held today the NDP would disintegrate, the Conservatives would lose seats, and the Liberals would have a bigger majority than they won a year ago.
Them's simply facts. And seeing as how he won the election by saying he was willing to run up the national debt to fix Canada's infrastructure, his adding to it was sort of expected.
I am uncertain why people are projecting only doom-and-gloom from a Trump Presidency. None of the "omg the world is going to end" scenarios happened when Obama won in 2008 then 2012 so none of the "the world is going to end" scenarios are going to happen now. There isn't going to be a wall, there won't be mass roundups and deportations, and sexism/racism aren't going to skyrocket.
It depends on your definition of skyrocket. I expect Trump's Justice Department to gut the civil rights division. I doubt we'll see any action from them on voter suppression or police shootings and we may not even see federal action on things like church burnings. The alt-right and the white nationalists went strong for Trump and they're going to want something in return, and decreased scrutiny is (imho) the most likely form of that return.
I do hope there isn't a wall or mass roundups, because that makes it far less likely that he'll be reelected in 2020.
Ah and the media outfall. End of the world. Downfall of America. Doomsday.
Just like after the Brexit.
And that's what makes me so smug. The media might as well have done Hillary's campaigning for her while desperately throwing anything and everything they could at Trump, and nothing stuck. Its a gigantic "screw you" to the media and I will happily drown in their salty, corrupt tears.
It's worth noting that Hillary is still projected to win the popular vote. If you want to "blame" anything for her loss, it's the electoral college.
This is why the electoral college is a good thing. So that big cities with high populations, usually liberal (see: San Fran, Chicago, NYC), don't have so much sway that they can dictate the way of life for the rest of us that live in the suburbs or rural areas.
The breakdown of the Senate gives the Republicans only a very slim majority; any nominee presented must have Democrat support in order to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. That being said, moving forward into the near future the Court is not going to restrict gun rights or abortion rights so the two primary issues are as secure as they are right now.
So how does the appointment of a judge for the Supreme Court work?
Is the majority of the Senate not sufficient? Yes the Republicans only hold a very slim majority there, but it's a majority still. Can the Democrats still block a judge from being appointed even if all Republicans vote for him?
Also I wasn't talking about "near future". That's exactly what I meant with "decades". Gun or abortion rights may very well be an issue in the coming decades.
The Senate has a procedure called a "filibuster". This is when a senator uses his time to talk to block a vote. It used to be that they actually had to talk continuously for the whole time (see the movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington), but now they just have to declare their intent to filibuster. Ending a filibuster needs 60 votes, so if the Democrats filibuster the vote on a nominee, the Republicans would need 9 Dems to vote their way.
When Anthony Scalia died, the Pubs refused to even hold a vote on Obama's nominee. During the campaign, Mitch McConnell stated that the Senate wouldn't approve any of Clinton's nominees, so there's a lot of bad blood over this issue. The Dems will almost certainly use the filibuster to try to force Trump to nominate judges who aren't hard-right ideologues.
Comments
@deltago
I'm not reading activly about politics in Canada, but I haven't read anything negative about Trudeau, in contrary.
https://www.google.de/search?q=Justin+Trudeau&num=100&rlz=1C1CHBF_deDE714DE714&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjs6Kn53pvQAhXMkSwKHRilCvYQ_AUICSgC&biw=1600&bih=780
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/
Let's check politfact on Trump in 4 years.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/get-used-to-the-job-churn-of-short-term-employment-and-career-changes-bill-morneau-says
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-trudeau-protests-youth-students-1.3822504
One of Trudeau's biggest and most influential ads during the campaign:
So he promised job growth, but is now delivering, from his Finance minister, "the status quo," with no plan on changing it.
Sure, he is still in his honeymoon period with the rest of the world, but it is about to end especially if he keeps adding to the national debt by $30 billion per year and hoping it will balance itself out.
"Grab pop-corn and get ready for lulz" has been a common saying in Russia for a while now, so welcome to the club
We have Good Guy Obama and Good Gal Clinton with 75 % or more half true or better.
Contrast with Donnie who has 30 % half true or better with 70 % mostly false or worse. Looks like maybe they weren't equally dishonest.
I am trying not to fall into pessimism. Hopefully some good will come of this. But the GOP controlled all branches of government for the first two years of the George W. Bush administration, and that went very poorly. Unless there's some radical change along the way, we will see a repeat of that.
71% chance of Clinton winning was the last number I saw (the day of the election). That number suggests Clinton has it in the bag, so if you were going to vote for her, you really don't have to, because everyone else is going to do it for you. Might as well stay home and make dinner instead of getting take-out on your way home from the polls.
It also motivated Trump voters, who had a over-my-dead-body attitude towards Clinton, to come out in force to make sure the 29% became reality.
Also, the "none-of-above" option did Clinton in. Taking Florida, just adding Johnson's (the Libertarian candidates) numbers to Clinton's, would have allowed her to take the state. Same for Wisconsin. That alone is 39 electoral vote swing leaving it up to Michigan and Minnesota (who once again, has third party Candidates stealing votes) to finalize the election.
Rally.
Rally.
Clinton (like Gore) has a higher popular vote as well, she just doesn't have it in the right places.
He wasn't my candidate and I didn't vote for him. Trump broke the Republican Party; it is going to be funny to watch the anyone-but-Trump folks come begging to his door. The Democrats should not have been so over-the-top for Clinton, especially to the point where they threw Sanders under the bus by micromanaging the DNC debates to shut him out. Had she really wanted to win she would have picked him for the VP spot.
The resident of the White House has very little impact on people's daily lives. Local elections have significantly more impact.
Pardon me, but we were promised a 3rd World War after Brexit. Trump was supposed to be the 4th World War and if Le Pen was elected in France in their election, that was supposed to be the 5th.
You had ONE job, all you doomsayers! ONE JOB! And you blew it! Where is the goddamn World War I was promised after Brexit???
America isn't supposed to give in to terrorists but maybe individuals took a look at GOP threats to continue to investigate, stall and block the government, exactly as they did with Obama, and took the easy route and gave in. Or maybe they wanted change so bad they didn't think things can change worse.
Proud that my state voted Hillary and she won the overall popular vote so there's that. How much damage can DT do in 4 years with a GOP house and Senate and Supreme Court? I guess we're about to see.
I'm sad, appalled and disappointed. I feel bad for my eight year old daughter who was excited about getting our first female president. Instead we got the guy who grabs em by the pushy.
She was upset as it looked like the first female president was going to lose to that terrible man. I told her to keep doing her best and let me worry about grown up stuff. She will have her day to worry about adult things someday. That was the best I could do.
Then after she went to bed I registered on Australias immigration site and poured myself a glass of whiskey. Can anybody there help me out?
Anyone who is thinking that the FBI and DoJ are going to keep going after Hillary over her e-mail server...well, those people need to quit that nonsense right now. She lost the election so her political career is most likely over. Going after her now will only cause the pendulum to swing back the other way at some point in the future and our pendulum is swinging a little too wildly these days--no revenge-seeking and no witch hunts, thank you very much.
Them's simply facts. And seeing as how he won the election by saying he was willing to run up the national debt to fix Canada's infrastructure, his adding to it was sort of expected.
I do hope there isn't a wall or mass roundups, because that makes it far less likely that he'll be reelected in 2020.
When Anthony Scalia died, the Pubs refused to even hold a vote on Obama's nominee. During the campaign, Mitch McConnell stated that the Senate wouldn't approve any of Clinton's nominees, so there's a lot of bad blood over this issue. The Dems will almost certainly use the filibuster to try to force Trump to nominate judges who aren't hard-right ideologues.