45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.
Discussion
Stickyfinger said:
It is a mind set of the people.
They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Less than half of the population in America and just under half of the population here didn't vote for such a change at all. They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Those that did probably contain a few people who will be happy to pay more. Even if it's half of those who voted for Trump and Brexit, that's 3 quarters of each country who won't be happy paying a penny more for the same goods.
Hell even if the whole half of each country who voted for Trump or Brexit are happy for costs for things to increase, that's a whole half that won't be and that's absolute best case scenario.
Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th January 18:28
p1stonhead said:
Stickyfinger said:
It is a mind set of the people.
They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Less than half of the population in America and just under half of the population here didn't vote for such a change at all. They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
Efbe said:
so what is actually made and sold in the US these days?
We had the example of the t-shirt company that went bust.
What else is there that we can use as a model for this?
The US company I work for in IT Security makes everything in the US, not like pretty much everyone else in my industry who tend to use China.We had the example of the t-shirt company that went bust.
What else is there that we can use as a model for this?
turbobloke said:
p1stonhead said:
Stickyfinger said:
It is a mind set of the people.
They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Less than half of the population in America and just under half of the population here didn't vote for such a change at all. They voted for that mind set in their new President in the USA and we have done the same in the UK with our Brexit vote, it is a generational thing. Lets hope it works.
Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
Stop trying to push the idea that he won't be fought tooth and nail every second he is in office by people who didn't vote for him - especially if he increases prices by trying to do what amounts to a magic trick. Whatever way the elections work over there, you do know that a MAJORITY of actual people in America didn't vote for him and hate everything he stands for?
They won't ' get behind him'. There was no popular shift in how the country thinks - the electoral college gave him his position. You can argue until you are blue in the face that 'that's the way the election works' and that's fine because it's true, but to suggest that the common man will get behind his policies is laughable.
Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th January 18:52
turbobloke said:
It's only ever those that vote who make a difference.
Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
I'm not so sure about the US. If the Democrats can find someone without as much baggage as Hillary (who still won 'the popular vote'), then they're probably going to be in a much better position next time around. I wonder if Obama had (and was able to) run if things would have been closer / different. Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
It's in Trump's hands to make good on his promises and make it so American can't imagine anyone else running the country in 4 years' time. I think it's fair to say he's set expectations high.
La Liga said:
turbobloke said:
It's only ever those that vote who make a difference.
Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
I'm not so sure about the US. If the Democrats can find someone without as much baggage as Hillary (who still won 'the popular vote'), then they're probably going to be in a much better position next time around.Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
The critical factor for me is that Trump and the Republicans won't be starting from the same place next time. When people get a taste of life out from under the failings of a left-illiberal cosh, they may well decide to stay out and vote accordingly.
La Liga said:
'm not so sure about the US. If the Democrats can find someone without as much baggage as Hillary (who still won 'the popular vote'), then they're probably going to be in a much better position next time around. I wonder if Obama had (and was able to) run if things would have been closer / different.
Imagine someone who people liked, the Dems would have smashed it.Halb said:
La Liga said:
'm not so sure about the US. If the Democrats can find someone without as much baggage as Hillary (who still won 'the popular vote'), then they're probably going to be in a much better position next time around. I wonder if Obama had (and was able to) run if things would have been closer / different.
Imagine someone who people liked, the Dems would have smashed it.Stickyfinger said:
And now we see the assumptions and denials of democracy coming out of the woodwork, me thinks you would be defending the same position if Hillary had won and Trump called the same objection.
What a laugh your morals are.
Democracy can take many forms - the electoral college exists IIRC because the founding people were afraid of 'direct democracy' so invented a way to get around it. What a laugh your morals are.
Have a read;
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-th...
Some would argue getting more votes counts - one person, one vote and all that. If it did, Hillary would be president.
Others don't agree, some fairly sensible reasons for the electoral college here;
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/12/...
Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 18th January 19:36
turbobloke said:
Not possible to say, not least as sufficient people liked Trump even with virtually the entire media out for his head on a plate, including one scandal after another. Billary was unbeatable and yet she was well beaten - POTUS isn't elected on the popular vote, btw. As per my previous post, Trump will be starting from a different position next time which means a different ball game, if he decides to stand.
Immediate post election, the dem vote had slumped by millions, now though (as I check) some time after, it's a few 100,000, but still down on Obama, who himself had lost 5 million votes since his first win, considering how disliked CLinton was in many places, in hindsight, yes it's fairly reasonable to say a Dem candidate who wasn't as disliked and croooked as Hilary would have had a much better chance of winning.5ohmustang said:
The crooks are leaving the building.
Take a look at the people behind one of the biggest administration failures in history.
They are leaving but Trump seems to have problems filling top posts in the cabinetTake a look at the people behind one of the biggest administration failures in history.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-senate...
Further down the ranks there are even more gaps....
Gandahar said:
They are leaving but Trump seems to have problems filling top posts in the cabinet
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-senate...
Further down the ranks there are even more gaps....
once elected can't Trump just impose his selections.http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-senate...
Further down the ranks there are even more gaps....
If we step back a bit from politics in Washington at the current and future time, and go back months to what the voters wanted then we see that the main US voters wanted to get the american dream, and associated wealth, back on track for the majority. That seems a sensible plan.
So we have a candidate who offers the goldmine. And we have a candidate, who opponents say offers snake oil. Come back to the present day. We still have that same deal for the US people. Forget foreign matters etc, it is goldmine or snakeoil. That's what matters for the next 4 years.
No matter the amount of whinging in Europe etc etc, as long as Donald makes people feel richer in the USA who have voted him in, and others who have not, the great unwashed in effect, then he will be fine. If he doesn't - then he will be hung out to dry.
Of course his spin on things might upset how well he is doing. He's the biggest SpinMeister ever. Or am I just giving you fake news
So can Donald deliver?
Who knows, but I see one really big problem. He's not ingrained with the GOP or the politics in Washington. This is the same problem Obama had ironically, but here Trump has a Congress and Senate completely conservative and even before the election they don't seem to be able to work it. It should be wham bam, thank you mam and grabbing those Democrats by the pussy.....
Instead the biggest threat to the GOP once again getting into power is not the Democrats but their leader. Who is now more and more seemingly to be a business independent. Perhaps he needs his own party.There is a time issue also. Mr Trump keeps setting tight deadlines.
In summary, he's not draining the swamp, he is running about with a twitter account in one hand and an AK47, supplied by Mr Putin in another.
The funny thing is the hated media are the ones who are now rolling in pigshiit over this and loving it.
Popcorn anyone? Roll on.
So we have a candidate who offers the goldmine. And we have a candidate, who opponents say offers snake oil. Come back to the present day. We still have that same deal for the US people. Forget foreign matters etc, it is goldmine or snakeoil. That's what matters for the next 4 years.
No matter the amount of whinging in Europe etc etc, as long as Donald makes people feel richer in the USA who have voted him in, and others who have not, the great unwashed in effect, then he will be fine. If he doesn't - then he will be hung out to dry.
Of course his spin on things might upset how well he is doing. He's the biggest SpinMeister ever. Or am I just giving you fake news
So can Donald deliver?
Who knows, but I see one really big problem. He's not ingrained with the GOP or the politics in Washington. This is the same problem Obama had ironically, but here Trump has a Congress and Senate completely conservative and even before the election they don't seem to be able to work it. It should be wham bam, thank you mam and grabbing those Democrats by the pussy.....
Instead the biggest threat to the GOP once again getting into power is not the Democrats but their leader. Who is now more and more seemingly to be a business independent. Perhaps he needs his own party.There is a time issue also. Mr Trump keeps setting tight deadlines.
In summary, he's not draining the swamp, he is running about with a twitter account in one hand and an AK47, supplied by Mr Putin in another.
The funny thing is the hated media are the ones who are now rolling in pigshiit over this and loving it.
Popcorn anyone? Roll on.
johnxjsc1985 said:
Gandahar said:
They are leaving but Trump seems to have problems filling top posts in the cabinet
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-senate...
Further down the ranks there are even more gaps....
once elected can't Trump just impose his selections.http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-senate...
Further down the ranks there are even more gaps....
I've been reading politico the past few months, doesn't seem too biased, which probably means they report to my bias ...
, however, quite a lot of words which are not hysterical, no bad thing. I liked this piecehttp://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-slow-t...
"Noah Bryson Mamet, who was seeking a post in Argentina, and hotel magnate George Tsunis, who was nominated for an ambassadorship in Norway, both admitted during their hearings that they had never visited the countries where they sought to represent the U.S. Tsunis never made it through the hearing because of his lack of knowledge of the country. He thought Norway was a republic instead of a monarchy and had very little knowledge of the political situation in the country. Mamet was ultimately confirmed."
That's terrible! I always assumed the ambassador would at least speak the lingo?
What is going on over there?
turbobloke said:
La Liga said:
turbobloke said:
It's only ever those that vote who make a difference.
Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
I'm not so sure about the US. If the Democrats can find someone without as much baggage as Hillary (who still won 'the popular vote'), then they're probably going to be in a much better position next time around.Always was, always will be. The rest have no basis for complaint.
In which case, Stickyfinger's point remains - those that vote have signalled a change in direction. I reckon it's unlikely to reverse in the next 4 - 5 years on either side of the pond. Possibly longer.
The critical factor for me is that Trump and the Republicans won't be starting from the same place next time. When people get a taste of life out from under the failings of a left-illiberal cosh, they may well decide to stay out and vote accordingly.
I like the idea of someone mixing things up and being a bit more radical. As Obama highlighted, campaigning and governing are quite different and Trump is on the cusp of transitioning from promises to delivery. I also have a nagging feeling he has more dirt that may surface.
I hope he and Brexit both deliver. If they don't, future generations could be afraid to take a risk and send a message to the status quo as has been sent both sides of the pond.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff