Donald Trump Wins U.S. Presidential Election

[Captn Norrington]

Donald Trump has won the U.S. Presidential Election.

Hillary Clinton has called him and conceded the election.

It is officially over, Donald Trump is the 45th President of the United States.

 

[Kirthag]

Google

 

[Kirthag]

Looks like the GOP won this year. However, it is a splintered GOP - they are not a unified party.

Will they be able to work together and lead??

I think that is the real question, regardless of opinion on the (apparent) president-elect.

 

[SugarMMM]

Well now that it has been announced and i'm all caught up on the forums I guess it's nap time!
Well that is if I can sleep with all of the fireworks going off! Ugh!

 

[Ox AO]

it is a splintered GOP
.

Splintered is an understatement.
GOP doesn't exist for most of us. There is only one party Demo-plican.
I see them as a Monarchy

This is a greater change to the US then most people realize. There is only establishment and the people.
**** at this point I'm willing to vote for a socialist like Sanders over the establishment if that is what it takes.
He clearly wasn't part of the establishment.

 

[Fridgster]

Splintered is an understatement.
GOP doesn't exist for most of us. There is only one party Demo-plican.
I see them as a Monarchy

This is a greater change to the US then most people realize. There is only establishment and the people.
**** at this point I'm willing to vote for a socialist like Sanders over the establishment if that is what it takes.
He clearly wasn't part of the establishment.

Funny thing is I truly believe that the democratic party had the winning candidate in Sanders. Of course we know how the Clinton machine destroyed that thanks to wikileaks.

Trump was the only viable choice. Warts and all.

 

[Tyrath]

Trump is very far removed from a republican, in reality we have our first almost libertarian president.

 

[Merlin]

Donald Trump won the White House. Republicans retained the House of Representatives and Senate.

In 2008, when the Democrats won the Presidency and both houses of Congress, Obama was asked what his intentions were for working with Republicans and he replied that "elections have consequences" and that "they can come for the ride but they have to sit in the back".

I did not volunteer for the Trump campaign for him to suddenly become a moderate and try to work with the Democrats. Even when the Republicans started to win back some power during the Obama years, Dingy Harry Reid wouldn't even allow a vote on a budget to come to the Senate floor.

The Republicans have some soul searching to do in terms of whether or not we will allow Paul Ryan to remain in a leadership position as the Speaker of the House, but we certainly don't need to have consent from the Democrats to move our agenda forward and undo large swaths of the Obama legacy.

 

[Flagg]

In US election system it is anecdotal more than anything else, but as it stands it seems Clinton won the popular vote at least,250k lead.

I guess you know what must be done though? Since:

Full article, originally found&linked by @Garen
That time Donald Trump had a total meltdown on Twitter after Obama won reelection

Tweets here are pure gold.If you at any moment feel any kind of urge to wave a finger at them liberals for throwing " tantrums" in aftermath, of Trump's victory, consult the tweets by your next President first, lol

 

[Nexus]

Trump is very far removed from a republican, in reality we have our first almost libertarian president.

I wouldn't say libertarian... There have been social platforms that changed government similar to the platform Trump ran on, which is what I find most terrifying they all ended badly not just for the country they happened in but globally.

 

[Ox AO]

I wouldn't say libertarian... There have been social platforms that changed government similar to the platform Trump ran on, which is what I find most terrifying they all ended badly not just for the country they happened in but globally.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Why did Taylor give a thumbs up to a riddle me this statement?


Trumps social policy is to not give free or subsidized housing to people that claim residence in other countries.
Why would that even be an argument and why is that terrifying?

 

[Nexus]

I have no idea what you're talking about. Why did Taylor give a thumbs up to a riddle me this statement?


Trumps social policy is to not give free or subsidized housing to people that claim residence in other countries.
Why would that even be an argument and why is that terrifying?

Well.... This won't be short, there's no way to make it simple, I wrote what I did knowing those educated in Political Science, Political History, and Political Philosophy would understand and I hoped I wouldn't need to spell it out. But here goes...

Let's start in hmm.... 360 B.C.E. with Plato's The Republic specifically Book VIII but to help, I'll need to explain a bit more. See Plato wasn't really a fan of Democracy, he believed it was the second worst form of Government because in his observations it always degrades into Tyranny. Trump's political rise mirrors Plato's description of this process of degradation in numerous ways. To simplify the process it goes like this: In their love for freedom the largest multitude of people (Poor and Middle Class) rally behind a champion (Trump) who will help them against those they perceive as oligarchs (The 1%, Big Business, Big Government, Lobby groups, etc.) and this champion later uses the position he has obtained to exploit the people for this own ends.

Much of his campaign rhetoric was designed to inflame the passions of the most people against the establishment, and I'm not saying that the message was wrong just what he has described as his methodology to correcting the actual issues. What is problematic to me is people have been so focused on that message, but they seem to have overlooked much of everything else has said that re-enforces my worry.

The rhetoric used on the campaign trail reads as if it was inspired by or in some cases flat out taken from the NSDAP 25 point program, among these but not limited to are:

Using the ability to apply tariffs as a method of essentially regulating industry, or in other words unofficially nationalizing industry through taxation.
Removing or weakening protections for free speech and freedom of the press.
He's suggested creating special laws that target Muslim Americans, he's mentioned requiring them to register for a database, and potentially wearing special badges or carry ID identifying them by faith.
Pretty much all of his immigration reform.

 

[Garen]

Donald Trump won the White House. Republicans retained the House of Representatives and Senate.

In 2008, when the Democrats won the Presidency and both houses of Congress, Obama was asked what his intentions were for working with Republicans and he replied that "elections have consequences" and that "they can come for the ride but they have to sit in the back".

I did not volunteer for the Trump campaign for him to suddenly become a moderate and try to work with the Democrats. Even when the Republicans started to win back some power during the Obama years, Dingy Harry Reid wouldn't even allow a vote on a budget to come to the Senate floor.

The Republicans have some soul searching to do in terms of whether or not we will allow Paul Ryan to remain in a leadership position as the Speaker of the House, but we certainly don't need to have consent from the Democrats to move our agenda forward and undo large swaths of the Obama legacy.

Of course you're stripping out any context.

Finally, we get this car out of the ditch, and it’s banged up. It needs some body work, needs a tune-up. But it’s pointing in the right direction. The engine is turning and it’s ready to go. And we suddenly get this tap on our shoulders. We look back, who is it? The Republicans. And they're saying, “Excuse me, we want the keys back.” You can’t have the keys back. You don't know how to drive! (Applause.) You can’t have them back. Can’t do it. (Applause.) Not after we’ve worked this hard.

We can’t have special interests sitting shotgun. (Laughter.) You know, we got to have middle-class families up in front. (Applause.) We can’t -- we don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they got to sit in back. (Laughter.)

Remarks by the President at DCCC General Reception

It was about the economic recovery plan, not a complete dismissal of all bipartisanship.

 

[Kirthag]

Trump is very far removed from a republican, in reality we have our first almost libertarian president.

I'm a registered Libertarian - have been for several years.
Can I be offended by this statement without seeming like a whiny cry-baby needing pacification before I run amok and start protests?

 

[Ox AO]

I wouldn't say libertarian... There have been social platforms that changed government similar to the platform Trump ran on, which is what I find most terrifying they all ended badly not just for the country they happened in but globally.

You gave no indication in this statement of government transition into the next succession. Which leads me to this statement you made:
You said, "Well.... I wrote what I did knowing those educated in Political Science, Political History, and Political Philosophy would understand and I hoped I wouldn't need to spell it out."

Contempt
How long have you felt this way about others?


We very well maybe moving through a transition of government types.
Trump didn't create it. Corruption did that seems obvious to me.

You never even read the 25 point program or the 30 point program on the state of religions by the NSDAP.
If you did you don't remember them because none of them has any correlation with today.
Prove me wrong. Pick one of the either program and show how it fits today. Just one.



You said, "He's suggested creating special laws that target Muslim Americans"

Why do you bring something up YOU know we can't talk about on this site?
Every point you made had no correlation what so ever even this one.

 

[Ox AO]

I'm a registered Libertarian - have been for several years.
Can I be offended by this statement without seeming like a whiny cry-baby needing pacification before I run amok and start protests?

I have been registered a libertarian for over a decade.
Trump is by far the closest this country has had to a libertarian since the founders.
I'm no say he is one though.
Many reasons most important reason. We have nothing if corruption is out of hand.

Connection is poor .. leaving

 

[Kirthag]

I will admit, he's "close" in some respects. I've always said would take a business man to fix our country - I just didn't think he'd be the one to actually get into office. Met him once, did not leave a very good impression.

I just wish ppl would stop freaking out and actually pay attention - but then that is what the president elect stirred up.

Only commentary I've read over all this that makes the most sense is from Mike Rowe of "Dirty Jobs" fame. I like what he said, and he's on point.
Here's what he wrote: (link to his Facebook post: Mike Rowe - Timeline | Facebook - I just copied it here for those who don't like FB)

Mike Rowe
11 hrs ·
Off The Wall

Hey Mike. You’ve been very quiet. Everything OK? I just wanted you to know that I voted for you. I was also hoping you might explain what the hell happened on Tuesday, and say something to make me feel better about my fellow man. Thanks,
Carol Savoy

Hi Carol

Last Friday, my dog posted a video that featured a man licking a cat with the aid of a device that’s designed for the specific purpose of making it easier for people to lick their cats.I’ve been silent ever since, because frankly, I couldn’t think of a better way – metaphorical or otherwise - to express my feelings about this election cycle. The entire country it seems, has been preoccupied with finding a way to lick a cat without actually putting their tongue on it.

Too oblique? Too weird? Ok, how about this analysis:

Back in 2003, a very unusual TV pilot called Dirty Jobs, Forrest-Gumped its way onto The Discovery Channel and found an audience – a big one. For Discovery, this was a problem. You see, Dirty Jobs didn’t look like anything else on their channel. It wasn’t pretty or careful. It took place in sewers and septic tanks, and featured a subversive host in close contact with his 8-year old inner child who refused to do second takes. Everyone agreed that Dirty Jobs was totally “off-brand” and completely inappropriate for Discovery. Everyone but the viewers. The ratings were just too big to ignore, so the pilot got a green-light, and yours truly finally got a steady gig.

But here's the thing - Dirty Jobs didn’t resonate because the host was incredibly charming. It wasn’t a hit because it was gross, or irreverent, or funny, or silly, or smart, or terribly clever. Dirty Jobs succeeded because it was authentic. It spoke directly and candidly to a big chunk of the country that non-fiction networks had been completely ignoring. In a very simple way, Dirty Jobs said “Hey - we can see you,” to millions of regular people who had started to feel invisible. Ultimately, that’s why Dirty Jobs ran for eight seasons. And today, that’s also why Donald Trump is the President of the United States.

I know people are freaked out, Carol. I get it. I’m worried too. But not because of who we elected. We've survived 44 Presidents, and we'll survive this one too. I’m worried because millions of people now seem to believe that Trump supporters are racist, xenophobic, and uneducated misogynists. I'm worried because despising our candidates publicly is very different than despising the people who vote for them.

Last week, three old friends – people I’ve known for years - each requested to be “unfriended” by anyone who planned on voting for Trump. Honestly, that was disheartening. Who tosses away a friendship over an election? Are my friends turning into those mind-numbingly arrogant celebrities who threaten to move to another country if their candidate doesn’t win? Are my friends now convinced that people they’ve known for years who happen to disagree with them politically are not merely mistaken – but evil, and no longer worthy of their friendship?

For what it’s worth, Carol, I don’t think Donald Trump won by tapping into America’s “racist underbelly,” and I don’t think Hillary lost because she’s a woman. I think a majority of people who voted in this election did so in spite of their many misgivings about the character of both candidates. That’s why it’s very dangerous to argue that Clinton supporters condone lying under oath and obstructing justice. Just as it’s equally dangerous to suggest a Trump supporter condones gross generalizations about foreigners and women.

These two candidates were the choices we gave ourselves, and each came with a heaping helping of vulgarity and impropriety. Yeah, it was dirty job for sure, but the winner was NOT decided by a racist and craven nation – it was decided by millions of disgusted Americans desperate for real change. The people did not want a politician. The people wanted to be seen. Donald Trump convinced those people that he could see them. Hillary Clinton did not.

As for me, I’m flattered by your support, but grateful that your vote was not enough to push me over the top. However, when the dust settles, and The White House gets a new tenant, I’ll make the same offer to President Trump that I did to President Obama – to assist as best I can in any attempt to reinvigorate the skilled trades, and shine a light on millions of good jobs that no one seems excited about pursuing. http://bit.ly/2fG1SxI

Like those 3 million “shovel ready” jobs we heard so much about eight years ago, the kind of recovery that Donald Trump is promising will require a workforce that’s properly trained and sufficiently enthused about the opportunities at hand. At the moment, we do not have that work force in place. What we do have, are tens of millions of capable people who have simply stopped looking for work, and millions of available jobs that no one aspires to do. That's the skills gap, and it's gotta close. If mikeroweWORKS can help, we're standing by.

If not, I suppose we'll just have to find another way to lick the cat.

Mike

 

[Tyrath]

Notice I said "Almost Libertarian" I have only been a part of the Libertarian Party since 1984

 

[Ox AO]

Sam Harris whom was very much against Trump. On why he thinks Trump won:
political correctness gone mad:

 

[Angel of Sonoma]

...
He's suggested creating special laws that target Muslim Americans, he's mentioned requiring them to register for a database, and potentially wearing special badges or carry ID identifying them by faith.
Pretty much all of his immigration reform.

The beginning of 666. I say this halfheartedly but that was the first thought that popped into my mind.

There are many sides to immigration reform. The government needs to stop allowing foreigners into the USA on work visas taking jobs that could be filled by qualified Americans. Half of the people I work with are from India. They are here on work visas because "they possess special skills" that are not available from US citizens. The special skill they possess is that they are willing to work for 40% lower pay. This needs to stop.

 

[Nexus]

Donald Trump won the White House. Republicans retained the House of Representatives and Senate.

In 2008, when the Democrats won the Presidency and both houses of Congress, Obama was asked what his intentions were for working with Republicans and he replied that "elections have consequences" and that "they can come for the ride but they have to sit in the back".

I did not volunteer for the Trump campaign for him to suddenly become a moderate and try to work with the Democrats. Even when the Republicans started to win back some power during the Obama years, Dingy Harry Reid wouldn't even allow a vote on a budget to come to the Senate floor.

The Republicans have some soul searching to do in terms of whether or not we will allow Paul Ryan to remain in a leadership position as the Speaker of the House, but we certainly don't need to have consent from the Democrats to move our agenda forward and undo large swaths of the Obama legacy.

I get the feeling you're going to wind up severely disappointed. The only way sweeping change is going to happen is if Trump manages to sway the GOP to a more Progressive Conservative stance, which would require picking up, accepting, and adopting some stances which have been in current history hallmarks of the Democratic platform resulting in a shift back towards a more moderate position. Democrats already have an internal splinter party similar to this, they are called "Blue Dog Democrats" and like with the GOP their numbers are small.

It goes back to Aristotelian virtue, the concept that Virtue is the mean between two extremes, or simply stated moderation in all things. It gives you the flexibility to view and embrace ideology from both sides of an argument to craft the best solution.

 

[Ox AO]

Nexus,
You're missing the most important point of why Trump won. This has nothing at all to do with partition politics.

I honestly believe the FBI is in full support of clearing out the corruption at the highest levels of government.
I have to believe that or we're a dying nation.

You did not read the wikileaks emails. The Media only said there are Emails not what was in them. You couldn't know what took place.

I have only talked online with two people that read many of the emails and still sided with Hillary.
They were both avidly in favor of war with Russia (they both left out china)
Both believed Russia and China would back down in Syria from our aggression. One of them wanted war with Russia actually thought it was a good idea.
Both of them felt the corruption that took place was acceptable for this event to take place.
Because it couldn't happen without it.

 

[Nexus]

Nexus,
You're missing the most important point of why Trump won. This has nothing at all to do with partition politics.

I honestly believe the FBI is in full support of clearing out the corruption at the highest levels of government.
I have to believe that or we're a dying nation.

You did not read the wikileaks emails. The Media only said there are Emails not what was in them. You couldn't know what took place.

I have only talked online with two people that read many of the emails and still sided with Hillary.
They were both avidly in favor of war with Russia (they both left out china)
Both believed Russia and China would back down in Syria from our aggression. One of them wanted war with Russia actually thought it was a good idea.

I believe the top level FBI officials are in the corruption up to their necks. Don't get me wrong, I agree we need to get the corruption out of government, the message is the right one. I just don't believe Trump is the person to do it, granted Hillary wasn't either but with her we would have most likely had 4 more years of nothing getting done in D.C. and a chance to try again.



It really does come down to partisan politics in the long run though. The election itself might not have, but once he's in office that will be a major issue, if he wants to effect any meaningful change he'll have to shift the GOP left, while shifting the Dems right. When he can't bully Congress what then? Does he resign? Does he do something stupid in a fit of anger and get impeached and removed leaving us with a rubber stamp for Far-Right ideology in Mike Pence? Several Republicans have already mentioned this as a possibility.

The core problem is the partisan politics, people need to stop thinking in terms of Conservative or Liberal ideology, both sides have their value and constructive merits. This is the spring for all the corruption in Government, having a firm ideology locks us into a pattern where we can not progress, and those locked into this perspective have shown they are willing to do what ever it takes to assure they are in position to forward their agenda. It's why I've mentioned I believe we need a more moderate stance where officials will view both sides of an issue, and look for common ground and a place that will benefit everyone and not just those who prescribe to one view or the other.

 

[Ox AO]

Nexus
You're still thinking about politics before the corruption got out of hand.
I'm positive you don't know how bad it is.

I don't know why you feel Trump will no to be working with the FBI to weed out at least some of the root problems of this corruption.
Feelings or something you know?

 

[Nexus]

Nexus
You're still thinking about politics before the corruption got out of hand.
I'm positive you don't know how bad it is.

I don't know why you feel Trump will no to be working with the FBI to weed out at least some of the root problems of this corruption.
Feelings or something you know?

Honestly I'm more a hope for the best but expect the worst type of person, it makes everything a pleasant surprise.

I think he'll try to work with the FBI, but that doesn't mean they'll be working with him.. Also with Trump having legal issues already with Trump University for example, what happens if the decision is made for the DOJ to get involved with that or even the NY Attorney General who is already investigating him for Fraud in connection with the Trump Foundation?

 

[Ox AO]

Trump University and Trump Foundation is a none issue.

You really need to look into these things. Don't take the media or anyone at their word.

 

[Garen]

Trump University and Trump Foundation is a none issue.

You really need to look into these things. Don't take the media or anyone at their word.

You think actual pending lawsuits have no merit, but yet you find it worthy enough to post about coups and counter-coups, and child molestation rings?
Do you have an objective bone in you?

 

[Ox AO]

You think actual pending lawsuits have no merit, but yet you find it worthy enough to post about coups and counter-coups, and child molestation rings?
Do you have an objective bone in you?

you have to look at the details of both. It takes time to do that.

 

[Giggles]

Locked per announcement here Political discussions on Stratics.