Donald! Trump!

so when does he give his first interview as president elect, or do we need to wait till january?

@eden I worked for an American company for 7 years and lived there for 3 (in the relatively liberal NY), throughout my career I have worked closely with Americans and spent another 4 month stint there in 2008. Now I appreciate that is not the whole country but Europe's politics are not supported in the US.

@clod not gleeful at all but it is what it is and we should try and understand why it happened and make sure we make the best of it. I have to say thinking that it was "rich white people" that lead to the victory is particularly dangerous certainly for those on the left here. Rich white people supported Hillary as part of the $1billion she spent, double that of Trump. I also think Trump's victory helps us materially with Brexit not least as it will lead to stronger electoral performance of those in Europe who want to radically reform the EU.

Speak for yourself mate, Obama wanted to put us to the back of the queue.

No, we voted to start a whole new round of trade talks, putting ourselves at the back of the queue.

Not sure Trump's Rhetoric is a reliable indication of what he's going to do in office.

Well true, there is the small matter of international law and war crimes to prevent him

(or as he put it, [i]"fighting a very 'politically correct' war"[/i] 🙄 )

Not sure Trump's Rhetoric is a reliable indication of what he's going to do in office.

I also think Trump's victory helps us materially with Brexit not least as it will lead to stronger electoral performance of those in Europe who want to radically reform the EU.

By that do you mean the far-right nationalist parties?

No, we voted to start a whole new round of trade talks, putting ourselves at the back of the queue.

Europe's politics are not supported in the US.

What the hell does that mean? How invested are you in say Latvian politics.

I too have lived in America, and most Americans couldn't place most European countries on the map let alone have in depth knowledge of Euro politics

I also think Trump's victory helps us materially with Brexit not least as it will lead to stronger electoral performance of those in Europe who want to radically reform the EU.

Andy - couple of thoughts. Trump out polled Hillary with voters on over $50k, and Hillary with voters on less than $50k. So it is not clear that the working class voted DT.
However the college educated tended to vote for Hillary and those without a degree tended to go for DT.
Read together those are interesting stats. But unclear what they mean.
What is clear is that the biggest indicator of voting was skin colour. Some non-whites voted Trump and of course lots of whites voted Hillary, but in general people voted on race. Perhaps unsurprisingly given the campaign.

Like you, I work for an American company which I visit every so often, and like you I once lived in the states (Virginia since you asked) and the only conclusion I've come to is that they are an odd mixed-up bunch, wonderful and terrible, but away from the coasts generally stuck in the 1950s. And the food, given their wonderful ingredients, is frequently dire.

Ransos just look at the map. The wealthy East and West coasts vote Democrat. Trump won with working class votes, predominantly white but he did better with Hispanics than Romney in 2012 and Black people did not turn out for Clinton in the way they did for Obama.

A majority of wealthier white people voted for Trump. A majority of poorer white people voted for Clinton. Those are facts, not jambafacts.

Talk of a slightly lower Black turnout for Clinton (than for the first African American president - oodathortit!) is a silly diversion.

What?

What did you not understand?

A majority of wealthier white people voted for Trump. A majority of poorer white people voted for Clinton. Those are facts, not jambafacts.

This vote you are talking about?
More Brexit rubbish?

> sigh <

If the Leave vote was not a vote to tear up all our trade agreements and start afresh negotiating new ones, then what was it?

A majority of wealthier white people voted for Trump. A majority of poorer white people voted for Clinton. Those are facts, not jambafacts.

It depends. Did all other nations buy UK made stuff from the UK or the EU?

What are you on about?

If the Leave vote was not a vote to tear up all our trade agreements and start afresh negotiating new ones, then what was it?

What did you not understand?

Existing trade agreements in place, and under negotiation, that we are a part of, while in the EU:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements

We start from scratch once we leave the EU.
That includes USA.
It''ll take "a while", and won't take precedence over other negotiations already well under way, was all that Obama pointed out.

Do you have a tyring to back that up? TYT is my only source for US politics and they don't agree with the old white man model you're suggesting, and they're full on card carrying lefty luvies (for Americans).

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-election/the-average-trump-supporter-is-not-an-economic-loser/article32746323/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/white-voters-victory-donald-trump-exit-polls
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37920950/who-voted-for-trump-not-young-people-say-exit-polls

It''ll take "a while", and won't take precedence over other negotiations already well under way, was all that Obama pointed out

9/11 effectively finished off the IRA

Hopefully today the BLM racists have lost traction too.

Unexpected results an' all.

It's interesting that Clinton is currently leading the popular vote by over 200,000. OK, it's only 0.2%, and ultimately meaningless, but it's still a lead.

The other interesting thing is over 6 million people (4.8%) voted for "others". In 2012, this was 1,945,981, in 2008 it was 1,866,981 , and in 2004 it was 1,226,291. This clearly shows the lack of trust in either of the Republican or Democrat candidates.

It would also be interesting to find out how many people only voted for either of the candidates because they were slightly less worse than the alternative. Something really needs to change if this is the best a country of 300 million people can do.

It''ll take "a while", and won't take precedence over other negotiations already well under way, was all that Obama pointed out.

In context, if you were buying goods (under a UK trade agreement) from a scottish company and scotland were to leave the UK, given the same (or better) terms, would you continue to buy from scotland or find a new source in the remainder of the UK?

Just leaving this here. Voting by 18-25 year olds.

[img] [/img]

How did that compare to Obama? It's only the swing that's interesting. I doubt old white dudes voted for Obama. The ones that switched to Trump are the interesting ones.

It's interesting that Clinton is currently leading the popular vote by over 200,000. OK, it's only 0.2%, and ultimately meaningless, but it's still a lead.

That's a problem common to the electoral college and to our FPTP. It's absurd that general elections are decided by a handful of states or constituencies.

Molgrips, this is far more telling...

231,556,622 eligible voters

46.9% didn't vote
25.6% voted Clinton
25.5% voted Trump

http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/

Whoah, that's a low turnout.

Quite. Talking about 18-25, talking about male v female, talking about Hispanic, Black or other, is pointless when 46.9% of eligible voters didn't vote.

Whine all you like about "democracy is broken" or "the system has failed us". By all means blame teh evil mediaz, if it makes you feel better, but the real problem isn't democracy, it isn't the type of democracy, it isn't the media, it's people. Apathetic, fed up, lazy people.

46.9% didn't vote.
46.9% of eligible voters in America simply couldn't give a shit any more.
THEY are the overwhelming majority. THAT is the problem.

It's not new or breaking news that often people start out supporting left wing politics then as they get older swing over to more right wing politics. That is the same in the UK. It's probably the case that the average age of the Labour/'Liberal and Green voter is lower than the average age of Conservative voters. Also the developed countries like the US and Europe have an ageing population so a higher proportion of older people making up their populations, unlike the Asian countries (except China of course). That's what happens when the average family has 2.4 children. The average really needs to be up over 3 children and it hasn't been in the developed nations for decades - hence the need for immigration.

People are P'd off with the small rich and powerful 'elite' grasping onto power and influence and are finding whatever way they can to rebel. That was the case with Brexit - people tired of being ignored by the EU, and similarly in the US. It really is not that hard to understand - but those with the power and influence are obviously going to struggle relinquishing their positions so bury their heads in the sand. It's a great warning for Europe where a number of key EU countries have up and coming national elections. They better head the warnings or the same will happen in Europe.

Academia has long been poisoned by left wing knobs so its no surprise that students are confused and voted Hillary. Safe Space dogma has hopefully been shattered.

but the real problem isn't democracy, it isn't the type of democracy, it isn't the media, it's people. Apathetic, fed up, lazy people.

The real problem is no candidates who offer any hope for tangible change, resulting in a general malaise that results in people either voting for the least worst option or not voting at all.

People are P'd off with the small rich and powerful 'elite' grasping onto power and influence and are finding whatever way they can to rebel.

Erm, so they vote a wealthy, powerful, elitist into power? I don't think they've quite grasped the basics of how rebellion works.

Quite. Talking about 18-25, talking about male v female, talking about Hispanic, Black or other, is pointless when 46.9% of eligible voters didn't vote.

Whine all you like about "democracy is broken" or "the system has failed us". By all means blame teh evil mediaz, if it makes you feel better, but the real problem isn't democracy, it isn't the type of democracy, it isn't the media, it's people. Apathetic, fed up, lazy people.

46.9% didn't vote.
46.9% of eligible voters in America simply couldn't give a shit any more.
THEY are the overwhelming majority. THAT is the problem.

In an election as bitter as this one, it is probable that a reasonable chunk of that 46.9% voted the only way they felt they could.

46.9% of eligible voters in America simply couldn't give a shit any more.
THEY are the overwhelming majority. THAT is the problem.

By far the biggest problem is that if you don't like the situation there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

RON on the ballot would change politics massively. Perhaps that's why it's not there. THAT's something we should have a referendum on. Why deny us the proper expression of our position?

enfht - Member
Academia has long been poisoned by left wing knobs

You mean they don't like racism or sexism, yeah what a bunch of Pc gone mad knobs 🙄

In context, if you were buying goods (under a UK trade agreement) from a scottish company and scotland were to leave the UK, given the same (or better) terms, would you continue to buy from scotland or find a new source in the remainder of the UK?

Good luck getting a decent malt.

Whine all you like about "democracy is broken" or "the system has failed us". By all means blame teh evil mediaz, if it makes you feel better, but the real problem isn't democracy, it isn't the type of democracy, it isn't the media, it's people. Apathetic, fed up, lazy people.

This.

I think we've probably reached the point where we all think 'well they're all ****ing bent, nowt will change anyway'

So as recent stuff has proved you either make a protest vote for the headbangers, or sit around, scratch your arse and fart.

Seems more people are in fact voting for the former though

This and Brexsahmbles prove that what people aren't doing is what was expected. Good!

Hate to find myself agreeing with Jammers, but while this is all clearly an absolute bloody nightmare, if this is a rocket up the arse of a smug and complacent neoliberal establishment, who couldn't give a shit about any of us, well... they're log overdue it

creative destruction, and all that

Something half-decent might possibly emerge at the end of it. Possibly

*goes back to injecting vodka into my eyeballs and sobbing*

Interesting. 42.5% didn't vote last time, so the repellent nature of both candidates may have had the most impact. I guess as Trump won then the repellent nature of Clinton was the biggest factor.

That was the case with Brexit - people tired of being ignored by the EU, and similarly in the US.

Except it was the UK government, not the EU, that either was or was not ignoring them. And of course by electing useless 'KIPpers as MEPs we could hardly complain about anything the EU did.

molgrips - Member
Just leaving this here. Voting by 18-25 year olds.

Have we worked out what Clinton was responsible for in hondurous and Haiti yet?

😀
They'll just get the Japanese and/or Chinese to copy it!
[img] [/img]
Glynnfeddich anyone?

Malt, you fool.

Though some of the Japanese stuff isn't too bad

Plenty of decent malts can be found elsewhere, Japan for starters. Plus it is hardly an essential people can easily change their habits.

Malt, you fool.

Hate to find myself agreeing with Jammers, but if this is a rocket up the arse of a smug and complacent neoliberal establishment, well... they're log overdue it

The problem being that behind all the "outsider" bluster, Trump is as much part of the elitist establishment as anyone. This, coupled with the fact he will have the usual White House aides and advisors, with foreign policy pretty much dictated by powers outside of the Whitehouse, means that this really is a paper tiger of a rebellion.

Academia has long been poisoned by left wing knobs so its no surprise that students are confused and voted Hillary. Safe Space dogma has hopefully been shattered.

A poisonous academic earlier...

[url= https://goo.gl/images/5GMR4V ]Prof Minford[/url]

Wrecker - STW. There are some standards that are sacred.

Dragon - the Japanese were smart. They made ridiculously good offers to some senior (Scots I believe) distillers to set up some Japanese distilleries. The results are good, if a little generic. Outside of Scotland and Japan it gets a little harder. Irish stuff is often bland, Welsh just poor and new world? No thanks.

So it's good then?

There are some standards that are sacred.

I'd rather this than anything Scotchish.
[img] ?ss=2.0[/img]

the good news is that k Hopkins said she will move over there .

mikey74 - agree with you completely. When there isn't a massive wall between Mexico, and no new jobs in Ohio, then what then?

I'm trying to take a relatively positive long term view that ultimately this may change politics for the better

Mainly to stop myself running round and round in circles, screaming hysterically and head butting the walls

[quote=GrahamS ]

I also think Trump's victory helps us materially with Brexit not least as it will lead to stronger electoral performance of those in Europe who want to radically reform the EU.

By that do you mean the far-right nationalist parties?

I'm not sure the sentiment is a surprise coming from jamba - the level of glee might be new though. Do you think there's any chance of getting him to clarify whether he's hoping for a Le Pen victory?

[quote=binners ]I'm trying to take a relatively positive long term view that ultimately this may change politics for the better

Apologies for the cynicism, but I have to wonder whether the career politicians will just take it as a lesson in how to win elections by talking bollocks.

Captain - is that the one where the top lad from Bowmore got a free hand? Could be wrong. (It certainly reminded me of Bowmore when I had it but it was a few years ago)

This needs to be part of the new Presidential cavelcade.

When discussing turnout, it's important to remember that simple majority constituency-based elections like this one and general elections in the UK effectively disenfranchise a huge proportion of the electorate. Your vote simply cannot count in most US states that basically haven't changed hands ever. Or to be more precise, your chances of swinging the outcome varies from about one in a million in some states, to one in a billion in others (based on some fairly detailed and credible statistical modelling).

The problem being that behind all the "outsider" bluster, Trump is as much part of the elitist establishment as anyone.

Having watched Hilary politicians hav elearned it's just as easy to lose an election by talking bollocks. Obama had a popularity rating of over 50% at then end of his two terms, that's excellent, yet Hilary turned it into a loss.

I winced at some of her stuff, slagging off Trump for behaviour her own hubby indulges in, accusing Trump of having unacceptable attitudes (that most Americans I've met have expressed). And it was all painfully thin on policy whereas Trump fed people simple understandable ideas.

The democrats chose the wrong candiadte. Another Kinnock, Corbyn, Jospin... .

Anyhow, Trump's won and I'll wait until he does something I disagree with before slagging him off.

Flashy those turn out stats are indeed a worry

@igm my wife made a good point to me earlier (whilst I was moaning at the election coverage on tv 😉 ) that non-college educated isn't the real factor (ie it's not because they are "stupid"), its that those people are most likely in a poorly paid job or none at all. I think too much can be made of relatively small variences but then the result was very close in many places. Your observations match my own 🙂

@aracer I am in favour of anti-EU parties so in France yes that's Le Penn. Sarkozy has said he wants to offer us a deal to stay but I don't want that. So yes a Le Penn win would give the best result for the UK and I care about that.

Obama's "back of the queue" remark (scripted by Cameron) is now worthless for 2 reasons, firstly as I said at the time he won't be President in 2017 and secondly the US was only working on one deal TTIP and that's now in the bin for good, the EU don't want it and neither does Trump. So as of today there is no queue.

Binners, this will not make things better in the long term - there will be no counter reaction to Trump. This is a descent into tribalism, the left will reject neoliberal views as well (like the Guardian wants us to) and the developing world will be left out in the cold by protectionism, unable to compete with protectionist countries with large tax returns and good infrastructure. We are heading towards Elysium.

Anyway, I'll quote this guy for the millionth time.

When, for whatever reason, self-esteem is unattainable, the autonomous individual becomes a highly explosive entity. He turns away from an unpromising self and plunges into the pursuit of pride — the explosive substitute for self-esteem. All social disturbances and upheavals have their roots in crises of individual self-esteem, and the great endeavor in which the masses most readily unite is basically a search for pride.

and

To find the cause of our ills in something outside ourselves, something specific that can be spotted and eliminated, is a diagnosis that cannot fail to appeal. To say that the cause of our troubles is not in us but in the Jews, and pass immediately to the extermination of the Jews, is a prescription likely to find a wide acceptance.

- Eric Hoffer

@aracer I am in favour of anti-EU parties so in France yes that's Le Penn. Sarkozy has said he wants to offer us a deal to stay but I don't want that. So yes a Le Penn win would give the best result for the UK and I care about that.

In late 1945 through to the '60s - you'd have so totally been one of the Nazi voters harping on that you weren't responsible for the holocaust - cuz "Versailles", that it all seemed like such a good idea at the time and Hitler made you feel special.

Have we worked out what Clinton was responsible for in hondurous and Haiti yet?

I think something like ... Fund raising via Clinton Foundation for earthquake relief then spending the money for personal gain / influence.

I'm in favour of some things Mélonchon proposes but that doesn't mean I'll vote for him, Jamba. Choosing a candidate on the basis of one policy doesn't happen in France. Most of the population has a couple of years of philosophy under their belts.

So yes a Le Penn win would give the best result for the UK and I care about that.

Fund raising via Clinton Foundation for earthquake relief then spending the money for personal gain / influence.

Didn't The Clinton Foundation pay for Chelsea's wedding? Willing to be wrong, obviously.

@igm my wife made a good point to me earlier (whilst I was moaning at the election coverage on tv ) that non-college educated isn't the real factor (ie it's not because they are "stupid"), its that those people are most likely in a poorly paid job or none at all. I think too much can be made of relatively small variences but then the result was very close in many places. Your observations match my own

I think that's part of it. But also college educated are more likely to have left their home town and travel (in my experience, yours may differ) makes for more tolerant and liberal views. Also a good college education, and they're not all good, forces people to think - that's different from being stupid or intelligent, it's forcing people to consider other ideas, assess them, weigh them up, and again that makes (generally) for a more tolerant outlook.

Now these effects do of course pass with time - I think I'm about 10 years your junior and expect to be as grumpy and reactionary as you by 2025. 😉

"Apologies for the cynicism, but I have to wonder whether the career politicians will just take it as a lesson in how to win elections by talking bollocks."

No, because it only works for one term, next time your opponent can list all the broken promises.

Also the main reason to talk bollocks was to get publicity - Trump had half the budget of Clinton so he relied more on getting his message in the media, Clinton could pay to distribute her message.

But then the Clinton campaign wasn't especially great. Trump had a pretty straightforward economic plan. Collect tax, use tarrifs to protect, spend like crazy on infrastructure. He spelt it out. Clinton's whole campaign looked to me like personal attacks on Trump.

Mind you, this is all hindsight, yesterday it looked like Clinton was a shoe in on 350 votes.

I think Brexit and this election reinforce what we already know. Ad Homs and the Straw man doesn't work. You have to state your own case simply and clearly. Shouting "racist idiot" can't and won't win a debate.

I think Brexit and this election reinforce what we already know. Ad Homs and the Straw man doesn't work. You have to state your own case simply and clearly. Shouting "racist idiot" can't and won't win a debate.

Errr I think you'll find the remainers were the only ones with facts on their side, people don't care for facts - they run on feelings - this is what post truth politics relies on and in fact what many populists have relied on in the past.

People vote down tribal lines and look to scapegoat others when they feel vulnerable or slighted, Clinton simply forgot this. We have literally forgotten all of the most basic lessons in regards to the rise of fascism in Europe - it's like it never happened and the squarking heads in the media are at a complete loss as to explain it - the answer is staring them in the ****ing face in history textbooks, political sociology books and memoirs. ****, Eric Hoffers book won awards back in the '50s - and people loved it because it explained communism and fascism to a tee - now? It's like those times and the political debates around them never happened.

[quote=jambalaya ]@aracer I am in favour of anti-EU parties so in France yes that's Le Penn.

Thanks for the honest answer. I'll lump you in with those who voted for Trump because they're anti abortion then, though I suspect most of them wouldn't be too impressed to be put in the same category as a supporter of racists.

You have to state your own case simply and clearly.

"I'll lump you in with those who voted for Trump because they're anti abortion then,"

Trump's not really anti abortion, it's just rhetoric to win votes.

EDIT (too slow)

Have we worked out what Clinton was responsible for in hondurous and Haiti yet?

I think something like ... Fund raising via Clinton Foundation for earthquake relief then spending the money for personal gain / influence.

EDIT: details here, more of an issue of how Hillary acted as Secretary of State than Foundation. Money raised amd then spent with international (non-Haiti) groups on "services" rather spent with / for the Haitian people
[b]
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37826098 [/b]

I don't give a crap about Clinton Jamby, what I want to know is how you can support an utter populist like Trump and call yourself British or a Conservative? We've got hundreds of years of resisting these ****tards, from the French Revolution to Communism and then Fascism. Because we knew what the plebs were capable of and thus kept them in their places, either through subtle coercion or force.

People like you are undermining a glorious history of tea drinking snobbery and the killing of foreign upstarts.

Not surprised by your FN support Jambalaya.
She is trying to dampen the fascist image of her party, with limited success. Fortunately her dad does his best to contradict her.

[quote=outofbreath ]Trump's not really anti abortion, it's just rhetoric to win votes.

I don't think I was suggesting he was, simply that some people voted for him just because of that issue. Which is kind of the point.

Yep irony of dismissing Clinton as corrupt when in the same room as Trump isnt lost. It says more about the Trump lovers than anything else.
As for malt the most innovative and progressive makers are within 50 miles of me here is tasmania not going to be doing the massive volumes but nailing the good stuff.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/16/the-american-prophet-who-predicted-trump.html

Trump’s followers have responded most enthusiastically to the candidate’s diatribes against such devils as Mexicans and other “illegal immigrants,” Muslims of any stripe, unattractive or pushy women, clueless policy-makers, “loser” opposing candidates, and reporters who ask him other than softball questions.

The pollsters tell us that Trump’s followers share a decided affinity for authoritarianism, as well as beliefs that government causes more problems than it solves and that immigrants (and people with darker skins, and women) have stolen their jobs and their futures.

More: Trumpsters have little regard for facts that contradict their stances. Hoffer could have predicted this. [b]“It is the true believer’s ability to ‘shut his eyes and stop his ears’ to facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard which is the source of his unequaled fortitude and constancy[/b]. He cannot be frightened by danger nor disheartened by obstacle nor baffled by contradictions because he denies their existence.”

Hoffer described in detail who the true believers were: the frustrated, the disaffected, the dissatisfied with the status quo, those who put their faith in a leader promising simple yet radical solutions to their and society’s problems. “We join a mass movement,” Hoffer wrote, “to escape individual responsibility, or, in the words of the young Nazi, ‘to be free from freedom.’
“Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for the loss of faith in ourselves.

“All mass movements deprecate the present,” wrote Hoffer, “and there is no more potent dwarfing of the present than by viewing it as a mere link between a glorious past and a glorious future.” That’s what Trump is doing when he vows to “make America great again”—celebrating what was and will be, while denigrating what is.

Trumpsters are predominantly white, native-born American males who do not have college degrees, and are economically in the lower middle class rather than among the very poorest. Actually, in these ways they are more like Eric Hoffer than many other Americans. In a 1964 article, Hoffer identified himself and his fellow longshoremen as white men from poor backgrounds, with little education and no skills except for their willingness to do backbreaking manual labor, who “do not feel that the world owes us anything, or that we owe anybody—white, black, or yellow—a damn thing.”

Sound like anyone on here, guys?