The (Semi) Official Trump Election/Inauguration thread...

[SEIndSAM]

I have lived so much of my life "knowing" deep down in my bones that some day Hillary would get "her turn" as president, that having passed that disaster, I am giddy and unsure what to expect.



I do not expect Trump's presidency to be a panacea, but I also do not expect it to be the nightmare that hers would have been.

Well said...

 

[phylodog]

I have yet to see accusations that Russia hacked the voting machines. All I see are accusations that Russia hacked the DNC email servers. I have a two part response to that. 1) Who cares? 2) Tough ****, if the emails didn't exist it wouldn't be an issue, now would it?

It matters not to me who exposes corruption. All that matters is that exposed corruption is dealt with accordingly. I have yet to see any claims that the leaked emails were falsified, claims that the DNC is not racist, that they don't see the hispanic vote as the taco bowl, that they don't rely on blind allegiance from the black community. But we're going to focus on who did the hacking rather than the content of the emails? Please...

 

[actaeon277]

Trump cabinet picks galling to democrats?Commentary

Why Trump's cabinet picks are so galling to Democrats, and why he doesn't care

Jake Novak | @jakejakeny



A funny thing about almost every modern presidential election aftermath is that the losing side often makes the loudest demands. It doesn't matter if the losers are Republicans or Democrats. With every cabinet pick announcement you can bet the losing side will cry bloody murder about it as if they had won and the new president owed them something.

Because, usually they can block a choice. So you have to do stuff to appease the losing side, to get your appointments passed.


Making it all worse for the Democrats is their ability to block these appointees is now almost nil. The Senate confirms cabinet-level choices and Republicans control the Senate with a 52-48 vote advantage this coming term, (53-48 when Vice President-elect Mike Pence's tie-breaking vote is accounted for).

Well, they did get their pee-pee slapped this election.
Maybe all that gun control stuff bit them in the ass.
Maybe all their badly behaving protestors bit them in the ass.


Even worse, the Democrats themselves eliminated almost every significant minority party filibuster tool when former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid initiated the so-called "nuclear option" in 2013. Since that move, individual senators have only been able to seize the floor for marathon speeches opposing nominees. But once those speeches end, the majority can now confirm nominees without needing the once traditional minimum 60 votes. All of this is adding to a combination of liberal despair and vehement anger.

Well, maybe they should have realized those rules could be used AGAINST them. It's not like this is the FIRST ELECTION EVER. I mean, come on. Democrat. Republican. Democrat. Republican. Duh! It just flops back and forth. So if they made rules weakening the power of the minority party, then they were MORONS. Cause sooner or later, it was going to happen to them.


He's also betting that the people who are the angriest about his picks are either career politicians or activists who will never support him and don't represent the bulk of the voting public anyway. In other words, Trump doesn't think the average American is scared or aggrieved about his cabinet picks. He's betting the people are only going to care about results.

In a year or two, he's betting that the politicians and ordinary Americans with ideological ties to environmental causes, public education, union clout, etc. will be even more outnumbered by everyone else who simply wants more economic prosperity. Until then, Donald Trump doesn't really care about your feelings.

He might be right. Maybe later, after things have improved they might care. But put people back to work, and for a while, he'll be okay. For a while.
And he is also probably right, that certain people would NEVER support him anyway. So why try?

 

[phylodog]

Obama sure never bothered to give a **** what the opposition thought of his actions, why should Trump? The past 8 years have more than demonstrated that there is no middle ground, those who don't agree with you are the enemy and it is no holds barred when it comes to demonizing those who don't agree with you. I find it more than mildly entertaining that the left now feels they should be listened to even though they lost in spite of the fact that they've done everything imaginable to make the right out to be evil for the last 8 years. Let them enjoy sleeping in the bed they made.

 

[Trigger Time]

Obama sure never bothered to give a **** what the opposition thought of his actions, why should Trump? The past 8 years have more than demonstrated that there is no middle ground, those who don't agree with you are the enemy and it is no holds barred when it comes to demonizing those who don't agree with you. I find it more than mildly entertaining that the left now feels they should be listened to even though they lost in spite of the fact that they've done everything imaginable to make the right out to be evil for the last 8 years. Let them enjoy sleeping in the bed they made.

Exactly! And all of his speeches talking about working together are BS because his actions were different. Also all his BS speaches
about supporting and defending the constitution or telling us what the constitution says made me want to puke because his actions showed he hated the constitution.

 

[actaeon277]

Obama sure never bothered to give a **** what the opposition thought of his actions, why should Trump? The past 8 years have more than demonstrated that there is no middle ground, those who don't agree with you are the enemy and it is no holds barred when it comes to demonizing those who don't agree with you. I find it more than mildly entertaining that the left now feels they should be listened to even though they lost in spite of the fact that they've done everything imaginable to make the right out to be evil for the last 8 years. Let them enjoy sleeping in the bed they made.

Yup.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Republicans are pansies and don't know how to lead. Not since Gingrich, and they threw him out like trash.

trump is a fighter, time to knock them in the teeth, so to speak

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Obama sure never bothered to give a **** what the opposition thought of his actions, why should Trump?

I'll give Obama this, he didn't change his tune when Trump won. I heard an interview with him about the transition meetings and he was asked what he thought of a particular cabinet appointee. He said it would be inappropriate for an outgoing POTUS to comment on the selections of an incoming POTUS, and then basically restated the "elections have consequences" speech. Elections had consequences when he won, he could do things his way. Elections have consequences when Trump wins, he can do things his way.

 

[JTScribe]

I'll give Obama this, he didn't change his tune when Trump won. I heard an interview with him about the transition meetings and he was asked what he thought of a particular cabinet appointee. He said it would be inappropriate for an outgoing POTUS to comment on the selections of an incoming POTUS, and then basically restated the "elections have consequences" speech. Elections had consequences when he won, he could do things his way. Elections have consequences when Trump wins, he can do things his way.

I have actually been quite surprised at the Obama admin's consistency on this issue. Earnest made a comment the day after election to the effect of, "President Obama is forever grateful that George W. Bush refrained from commenting and allowed him to find his way, and President Obama has no plans to change that tradition."

Apparently Carter is the only moron that doesn't "get" that, heh.

 

[bwframe]

How much money are we putting down on Obama keeping his mouth shut like Bush did/has?

 

[printcraft]

How much money are we putting down on Obama keeping his mouth shut like Bush did/has?

I'm in. Narcissistic ******* will be blabbering in a week.

 

[jbombelli]

I have yet to see accusations that Russia hacked the voting machines. All I see are accusations that Russia hacked the DNC email servers. I have a two part response to that. 1) Who cares? 2) Tough ****, if the emails didn't exist it wouldn't be an issue, now would it?

It matters not to me who exposes corruption. All that matters is that exposed corruption is dealt with accordingly. I have yet to see any claims that the leaked emails were falsified, claims that the DNC is not racist, that they don't see the hispanic vote as the taco bowl, that they don't rely on blind allegiance from the black community. But we're going to focus on who did the hacking rather than the content of the emails? Please...

This. 100%

 

[bwframe]

I'm in. Narcissistic ******* will be blabbering in a week.

[video=youtube;gMAYkSPZB_M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMAYkSPZB_M[/video]

 

[actaeon277]

I think most of the Presidents have kept their mouths shut. Probably realize how hard the job is to do with the predecessor stabbing you all the time.

I have little hope for President Obama to do the same though.

Then again, I have little hope for President (elect) Trump to do the same. I know President (elect) Trump is a big mouth, and bucks convention, but that is one area I'd like to see remain the same. The area of, once you get out of office, STFU.

 

[actaeon277]

[video=youtube;gMAYkSPZB_M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMAYkSPZB_M[/video]

I wouldn't advise protestors to be silent either.
But if you're stopping people from getting to work/home/or such, you're not a protestor.
If you're burning a business/house, you're not a protestor.

 

[Libertarian01]

In the 1950's Sen Joe McCarthy would tell people while waving a folder or briefcase that "...I have a list of names..." regarding alleged communist spies. No such credible list was ever produced.

In the 1950's Pres Dwight D Eisenhower told the American people and the world that we are not spying on the Soviet Union. Along came Francis Gary Powers.

In the 2000's Vice President Dick Cheney told multiple news outlets regarding the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, "These are the worst of the worst. 95% of them have been captured on the field of battle." Later studies would prove that the exact opposite were true, that 95% had NOT been captured on the field of battle. Also, it has been proven that many hundreds were simply turned in for the huge ransoms that the American government was offering.

In the 2000's Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations that we have credible proof that Iraq was building WMD's. It has since been proven this was untrue. Not only that, but the lone source of information, Ahmed Chalabi, was questioned by the CIA as to having no credible evidence from any other source backing his claim.

In 2016 FBI Director James Comey said that there was no prosecutable evidence of any crime against then Secretary of State Hillary R Clinton. Really...?

These false narratives are the first that come to my mind when wondering about the credibility of unsubstantiated statements made in the press regarding the alleged "Russian Involvement" in the hacking of any computer at any time regarding the 2016 presidential election.

Note that not a single scrap of credible, verifiable evidence has been produced to back up this claim. None. Zero. Nada. And yet every major news source has on at least one occasion mentioned the Russian hacking of some computer, somewhere.

Maybe the Russians were involved - heavily. Maybe they had nothing to do with it. Perhaps a trusted insider like Huma Abadin leaked the emails. Perhaps it was the Chinese. I have no idea. I do believe that the Russians are seen as a credible, and thus believable threat to the United States and so leaking that they did it is an easy out. Perhaps the FBI has absolutely NO CLUE who did what and doesn't want to look incompetent. That would probably never happen but who knows...?

My only point with this is I am sick and tired of being led around by the nose trying to scapegoat someone without any evidence they have done anything. Maybe the Russians did do it, but I want to see something called proof. Call me olde fashioned but I believe that is a cornerstone of honorable behavior. To act less is to act in a less than honorable fashion. I wish there were some way to get the media to start questioning their sources and refusing to create an echo chamber without evidence. Silly me, right?

Regards,

Doug

 

[ATM]

... I wish there were some way to get the media to start questioning their sources and refusing to create an echo chamber without evidence. Silly me, right?

Not going to happen. Ever. They lie through their teeth.

It's silly to even expect the American people to really question anything at this point.

We love our lies. We defend them to the death.

 

[BugI02]

Not going to happen. Ever. They lie through their teeth.

It's silly to even expect the American people to really question anything at this point.

We love our lies. We defend them to the death.

Alas, this would have been great foreshadowing for the 9/11 thread

 

[jamil]

I wouldn't advise protestors to be silent either.
But if you're stopping people from getting to work/home/or such, you're not a protestor.
If you're burning a business/house, you're not a protestor.

People have a right to protest. People don't have a right to harm others while protesting.

 

[jamil]

Not going to happen. Ever. They lie through their teeth.

It's silly to even expect the American people to really question anything at this point.

We love our lies. We defend them to the death.

On both sides of the isle. It's okay if Russians hack into DNC emails and publish their dirty deeds. If Russians hacked into RNC emails and found the dirty deeds of Trump, his supporters would first excuse the deeds and say they don't matter, and be pissed that the russians interfered.

I am of course not saying that I'm not glad the DNC's deeds were exposed. I've made my points clear on that. I'm saying that we've lost a sense of principle, where we apply our rules to both sides and not just allow loyalty to make us have two sets of rules. I am a pragmatic guy, but pragmatism not guided by principles is what the Democrats have done for the last year, which we've all complained about.