The Money Mustache Community

Other => Off Topic => Topic started by: acorn on November 09, 2016, 01:49:19 AM

Title: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: acorn on November 09, 2016, 01:49:19 AM
It's over, the people have voted. It is what it is, we can't change it. Instead of what-ifs, debating why people voted the way they did, pointing fingers, despair and depression, let's have a civil discussion about what to expect in the next four years.

What will be the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency with Republican control of the House and Senate? The most obvious one is that Trump will get to nominate at least one conservative Supreme Court justice, who will be confirmed by the Republican Senate. The environment and climate change are also goners.

On other issues, it's not as clear to me. For example, Trump has called for protectionist trade policies, but the Republican party has generally been pro-free trade (correct me if I'm wrong). I guess my question is, who/what will determine US policies over the next four years? The Republican party has split itself into fractions, and has been at odds with Trump more often than not. Are we likely to see more party infighting in the years ahead, or will they regroup with their president and congress majorities to push forward their agenda? Who is going to decide their agenda? Will Trump adopt the Republican party platform, or will Republican party adopt his ideas (deportations, congressional term limits, etc)?

What is going to serve as a check and balance to Trump? Will the Republican party do that with their majorities? Will there be any moderate Republicans left? Trump does not seem to understand much about the nuances of policies, and has shown very little interest in learning about the intricacies of governing. In the best case scenario, he might change, if not, he's going to be heavily reliant on his "sources", which appear to be himself, the internet, and TV. Who are going to be his advisors? Who is going to be in his cabinet? Who is really going to run the show? Mike Pence/Paul Ryan/Mitch McConnell/Steve Bannon?

I know that no one has any answers, but I want to be prepared for what's coming.

TL;DR I'm freaking out worried. Tell me how bad it's going to be.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wienerdog on November 09, 2016, 02:01:30 AM
No different than Clinton.  They are same.  If you don't realize that then you need some work.  Trump is no different than Clinton.  No wall.  No magical thing to replace ACA.  Just sit and wait there is no difference.  It isn't any different than 'Hope and Change' that so many fools fell for.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Johnez on November 09, 2016, 02:17:05 AM
 I think Hillary would have been the cruise control candidate, Trump wants to blow shit up. Hope and change didn't accomplish anything? Two wars over, Affordable Care act passed, gay marriage rights, auto industry saved, recession killed and unemployment below 5% on his way out...those are just the biggies. Hope and Change wasn't perfect, but I'd hardly call the last 8 years idle time wasted. Contrast what he came into versus where we are now. Now we are going to make America "great" again. Lol. Great like the shape W left us in? Recession, 10% UE, 2 wars?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: 2Cent on November 09, 2016, 02:39:52 AM
Buy stocks now. The shock will wear off in a few days and markets will return to normal.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 09, 2016, 03:05:32 AM
Trump will have a Republican Senate for at least two years and a Republican House for probably indefinitely (unless gerrymandering laws are changed), they wont C-block him like they did Obama. He'll have conservative federal judges appointed with no problem. There will be 1-3 Supreme Court Judges up for grabs.

Look for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Expect medical insurance profits to rise.

Expect your middle class taxes to increase and if you're more wealthy, expect your taxes to decrease. Trickle down economics theory will return.

I think relations with other countries will be poor.

I think the ignorant and loud will rule.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BrokenBiscuits on November 09, 2016, 03:06:10 AM
We had a similar unexpected result recently over here in England when my people voted to leave the European union.

It will be near impossible to read any news that doesn't refer to the result in some way for a while.  But hopefully things return to normal or whatever counts for normalish pretty soon.

As for the markets, there will likely be buying opportunities as there were following brexit. I know a lot of mustachians are not market timers but I will occasionally top up extra if I see significant drops. My wealth benefitted from brexit (short term, who knows long term) even if it was not the result I wanted.

I can see the comparisons already, with the media suggesting large numbers of people uneducated beyond high school drove the result. Ultimately, it is what it is and now it's time to sit back and see what the ride will be like.

 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: alsoknownasDean on November 09, 2016, 04:15:46 AM
We'll see a flock to safe haven items (watch gold skyrocket) for a while, and in a while it'll calm down once people realise that the US economy will continue to kick along.

There'll be some areas that get defunded or disbanded. I'd expect Planned Parenthood and the EPA to be endangered species. Watch environmental/climate change regs get wound back.

They'll repeal ACA, but chances are health insurance premiums will continue to increase.

The minimum wage might get cut back again.

The TPP is probably not going to happen.

Restrictions on Chinese imports may harm the Chinese economy, and the economies of countries that have a significant amount of trade with China (including us here in Australia).

More worryingly, Trump's election might serve as propaganda/recruiting material for ISIL.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: cerat0n1a on November 09, 2016, 04:29:38 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?

Protectionism is an interesting game to play for a country that owes $6 trillion to foreigners. Fine when you can simply crank up the printing presses to deal with your debts; anything that puts at risk the dollar as the world's de facto trading currency pushes the US over the edge pretty rapidly.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: marty998 on November 09, 2016, 05:09:58 AM
I doubt you'll see the apocalypse that some have predicted. Maybe it's the alcohol talking but I think Trump will be determined to prove himself capable in the role.

You will not see any nukes. But you will see swift military retribution against any foreign country that threatens America (in whatever way, shape or form "threatened" takes).

I agree there will be significant tax cuts for the 1%. There will be attempts to shift the centre to the right. There will be a reframing of the culture wars - the topics so beloved by the left - gay marriage, climate change, refugees.

It won't be pretty, but the millions out there who have felt ignored, isolated and left out of 21st century progress will now feel like they are on top.

It won't change a damn thing for them however. Trump will govern for those like him, just as most politicians do. The situation for the server at the local Maccas will still be the same in 4 years time.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: chasesfish on November 09, 2016, 05:37:25 AM
Who really knows at this point?

20 years ago, Clinton sounded more Republican, Trump sounded more democrat.  I think the general mood outside of NY/Chicago/LA is the average working person is tired of elites telling them how to live their life.  Hillary Clinton was probably the only democrat that could loose to Trump.

At best, we'll have a republican president focused on the economy and regulation and ignore the "social" side of the house.   Worst case, he gets with the far right side and starts trying to "blow stuff up" an d kicks out reasonable house leader in Paul Ryan.

I don't think a lot will change, Democrats can still filibuster the Senate, so cooler heads will prevail. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: The Guru on November 09, 2016, 05:38:39 AM
I doubt you'll see the apocalypse that some have predicted. Maybe it's the alcohol talking but I think Trump will be determined to prove himself capable in the role.

You will not see any nukes. But you will see swift military retribution against any foreign country that threatens America (in whatever way, shape or form "threatened" takes).

I agree there will be significant tax cuts for the 1%. There will be attempts to shift the centre to the right. There will be a reframing of the culture wars - the topics so beloved by the left - gay marriage, climate change, refugees.

It won't be pretty, but the millions out there who have felt ignored, isolated and left out of 21st century progress will now feel like they are on top.

It won't change a damn thing for them however. Trump will govern for those like him, just as most politicians do. The situation for the server at the local Maccas will still be the same in 4 years time.

^ This. I predict trump's blue-collar supporters will be experiencing a steamin' hot bowl of buyer's (voter's?) remorse before his first (and, one hopes, only) term is half over. While I'm sure that what benefits wealthy CEOs also benefits those who work for them in some magical fairyland somewhere I don't see The Donald as having the will to cause that to happen in the real world. As far as bringing jobs back from China, he could have done that with his own signature clothing line. But he didn't. I feel somewhat bad for those who feel like they've been left out of whatever prosperity the rest of us enjoy (if not the racism and xenophobia that seems to accompany it) but that sympathy is tempered by the knowledge that they should have questioned Trump's ability and/or desire to actually make it come about. Instead they blindly accepted what they wanted to hear. In short- they were played, pure and simple.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ysette9 on November 09, 2016, 05:44:11 AM
I'm seriously worried that a repeal of Obamacare means that our FIRE plans are in jeopardy. We can plan for cost increases but we cannot plan for one of us having our coverage dropped and being uncovered, should we develop a health condition down the road.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 09, 2016, 05:55:40 AM
You will lose a lot of money in the short term.  It will bounce back.  Your insurance will be go back to the way it was, still increasing year over year but no subsidies to lessen the bite.  If you get cancer, I hope your stash is really big or you pass quickly because you will be dropped.  If you are gay and married, I hope you enjoyed the experience.  at least one and potentially more young conservative supreme court justices will overturn that.  Probably 50/50 odds on Roe v Wade. 

As I told my wife last night who was very upset that so many people could be so wrong.  It will be ok, at least for us.  In many ways a Trump and republican dominated government is personally beneficial to me (assuming no nuclear war is started), but we voted for the greater good at our own expense.  I almost look forward to the schadenfreude I will feel when people who voted Trump start complaining about their taxes, their insurance, their jobs not coming back, spiraling deficits and debt.

People had a lot of doom and gloom predictions on Obama being elected, but remember those where all suppositions based on stereotypes (he will take away your guns.....despite never saying he had any desire to).  There is a lot of doom and gloom for Trump too, but unfortunately that is all based on him doing exactly what he said he wants to do.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: MasterStache on November 09, 2016, 06:05:08 AM
I am cautiously optimistic. I am just glad we have a system of checks and balances.

If Trump does indeed push through his agenda, I believe we'll have another stifling recession. And the very folks he "promised" to help, will be in much worse shape. The real irony of his plan. I am hopeful that President Trump will be vastly different from candidate Trump.

My biggest fears though are starting more wars, possibly with nukes and watching the renewable energy industry take a huge hit. Still hard to believe "we" elected a guy that sexually assaults women and believes China created climate change. Oh what a crazy country we live in.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: boarder42 on November 09, 2016, 06:07:45 AM
lower taxes. and hopefully more efficient and simple tax code in the process. 

republican house/senate/president
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 09, 2016, 06:09:10 AM
lower taxes. and hopefully more efficient and simple tax code in the process. 

republican house/senate/president

Are you making 500k a year or more?  In that case, enjoy your lower taxes.  If not......HA HA HA
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jinga nation on November 09, 2016, 06:11:32 AM
I don't see a big change. Corporations and lobbyists will still run DC while the puppets change. Kabuki theater for the masses.

Obama promised no lobbyists, etc etc, railing on big money... etc. Then he rolled over. Or was bent over. Supreme Court grand cockup of corporations are people was the ultimate gangbang.

It was a choice of do you want a male wolf or female wolf, both are hungry. And will herd the sheep.

If Wikileaks did some damage, I'm happy for the truth to come out.

I hope Obama doesn't pardon Hillary on his way out, but I know he will.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: boarder42 on November 09, 2016, 06:13:35 AM
lower taxes. and hopefully more efficient and simple tax code in the process. 

republican house/senate/president

Are you making 500k a year or more?  In that case, enjoy your lower taxes.  If not......HA HA HA

his plan lowers taxes for those making less than 500k ... just the increased standard deduction does alot.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Rufus.T.Firefly on November 09, 2016, 06:13:58 AM
R-E-L-A-X. Relax.

Remember this: about half of the country was beside themselves for the last 8 years that Obama was elected, and re-elected. Before that, about half of the country was distraught over Bush being re-elected. Before that, about half of the country was ready to impeach Clinton at the end of his second term.

The election process lends itself extreme statements and hysteria. None of the above mentioned candidates were as terrible or as disastrous as the rhetoric suggests. In fact, they were all reasonably functional presidents. I knew a lot of Republicans who were rooting against Obama the moment he was in office - that doesn't make any sense to me.

I don't support Trump, but I'll sure as hell root for him now that he's our guy. And I will do so for every president because we're in this together, folks. If he does a terrible job, we'll get to vote him out in 4 years. But let's hope he does a great job. After all, he's surprised us a couple of of times already. Maybe he'll surprise us again.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: redbird on November 09, 2016, 06:19:43 AM
The upside: stocks are gonna be on sale, guys. I wish I had even more money to throw at them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: I'm a red panda on November 09, 2016, 06:37:21 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: AdrianC on November 09, 2016, 06:41:39 AM
As I told my wife last night who was very upset that so many people could be so wrong.  It will be ok, at least for us.  In many ways a Trump and republican dominated government is personally beneficial to me (assuming no nuclear war is started), but we voted for the greater good at our own expense.  I almost look forward to the schadenfreude I will feel when people who voted Trump start complaining about their taxes, their insurance, their jobs not coming back, spiraling deficits and debt.

Well said. Same here. We're disappointed, but our family will be just fine.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: acroy on November 09, 2016, 06:54:00 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KCM5 on November 09, 2016, 07:06:08 AM
I hope Obama doesn't pardon Hillary on his way out, but I know he will.

Pardon her for what?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Freedom2016 on November 09, 2016, 07:07:38 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.

But not the workers? Isn't this exactly what would benefit Trump supporters - a real increase in wages? Those are not the folks holding index funds that will go up when shareholders get a little slice of that corporate pie.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 09, 2016, 07:14:15 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.

That is so cute you think the big companies will bring back money and enrich their workers and or shareholders. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on November 09, 2016, 07:22:38 AM
As I told my wife last night who was very upset that so many people could be so wrong.  It will be ok, at least for us.  In many ways a Trump and republican dominated government is personally beneficial to me (assuming no nuclear war is started), but we voted for the greater good at our own expense.  I almost look forward to the schadenfreude I will feel when people who voted Trump start complaining about their taxes, their insurance, their jobs not coming back, spiraling deficits and debt.

Well said. Same here. We're disappointed, but our family will be just fine.

To me this is the biggest issue.  Your family may be fine, but what about those whom he has promised to discriminate against.  Ending marriage equality, starting shock therapy for those in the LGBT community to "straighten" them out.  The economy may be just fine(I do not know what the future holds) but human rights have been trampled on by Trump, and we have only seen the beginning.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: OurTown on November 09, 2016, 07:35:52 AM
Probably no nuclear war where the other side fires back.  I make no guarantees about a nuclear strike in Syria or Iran.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: I'm a red panda on November 09, 2016, 07:39:17 AM
As I told my wife last night who was very upset that so many people could be so wrong.  It will be ok, at least for us.  In many ways a Trump and republican dominated government is personally beneficial to me (assuming no nuclear war is started), but we voted for the greater good at our own expense.  I almost look forward to the schadenfreude I will feel when people who voted Trump start complaining about their taxes, their insurance, their jobs not coming back, spiraling deficits and debt.

Well said. Same here. We're disappointed, but our family will be just fine.

That is little relief to me when I think of all the people who won't be. There are racial minorities, religious minorities, LGBTQ, immigrants (legal ones) who are genuinely scared right now.  My middle class white privilege of "I'm going to be okay" doesn't help me feel better at all.

Although I actually fall into a minority group that is unlikely to be affected, but I'm really really scared of what could happen if they hold a witch-hunt against it. So I have genuine fear for myself too.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 07:45:19 AM
The upside: stocks are gonna be on sale, guys. I wish I had even more money to throw at them.

I wouldn't call a 50 basis point drop in the S&P 500 a "sale". I too was licking my lips over this supposed  huge drop. Didn't happen.

I think in the end the republican congress will be better for business - but maybe not for anyone else.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 09, 2016, 07:45:39 AM
Well, given that he also has the House and the Senate, he should get pretty far down this list, at least:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/donald-trump-first-day-in-office
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: MandalayVA on November 09, 2016, 07:46:23 AM
When Trump got the nomination I was like "Jesus, he might actually pull this off."  And so he has.  I would also remind various Chicken Littles that he will say ANYTHING if it gets him what he wants.  Yesterday, he wanted to throw Hillary Clinton in jail.  Today, he spoke respectfully of "Madam Secretary" and praised her tenacity.  And remember all the people whom, it was claimed, would never vote for him?  Well, guess what?  LGBTs voted for him.  Women voted for him.  Hispanics voted for him.  Hell, even Muslims voted for him.  Maybe not the majority, but much more than was predicted. 

Remember the kid in junior high who always tried to act tough and macho to fit in?  That's Trump in a nutshell.  He's always been mostly talk.  I think it may be sinking in that for perhaps the first time in his life he's going to be held accountable for what he's said.  And it's scaring the SHIT out of him. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 07:47:27 AM
The upside: stocks are gonna be on sale, guys. I wish I had even more money to throw at them.

I wouldn't call a 50 basis point drop in the S&P 500 a "sale". I too was licking my lips over this supposed  huge drop. Didn't happen.

I think in the end the republican congress will be better for business - but maybe not for anyone else.

Depends if Trump gets his wishes on NAFTA and the Fed. He could crater the economy very quickly.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: MasterStache on November 09, 2016, 07:48:40 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.

That is so cute you think the big companies will bring back money and enrich their workers and or shareholders.

(http://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/trickle-down.jpg)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 07:51:14 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 07:58:13 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

Clinton mentioned infrastructure spending, too, and the consensus was that nothing would get done because Congress is reluctant to allocate money.

Will Congress follow his lead because, "Hey friends, we're all Republicans"? It's possible. I expect that it's just another campaign promise that will be forgotten in 6 months.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 08:03:35 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

Clinton mentioned infrastructure spending, too, and the consensus was that nothing would get done because Congress is reluctant to allocate money.

Will Congress follow his lead because, "Hey friends, we're all Republicans"? It's possible. I expect that it's just another campaign promise that will be forgotten in 6 months.

Perhaps. But I think Trump can use his ability to "primary out" people to force them into Trumpism. There are some things I like about Trumpism more than the traditional Republican platform. Hopefully we get the best of both (socially liberal policies, simpler tax code, more infrastructure spending).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on November 09, 2016, 08:09:24 AM
Chill.

ACA Repeal: 2017 Republicans are smarter than 2010 Dems, they won't cut their own throats.
Verdict; no mandate, some change to the level of subsidy and maybe a time-cap or phase out of the subsidyindividually (5yrs?) and perhaps a an overlap (especially non medicaid expanded states) of subsidy and medicaid. Don't believe me? I live around these people, I do my best to think like they do.

War; Talks big to have greater negotiating power. Everything is on the table until it is not(negotiated off the table).
-We are out of the Middle east, maybe some type of containment involvement but that is it. He will leave it up to Europe/Japan and China to sort out who gets what oil.

Bad trade deals/inflation/jobs; as much as this has been his focus I am not sure how all this will work out. Higher tariffs for sure, Trump will likely fight GOP Congress on this with a consistent veto until he gets it. Actual jobs/factories will be slow to return, but the continued loss stopping of jobs will be immediate. Hopefully a focus on our trade deficit by country.

Gay rights/abortion/religious liberty-he will do his best to ignore.

Taxes; across the board small cut, but mostly a change in the standard deduction and increase in child tax credit/EITC. Between taxes/spending/debt increase we will get a lot of debt increases (if you are investing in the future on infrastructure/lowering unemployment etc I really don't see this as bad as other things we have done, esp. at todays rates)

Immigration/Deporting; Criminals will stay out. Through tariffs, preventing money from being wired to Mexico or some other clever means he will get Mexico to be much more cooperative in keeping people from il(licietly?) crossing the border. give it two years and if there are still lots of refugees some will come here, even Muslim ones.

Eminent Domain/Libel/other civil liberties; Not big on his agenda but there are probably enough libertarian conservatives and democrats to keep this in check.

The one I am worried about; Student loan repayments; Currently in IBR program. not looking forward to how this will go. Luckily a lot of Congress has kids who are probably on this too, fingers crossed but I know I have about 6-10 months before I should be ready to make a much larger payment. Overall, we all borrowed the money, just because someone offers you a handout doesn't mean you deserve it. Kinda like the ACA, it would make retiring easier but does not mean we are entitled to it.

Could people panic and the stock market tumble and stagnate? Sure, but the president can't really do much about that. All that cash sitting around could turn up inflation really, maybe even feel like hyperinflation(bad) but who knows.

EditInfrastructure/Environment/Coal; Congress will be slow to do infrastructure spending, but it will happen. CapnTrade wouldn't have happened with HRC either, this is mostly a wash. Nuclear is actually cheaper than coal, perhaps cooler heads will prevail, just don't expect an new regs on construction or mines. At least coal is point source pollution, can be controlled/mitigated. More instability in the middle east could mean higher gas prices...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 08:49:57 AM
Bad trade deals/inflation/jobs; as much as this has been his focus I am not sure how all this will work out. Higher tariffs for sure, Trump will likely fight GOP Congress on this with a consistent veto until he gets it. Actual jobs/factories will be slow to return, but the continued loss stopping of jobs will be immediate. Hopefully a focus on our trade deficit by country.

Manufacturing will not come back. It's not a matter of them leaving the States; it's a matter of simply fewer of them due to automation. Nothing Trump can do will fix that.

Quote
Gay rights/abortion/religious liberty-he will do his best to ignore.

Will he have to appease his evangelical voters? Or will he assume that they haven't a choice so he can ignore them and still get their votes?

Quote
The one I am worried about; Student loan repayments; Currently in IBR program. not looking forward to how this will go. Luckily a lot of Congress has kids who are probably on this too

Hahaha, good one.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: pdxbator on November 09, 2016, 09:05:58 AM
I had plans to FIRE next June. It is now on hold to see what happens with the ACA. If Drumpf hands it over to the insurance companies (big businesses) rates will skyrocket even more and they won't accept applicants with pre-existing conditions.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 09, 2016, 09:13:29 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

It's interesting how one can spend money to build infrastructure while cutting taxes and reduce the deficit and debt at the same time.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 09, 2016, 09:22:04 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

It's interesting how one can spend money to build infrastructure while cutting taxes and reduce the deficit and debt at the same time.

It's easy, you do it the same way you somehow restore large amounts of high paying single industry manufacturing jobs to small towns in the age of automation without causing trade wars and spiking the price of consumer goods.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 09, 2016, 09:28:54 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

It's interesting how one can spend money to build infrastructure while cutting taxes and reduce the deficit and debt at the same time.

It's easy, you do it the same way you somehow restore large amounts of high paying single industry manufacturing jobs to small towns in the age of automation without causing trade wars and spiking the price of consumer goods.
Not making fun here, but I'm not sure if this is a sarcastic reply or not. I don't think those manufacturing jobs are ever coming back. I feel for the rust belt, but when the jobs left, they should have too.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 09, 2016, 09:37:45 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

It's interesting how one can spend money to build infrastructure while cutting taxes and reduce the deficit and debt at the same time.

It's easy, you do it the same way you somehow restore large amounts of high paying single industry manufacturing jobs to small towns in the age of automation without causing trade wars and spiking the price of consumer goods.
Not making fun here, but I'm not sure if this is a sarcastic reply or not. I don't think those manufacturing jobs are ever coming back. I feel for the rust belt, but when the jobs left, they should have too.

sarcastic.  The answer to both my statement and your is pixie dust and wishful thinking, those are the only things that can make Trump's promise to the rust belt come true.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RetiredAt63 on November 09, 2016, 09:43:45 AM
Gay rights/abortion/religious liberty-he will do his best to ignore.

Will he have to appease his evangelical voters? Or will he assume that they haven't a choice so he can ignore them and still get their votes?

Former PM Harper managed to control his hotheads about this and keep abortion off the agenda.  Mind you, IMHO Canada is further along the equal rights road than the US, we are mostly more OK with abortion and a lot more open to birth control availability.

Veering off topic a bit, I am curious to see his Cabinet makeup.  After all, PM Trudeau's first cabinet was 50% women (not to mention variable in other ways) and when asked he shrugged and said "It's 2015".  Which was accepted as a perfectly good answer.  Canada's ethnic diversity is different from the US's ethnic diversity, but it would be nice to see more than just white men in his cabinet.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 09, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

It's interesting how one can spend money to build infrastructure while cutting taxes and reduce the deficit and debt at the same time.

It's easy, you do it the same way you somehow restore large amounts of high paying single industry manufacturing jobs to small towns in the age of automation without causing trade wars and spiking the price of consumer goods.
Not making fun here, but I'm not sure if this is a sarcastic reply or not. I don't think those manufacturing jobs are ever coming back. I feel for the rust belt, but when the jobs left, they should have too.

sarcastic.  The answer to both my statement and your is pixie dust and wishful thinking, those are the only things that can make Trump's promise to the rust belt come true.
Heh.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: acroy on November 09, 2016, 09:53:19 AM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.

That is so cute you think the big companies will bring back money and enrich their workers and or shareholders.
Way to be condescending.
Companies are in the business of doing one thing: making money for their owners. The offshore money is already on their books and implicit in the share price. It's just not in an American bank. They can't 'bring it home' and pay it out as a dividend (or do anything else with it) without paying corporate income tax, which shareholders do not want them to do.
Do you own any public companies? Vote as a shareholder? educated on these matters? Your comments indicate not.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: FIFoFum on November 09, 2016, 10:00:51 AM
Changes at the federal level won't necessarily dictate change at the state level and changes that require courts to have more than the +1 of Scalia are not imminent. Policies that happen at the agency or executive level are in serious jeopardy (immigration/deportation choices, education, etc.). Dittto for policies that can be defunded easily.

If you live in blue state America, the right to same sex marriage won't be removed. But protections in workplace and schools are now a state/district-by-district matter with no fed support for LGBT people.

If you live in the places where abortion was actually available at all within blue state America, your right to abortion will not change. But all costs for health care, including abortion, in jeopardy.

ACA subsidies and Medicaid expansion are likely toast after 2 year transition unless your state can figure out how to turn a Paul Ryan block grant into enough money to cover these (very unlikely and not a likely priority given other safety net gutting).

Honestly - while I do worry about the white nationalist sentiment, the authoritarianism, racism, etc., the most likely changes are that Congress can push through more of the traditional Republican agenda you would have seen with any candidate (cruz, Rubio, bush, and so on). Tax rates will resemble the W Bush era. Good for rich people and corporations and no one else.

The "best" thing that could happen would be for Trump to stack his branch with whackadoo east coast friends (like a Guiliani), feel ego or power threatened by Paul Ryan, and revert back into the NY billionaire rich dude who was never really a republican in the first place. I don't see Mike Pence running much of anything, given how much Trump doesn't even like him (his last minute thank you to include him was laughable).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on November 09, 2016, 10:40:08 AM
Bad trade deals/inflation/jobs; as much as this has been his focus I am not sure how all this will work out. Higher tariffs for sure, Trump will likely fight GOP Congress on this with a consistent veto until he gets it. Actual jobs/factories will be slow to return, but the continued loss stopping of jobs will be immediate. Hopefully a focus on our trade deficit by country.

Manufacturing will not come back. It's not a matter of them leaving the States; it's a matter of simply fewer of them due to automation. Nothing Trump can do will fix that.

Quote
Gay rights/abortion/religious liberty-he will do his best to ignore.

Will he have to appease his evangelical voters? Or will he assume that they haven't a choice so he can ignore them and still get their votes?

Quote
The one I am worried about; Student loan repayments; Currently in IBR program. not looking forward to how this will go. Luckily a lot of Congress has kids who are probably on this too

Hahaha, good one.

Jobs-mainly meant the factories, the actually # of jobs will be something ~1/10th. It will be slow to happen, decade(s).

(lgbt)/abortion/religious lib-he has their votes. Will begin to seethe as nothing happens. Supreme Court will take some time, if ever, before it turns back gay marriage.

Loans-glad you enjoyed.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: asiljoy on November 09, 2016, 10:47:49 AM
Does anyone have thoughts on his infrastructure ideas? He mentioned it in his speech.

While I think tax cuts will breeze through congress, will infrastructure spending?

I really hope Trump uses his political capital to change the republican party. Force them to do infrastructure and public works projects that the country desperately needs.

Clinton mentioned infrastructure spending, too, and the consensus was that nothing would get done because Congress is reluctant to allocate money.

Will Congress follow his lead because, "Hey friends, we're all Republicans"? It's possible. I expect that it's just another campaign promise that will be forgotten in 6 months.

They might follow his lead because he's in a better position to sell infrastructure investment as an investment in communities/businesses/to create jobs.

I don't believe that logically, but because my conservative family has told me that's what they believe.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 10:49:01 AM
What do you folks think about congressional term limits? Any chance he fights for it? It seems he has the mandate for change, this would be a major overhaul he could push for.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 09, 2016, 10:57:05 AM
What do you folks think about congressional term limits? Any chance he fights for it? It seems he has the mandate for change, this would be a major overhaul he could push for.

Nah. He doesn't give a shit about them, really, and members of Congress will convince him to drop it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: zoltani on November 09, 2016, 11:08:24 AM
Buy stocks now. The shock will wear off in a few days and markets will return to normal.

Wait, why aren't stocks crashing?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 11:17:41 AM
Buy stocks now. The shock will wear off in a few days and markets will return to normal.

Wait, why aren't stocks crashing?

Because republicans are going to lower the corporate tax rate and make the wealthy wealthier. Good for me I guess.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: little_brown_dog on November 09, 2016, 11:18:57 AM
I think if you are white, solidly middle class or wealthy, heterosexual, and not Muslim or an immigrant you are probably going to be fine. Your taxes may go up but meh, that’s really not a catastrophe or a human rights concern. You may not benefit from ACA if it gets dismantled, but if you are solidly middle class or well off chances are you can afford most necessary healthcare. I am genuinely concerned for people of color, religious minorities, the poor, and immigrants though. If Trump’s policies don’t go after them directly, some of his more zealous white nationalist type supporters might. I thought I read somewhere that there was an increase in racially/ethnically motivated hate speech and crimes after Brexit, as if the vote had encouraged people to go out and act on their baser impulses. Not sure how accurate that is, but I am definitely worried that same phenomenon could happen here. I am also very worried about potential impacts on safety net programs and healthcare services for the poor and working classes.

Despite my own personal grief over the election outcome, I am not entirely convinced Trump is going to usher in an apocalypse just yet. He isn’t exactly a true dyed in the wool conservative – no one is really sure what he is. The guy bounces around so much, it’s hard to say who he will nominate for the court, what specific legislation he will go after, etc. If he is truly a narcissist, that means he has a strong desire to look good, and will be willing to do things not on principle, but to make himself more powerful/popular. That makes his decisions unpredictable but not automatically super conservative.

Some realistic projections –

Moderate to conservative justices - Many of my progressive friends seem to think he is going to try to nominate 2 of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse to the court, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he shocks us and chooses moderates in an attempt to appear magnanimous or piss off the religious republicans he hates.

Abortion and LGBT rights – I don’t see Trump crusading against this stuff – that requires moral conviction and a willingness to side with typical republican stances, and the dude just seemed to ride this stuff and take the appropriately conservative and borderline crazy position because he had to in order to secure his voting base. Possible his justices or other leaders would try to go after the legality of these, but I don’t see him personally spearheading an attack or even caring that much.  I do however thing planned parenthood’s funding could be in serious jeopardy.

Immigration – high threat to illegal immigrants. Probable increase in deportations, increased funding for border security. Wall itself possible but doubtful.

Gun control – likely to just do nothing and just block attempts at reform, typical republican stance
Police brutality/minority human rights issues – increased threat to black/latino communities, increased funding and promotion of “law and order” policing strategies

No idea about what foreign affairs would look like. That and the climate/environment are particularly worrying to me.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gondolin on November 09, 2016, 11:25:48 AM
Lots of policy talk and counter policy talk on this thread.

The reality is that we have NO IDEA what Trump is going to do as President. Every is looking at his statements, his campaign and his life, filtering that through their own hopes and trying to guess what Trump will do.

I don't believe that anything Trump has said during the last 18 months is indicative of his true beliefs and motivations. He's said what his base wants to hear and only that. All politicians do this to some extent but, Trump has taken to another level. He may pursue some of the issues addressed during his campaign...or not. He may acquiesce to the general Republican agenda...or not.

He may prove to as crazy as he looks or he might rip off his mask and turn into Jimmy Carter. No one knows.

Making guesses about what policies will be pursued are just that, guesses, until the bills are introduced to Congress or the executive orders are signed.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: chesebert on November 09, 2016, 11:30:39 AM
Because market thinks he will be good for the economy, allow companies and individuals to repatriate the shitload of cash they have overseas and make the money go to work for America and rebuild the US infrastructure. If you go abroad often, you will appreciate how crappy US's infrastructure is.

Granted, none of the above can actually happen without Congress's approval and/or state-level action. 

Buy stocks now. The shock will wear off in a few days and markets will return to normal.

Wait, why aren't stocks crashing?

Because republicans are going to lower the corporate tax rate and make the wealthy wealthier. Good for me I guess.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 09, 2016, 11:36:39 AM
lower taxes. and hopefully more efficient and simple tax code in the process. 

republican house/senate/president

Are you making 500k a year or more?  In that case, enjoy your lower taxes.  If not......HA HA HA

his plan lowers taxes for those making less than 500k ... just the increased standard deduction does alot.

I would be surprised if the current 3rd revision of his tax plan got implemented unaltered. But if it did.

Yes its true that the standard deduction is a lot higher. But, correct me if I am wrong, he also couples that with the elimination of the personal exemption. That largely negates the larger standard deduction increase.

On top of that 25% tax bracket remains more or less unmoved and the old 10-15% bracket gets smoothed out to 12%. The net effect will be that all households making around $200,000 or less per year, which are the vast majority of us, will see a very minor bump or drop in taxes but it will more or less be the same saving at most maybe a couple grand un-taxed which isn't going to change your lifestyle.

While the removal of estate taxes and huge drop in top tax bracket will a major tax break for very high income individuals. The only effect of this will be an even wider gap between the rich and the middle class as if it could grow any faster.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 09, 2016, 11:46:01 AM
About the only thing he can do for his constituents is to removed as much regulation as possible from the energy sector. That might bring back some jobs and make him popular among his voters. And he can blow up our trade deals, not sure if he is going to get resistance on that from his own party or not, hard to say.

I am completely unsure if lower or removal of corporate tax would add blue collar jobs.

I think what is administration does will depend more on who he appointments to each position in the executive branch than on what was said in his campaign. I would imagine republicans will have to fall in line to avoid loosing there seats at the 2 year mark as a lot of pro Trump Republicans may try to ride the wave into office in 2 years..
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on November 09, 2016, 11:53:01 AM
Lots of policy talk and counter policy talk on this thread.

The reality is that we have NO IDEA what Trump is going to do as President. Every is looking at his statements, his campaign and his life, filtering that through their own hopes and trying to guess what Trump will do.

I don't believe that anything Trump has said during the last 18 months is indicative of his true beliefs and motivations. He's said what his base wants to hear and only that. All politicians do this to some extent but, Trump has taken to another level. He may pursue some of the issues addressed during his campaign...or not. He may acquiesce to the general Republican agenda...or not.

He may prove to as crazy as he looks or he might rip off his mask and turn into Jimmy Carter. No one knows.

Making guesses about what policies will be pursued are just that, guesses, until the bills are introduced to Congress or the executive orders are signed.

This is the issue to me though. He has said those things.  He has basically bullied himself into the oval.  He ahs said violence is ok, that it is ok to make fun of vets, that it is ok to make fun of handy capped people, that it is ok to shit all over the rights of whoever the hell he wants to.  If you are rich enough and white enough it does not matter.  This is the real issue with this election...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 09, 2016, 12:04:12 PM
Lots of policy talk and counter policy talk on this thread.

The reality is that we have NO IDEA what Trump is going to do as President. Every is looking at his statements, his campaign and his life, filtering that through their own hopes and trying to guess what Trump will do.

I don't believe that anything Trump has said during the last 18 months is indicative of his true beliefs and motivations. He's said what his base wants to hear and only that. All politicians do this to some extent but, Trump has taken to another level. He may pursue some of the issues addressed during his campaign...or not. He may acquiesce to the general Republican agenda...or not.

He may prove to as crazy as he looks or he might rip off his mask and turn into Jimmy Carter. No one knows.

Making guesses about what policies will be pursued are just that, guesses, until the bills are introduced to Congress or the executive orders are signed.

This is the issue to me though. He has said those things.  He has basically bullied himself into the oval.  He ahs said violence is ok, that it is ok to make fun of vets, that it is ok to make fun of handy capped people, that it is ok to shit all over the rights of whoever the hell he wants to.  If you are rich enough and white enough it does not matter.  This is the real issue with this election...



Trump supporters: "Our hope is that the man we elected was completely lying for the past 18 months.  Then everything will be fine."

GuitarStv to Trump supporters: "What the fuck were you voting for then?"
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gondolin on November 09, 2016, 12:09:33 PM
Quote
Trump supporters: "Our hope is that the man we elected was completely lying for the past 18 months.  Then everything will be fine."

What Trump supporters are you talking to? I'm certainly not one. I was just pointing out that it's possible that he's been lying for the past 18 months. He's been such a charlatan and has played down to his base so far that it's hard to tell where his opinions end and the campaign hyperbole begins.

I'm not particularly optimistic about what Trump will do once in office but, I do think everyone should stop reaching for the hemlock, at least until he starts instituting policy.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 12:12:19 PM
GuitarStv to Trump supporters: "What the fuck were you voting for then?"

I think the answers would be not voting for, but against Clinton and also: change.

They're going to get both now (no Clinton and change).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 09, 2016, 12:22:50 PM
Buy stocks now. The shock will wear off in a few days and markets will return to normal.

Or today even.  But ouch, my treasuries
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 09, 2016, 12:39:23 PM

Manufacturing will not come back. It's not a matter of them leaving the States; it's a matter of simply fewer of them due to automation. Nothing Trump can do will fix that.


Robot tax
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 09, 2016, 12:47:41 PM
It'll be interesting to see what happens with those US companies that have very large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because tax. I'm assuming Trump will do something to get that money back into America - question is what does it get spent on?


Why would he do that though?  HIS companies have large amounts of money overseas that they're not bringing home because of tax.

End corporate income tax. The big companies will bring it 'home' in a heartbeat and find a vehicle to return it to shareholders.

That is so cute you think the big companies will bring back money and enrich their workers and or shareholders.

What exactly do you think they will do with the money if they bring it back?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on November 09, 2016, 12:51:28 PM
Well we know one thing already: he'll try his damnedest to destroy what little we do to protect the planet.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Equally if not more appalling, appointees on deck for other cabinet positions:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rugorak on November 09, 2016, 12:55:33 PM
Here is a personal impact view.

I work for a college and my girlfriend works as a researcher for a medical school/hospital. Given the policies Ryan has been trying to get done for the past few years and Trump proposed during the campaign we both could be out of work next year. They want to end federal student aid. They want it all from private banks. But make the colleges be involved in the loan process and decide if someone is a good risk or not based on past academic records, major, and a plethora of other things. The college I work for is small non-profit school and primarily serves under-served adult learners. So many times we don't have academic records that are recent because the people have been working for years. And we don't have a huge endowment. So it could put us out of business. It is next to impossible to guess how people who have been out of formal education for years and sometimes decades may do.
My girlfriend's job is primarily funded by research grants. And the vast majority originate from the federal government. (She does cancer research if that matters to anyone.) So given how much Trump and the GOP abhor science she is probably screwed. And even if her PhD boss attempted to try and keep her on chances are the same thing that is going to impact my job could hit her for a double whammy.

So basically unless he flips and/or the GOP changes their stated positions my household is screwed. Thankfully we are working towards FIRE so we should be able to survive. But it sets us back years.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RosieTR on November 09, 2016, 01:03:30 PM
Remember the kid in junior high who always tried to act tough and macho to fit in?  That's Trump in a nutshell.  He's always been mostly talk.  I think it may be sinking in that for perhaps the first time in his life he's going to be held accountable for what he's said.  And it's scaring the SHIT out of him.

I hope you're right. I get a very different vibe, which is that he doesn't care much of what happens as long as he's getting attention. Which he will get for 4 years, in abundance. I think he's going to hand off all the detail stuff to his underlings (Pence and others) and do things to possibly piss off the GOP now and then because, more attention. I think that will be talk/bluster at international relations (attention from foreigners too!). So yes, agree it's a little unpredictable, but I also think we'll get Pence's agenda: defunding PP for sure, big reductions in other reproductive freedoms, repeal of Roe v Wade in a couple of years if they can install the right judges; legislation to grant the ability to discriminate against people just because you think they're gay, maybe repeal of gay marriage similar to the Roe v Wade situation. Pence cares a lot about the social evangelical agenda, and Trump gives even less of a crap now about it than when he was running. As for the economics, Paul Ryan is the guy. His agenda is very heavy on trickle-down to the point that Reagan looks like a tax-and-spend guy. Ryan cares about this a LOT, so has the will to push it through and has the details lined up. Again, Trump doesn't care all that much about the details as long as people are paying attention to him. They can push all this stuff through, having available all the lines of government (executive, legislative and soon, judicial) and Trump will sign because it will pander to his attention-getting. Maybe once in awhile he'll balk just for fun. But liberals will squawk at a lot of this, so it will still be plenty of attention.

Income taxes for all but the very wealthy will likely rise, capital gains taxes will likely be reduced or stay the same, ACA and other medical programs (Medicaid, maybe Medicare) will be gutted. If you're poor, good luck with that. The real bitch is that the combo of a Pence agenda reducing birth control availability and a Ryan reduction in other services for the poor mean a LOT more children born into struggling families. And that will not only be a moral issue but also reverberate for generations.

Nobody in the administration will give a rat's ass about climate. So if you are in the west, plan now for drought. Don't buy a house in southern Florida; they won't have fresh water in our lifetimes and possibly a lot sooner.

What Trump won't do? Bring much back in the way of jobs. Like previously pointed out, these are moving more toward automation, not less. Elon Musk isn't going to stop building self-driving electric cars because of Trump-he can just take it to Europe or wherever there's a market. Already a truck has made a successful delivery drive down an interstate in Colorado; trucking is one of the biggest employers of low-educated men in the US, especially in Rust Belt and Deep South areas. If there's nothing to stem the loss of those jobs, those guys are going to be disillusioned by Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rubybeth on November 09, 2016, 01:04:18 PM
I'm seriously worried that a repeal of Obamacare means that our FIRE plans are in jeopardy. We can plan for cost increases but we cannot plan for one of us having our coverage dropped and being uncovered, should we develop a health condition down the road.

Yes, get ready for this. You may be lucky if you never need health care, but if you need coverage and have pre-existing conditions, we'll go back to the old way. People who are saying this will have no affect have not really read any of the details or don't understand how insurers make money.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RosieTR on November 09, 2016, 01:14:37 PM
Here is a personal impact view.

I work for a college and my girlfriend works as a researcher for a medical school/hospital. Given the policies Ryan has been trying to get done for the past few years and Trump proposed during the campaign we both could be out of work next year. They want to end federal student aid. They want it all from private banks. But make the colleges be involved in the loan process and decide if someone is a good risk or not based on past academic records, major, and a plethora of other things. The college I work for is small non-profit school and primarily serves under-served adult learners. So many times we don't have academic records that are recent because the people have been working for years. And we don't have a huge endowment. So it could put us out of business. It is next to impossible to guess how people who have been out of formal education for years and sometimes decades may do.
My girlfriend's job is primarily funded by research grants. And the vast majority originate from the federal government. (She does cancer research if that matters to anyone.) So given how much Trump and the GOP abhor science she is probably screwed. And even if her PhD boss attempted to try and keep her on chances are the same thing that is going to impact my job could hit her for a double whammy.

So basically unless he flips and/or the GOP changes their stated positions my household is screwed. Thankfully we are working towards FIRE so we should be able to survive. But it sets us back years.

I agree that NIH, NASA, etc will probably be drastically cut, with the super-conservative idea that somehow this will be funded by industry. It won't. Maybe the EU will fill in some, but it will put a number of people out of work along with delaying discoveries that could be life-saving. Maybe she can retool for big data or compliance work? There will be some industry potential there.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 01:16:26 PM
Here is a personal impact view.

I work for a college and my girlfriend works as a researcher for a medical school/hospital. Given the policies Ryan has been trying to get done for the past few years and Trump proposed during the campaign we both could be out of work next year. They want to end federal student aid. They want it all from private banks. But make the colleges be involved in the loan process and decide if someone is a good risk or not based on past academic records, major, and a plethora of other things. The college I work for is small non-profit school and primarily serves under-served adult learners. So many times we don't have academic records that are recent because the people have been working for years. And we don't have a huge endowment. So it could put us out of business. It is next to impossible to guess how people who have been out of formal education for years and sometimes decades may do.
My girlfriend's job is primarily funded by research grants. And the vast majority originate from the federal government. (She does cancer research if that matters to anyone.) So given how much Trump and the GOP abhor science she is probably screwed. And even if her PhD boss attempted to try and keep her on chances are the same thing that is going to impact my job could hit her for a double whammy.

So basically unless he flips and/or the GOP changes their stated positions my household is screwed. Thankfully we are working towards FIRE so we should be able to survive. But it sets us back years.

I agree that NIH, NASA, etc will probably be drastically cut, with the super-conservative idea that somehow this will be funded by industry. It won't. Maybe the EU will fill in some, but it will put a number of people out of work along with delaying discoveries that could be life-saving. Maybe she can retool for big data or compliance work? There will be some industry potential there.

Or structural engineering or construction? I hear there might be a lot of workers needed for concrete, particularly along the border.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 01:59:45 PM
1) Repeal of the estate tax. This aligns with the beliefs of both traditional Republicans and billionaires everywhere.

2) The wall? Will it really be built? Do we raise taxes to build it?

3) The US will stop accepting Muslims as refugees. The Republicans already want to stop this and it aligns with Trump's rhetoric.

4) ACA will be repealed and possibly replaced with a watered-down health care plan. Would Trump and the Republicans kick out those with pre-existing conditions? Possibly. They could be sent back to the super-expensive last resort state pools.

5) NAFTA. Would Trump dismantle it, as hinted? Would this cause Texas to go into a depression? It would certainly hurt Mexico.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 09, 2016, 02:03:39 PM
1) Repeal of the estate tax. This aligns with the beliefs of both traditional Republicans and billionaires everywhere.

2) The wall? Will it really be built? Do we raise taxes to build it?

3) The US will stop accepting Muslims as refugees. The Republicans already want to stop this and it aligns with Trump's rhetoric.

4) ACA will be repealed and possibly replaced with a watered-down health care plan. Would Trump and the Republicans kick out those with pre-existing conditions? Possibly. They could be sent back to the super-expensive last resort state pools.

5) NAFTA. Would Trump dismantle it, as hinted? Would this cause Texas to go into a depression? It would certainly hurt Mexico.
Which did not exist in many states before ACA.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 02:17:45 PM
4) ACA will be repealed and possibly replaced with a watered-down health care plan. Would Trump and the Republicans kick out those with pre-existing conditions? Possibly. They could be sent back to the super-expensive last resort state pools.
Which did not exist in many states before ACA.

Right. Never underestimate the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" crowd, though. There wasn't a fix then and there probably won't be a fix in February. Or, rather, the fix will be "move or get healthier."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on November 09, 2016, 02:20:32 PM
This thread is about the realistic impacts of Trump as president.  The general consensus is that his campaign was primarily bullshit, saying what he needed to say to get in.  Epically when it came to the LGBT community rights.

Let me tell you a story.  This is a true story, I cannot share names and locations of the people in this story because I need to respect their privacy.

My youngest son is transgender.  I do not care to argue your belief in this matter, my opinion and beliefs will not change and neither will yours.  Because my son is in the LGBT community, I have gotten involved, very involved.  I am a member of several support groups, including a north American support group for gender diverse children.

Now, everyone know Trumps hate speech towards the LCBT community and the promises he has made to revert marriage equality, and even to start shock conversion therapy again.  Since the election has ended, with Trump as the president elect, the north American support group has exploded with activity.  There has been a total of 15 suicides committed by youth in this group, primarily 16-20 years old ( all but one, who was 14).  They have all left notes, and they all say that they have taken their life.  The notes are all different, of course, but say basically that with Trump in power, they cannot be who they are anyway.  The 1-800 help lines for LGBT youth are jammed full as are those for transgender youth as well.  This is a real effect of this election so far.  Who gives a fuck about policy, about taxes?  Our youth is killing themselves over this.

For those asking who gets to choose what racism is.  This is blatant homophobia causing these deaths...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: oldtoyota on November 09, 2016, 02:49:31 PM
I doubt you'll see the apocalypse that some have predicted. Maybe it's the alcohol talking but I think Trump will be determined to prove himself capable in the role.

You will not see any nukes. But you will see swift military retribution against any foreign country that threatens America (in whatever way, shape or form "threatened" takes).

I agree there will be significant tax cuts for the 1%. There will be attempts to shift the centre to the right. There will be a reframing of the culture wars - the topics so beloved by the left - gay marriage, climate change, refugees.

It won't be pretty, but the millions out there who have felt ignored, isolated and left out of 21st century progress will now feel like they are on top.

It won't change a damn thing for them however. Trump will govern for those like him, just as most politicians do. The situation for the server at the local Maccas will still be the same in 4 years time.

^ This. I predict trump's blue-collar supporters will be experiencing a steamin' hot bowl of buyer's (voter's?) remorse before his first (and, one hopes, only) term is half over. While I'm sure that what benefits wealthy CEOs also benefits those who work for them in some magical fairyland somewhere I don't see The Donald as having the will to cause that to happen in the real world. As far as bringing jobs back from China, he could have done that with his own signature clothing line. But he didn't. I feel somewhat bad for those who feel like they've been left out of whatever prosperity the rest of us enjoy (if not the racism and xenophobia that seems to accompany it) but that sympathy is tempered by the knowledge that they should have questioned Trump's ability and/or desire to actually make it come about. Instead they blindly accepted what they wanted to hear. In short- they were played, pure and simple.

Exactly. I'm thinking of a profile I read about a man in his forties who said he would vote for Trump because voting for Obama didn't help his life or help him get a new job. I wasn't clear on what this person expected a POTUS to do in the job department. It makes me sad. As you said, these people were played.

And, if it matters, the man was a minority, which was part of the point of the article.



Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cassie on November 09, 2016, 03:10:14 PM
So very sorry to hear about the suicides.  I really don't know what people were thinking when voting for him.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 09, 2016, 03:27:06 PM
If we can't realistically predict how Trump will govern, assuming all his campaign promises are bullshit, is anyone else doing OMY for Trump?  I know I planned to give notice at the end of the year, but now... a lot seems up in the air.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 09, 2016, 03:44:38 PM
If we can't realistically predict how Trump will govern, assuming all his campaign promises are bullshit, is anyone else doing OMY for Trump?  I know I planned to give notice at the end of the year, but now... a lot seems up in the air.

My last day is actually in 3 weeks. I'm thinking of taking another contract for next year until I see what happens to the ACA.

Or, since we're healthy, we might just go for it and do some medical tourism when pre-existing conditions eventually exclude us.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: moof on November 09, 2016, 03:54:41 PM
I expect the next world war to be fought on Twitter.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Julard on November 09, 2016, 04:11:10 PM
I can't guess what the impacts of his presidency will be.  He's such a bullshitter that it's impossible to know what he really believes/understands/plans, or how these will change from day to day.

But his election is an impact on integrity, on honesty, education, respect, compassion, tolerance and even the most basic courtesy.  Perhaps the consequences for global economics and security won't be as dire as many fear, but the impact on values is appalling.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: mtnrider on November 09, 2016, 04:16:33 PM
4) ACA will be repealed and possibly replaced with a watered-down health care plan. Would Trump and the Republicans kick out those with pre-existing conditions? Possibly. They could be sent back to the super-expensive last resort state pools.
Which did not exist in many states before ACA.

Even when they did exist, pre-ACA, some of those states' high-risk pools were difficult to get into.  There was essentially a waiting list.  And they could be unaffordable.

When the ACA is repealed, if you have a pre-existing condition, you're in trouble if you're not working in a company big enough to have shared-cost healthcare coverage.  You may be able to get charity coverage for emergency procedures.

Individual insurance premiums will likely increase at a very high rate, since individuals who opt for coverage are those who need it more.

The silver lining is that, he wants to allow health insurance companies to compete nationally.  It's possible that economies of scale will decrease some overhead costs and increase negotiation power.  It remains to be seen if states will give up their regulatory power though.  And hospitals and insurance companies are already negotiating fiercely. 

Be careful.  If you have employer coverage, you might want to stay employed until we know what will happen.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: moof on November 09, 2016, 04:19:00 PM
My fear is that he meant it when he said that Pence would handle all affairs foreign and domestic.  If Trump only wants to be a puppet and to let Pence run the show for him ala Cheney, then we better watch out.  Pence is a "true believer" of some pretty scary and draconian stuff.  Even with all the tapes, we may find that Trump really is the more respectful of the two when it comes to important women's rights.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: FIPurpose on November 09, 2016, 04:27:02 PM
Well we know one thing already: he'll try his damnedest to destroy what little we do to protect the planet.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Equally if not more appalling, appointees on deck for other cabinet positions:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071

Wow one could only hope that this list is a very rough draft. Sarah Palin, Ben Carson, Rick Perry, Sessions, all inept to lead just about any department.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Abe on November 09, 2016, 05:21:50 PM
I think Trump will nominate semi-random people to cabinet positions. They won't have much to do since he'll strip most regulations and Ryan will get congress to defund enforcement of the rest.  Undocumented aliens will be deported.  Luckily without the pesky government enforcing regulations, we can pay these newly employed $1/hr. More awesomeness for his supporters since that will bring jobs back to the US. Yeah, a lot will go bankrupt from medical expenses from lack of insurance (diabetes is a pre-existing condition!), lack of pay and lack of welfare, but overall very great outlook. Their church can take care of them and there's always subsistence farming/hunting in a regulation-free utopia (projected deer population, 2018: 2, living off the White House lawn.)

But in all seriousness, no one knows what'll happen. That's why We the People should be heavily armed and ready to defend ourselves.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 09, 2016, 05:50:13 PM
Thats alright Trump can spend eight years fucking the city folk over and we will elect socialist and we can seesaw our way to a full blown fascist if we haven't already gotten there this go around.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: MasterStache on November 09, 2016, 06:53:07 PM
Well we know one thing already: he'll try his damnedest to destroy what little we do to protect the planet.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Equally if not more appalling, appointees on deck for other cabinet positions:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071

Well nothing says "I'm gonna bring this country together" more than choosing a climate denier to head up the EPA. I had a small glimmer of hope, but that is fading fast.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 09, 2016, 07:07:13 PM
4) ACA will be repealed and possibly replaced with a watered-down health care plan. Would Trump and the Republicans kick out those with pre-existing conditions? Possibly. They could be sent back to the super-expensive last resort state pools.
Which did not exist in many states before ACA.

Even when they did exist, pre-ACA, some of those states' high-risk pools were difficult to get into.  There was essentially a waiting list.  And they could be unaffordable.

When the ACA is repealed, if you have a pre-existing condition, you're in trouble if you're not working in a company big enough to have shared-cost healthcare coverage.  You may be able to get charity coverage for emergency procedures.

Individual insurance premiums will likely increase at a very high rate, since individuals who opt for coverage are those who need it more.

The silver lining is that, he wants to allow health insurance companies to compete nationally.  It's possible that economies of scale will decrease some overhead costs and increase negotiation power.  It remains to be seen if states will give up their regulatory power though.  And hospitals and insurance companies are already negotiating fiercely. 

Be careful.  If you have employer coverage, you might want to stay employed until we know what will happen.

To be fair, everything but the pre-existing conditions issue is present in the ACA - still very expensive, still getting more and more expensive every year, hospitals have trouble operating under some of the rules, and many doctors/hospitals are pulling out of the affordable plans.  I refuse to believe there isn't a better option than what we currently have for healthcare in this country.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 09, 2016, 07:13:23 PM
Well we know one thing already: he'll try his damnedest to destroy what little we do to protect the planet.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Equally if not more appalling, appointees on deck for other cabinet positions:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071

Well nothing says "I'm gonna bring this country together" more than choosing a climate denier to head up the EPA. I had a small glimmer of hope, but that is fading fast.

The potential appointment of Myron Ebell to the EPA is concerning in a multi-generational kind of way.

The extent to which Trump will actually deliver the opposite of what we need makes my brain hurt. That it will also disproportionately hurt the marginalized that he tapped into to get elected just pushes it over the edge.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: mtnrider on November 09, 2016, 08:17:23 PM

Even when they did exist, pre-ACA, some of those states' high-risk pools were difficult to get into.  There was essentially a waiting list.  And they could be unaffordable.

When the ACA is repealed, if you have a pre-existing condition, you're in trouble if you're not working in a company big enough to have shared-cost healthcare coverage.  You may be able to get charity coverage for emergency procedures.

Individual insurance premiums will likely increase at a very high rate, since individuals who opt for coverage are those who need it more.

The silver lining is that, he wants to allow health insurance companies to compete nationally.  It's possible that economies of scale will decrease some overhead costs and increase negotiation power.  It remains to be seen if states will give up their regulatory power though.  And hospitals and insurance companies are already negotiating fiercely. 

Be careful.  If you have employer coverage, you might want to stay employed until we know what will happen.

To be fair, everything but the pre-existing conditions issue is present in the ACA - still very expensive, still getting more and more expensive every year, hospitals have trouble operating under some of the rules, and many doctors/hospitals are pulling out of the affordable plans.  I refuse to believe there isn't a better option than what we currently have for healthcare in this country.

Clawbacks and caps were removed with ACA too.  ACA has an option for dental coverage.

I don't have nationwide data, and it's hard to compare apples to apples with insurance plans. But in my northeastern state, the single adult + children ACA plans costs are on par with the coverage and cost I get through a megacorp.  I'd wish for both to be more "affordable", but that's a different problem.

My employer's plans have problems almost every year as they renegotiate with hospitals.  We get warning letters from the insurance company, "Stop using hospital X, we were not able to negotiate an agreement this year."  And doctors frequently drop off my employer's plan too.  "Sorry, we no longer accept that insurance as they only pay out at medicaid rates."  New doctors are added though.

This isn't to defend the current system, but to say that the ACA is not so different, cost-wise.  Like you, I also believe there is a better way, although it may well involve some hard choices.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: gimp on November 09, 2016, 08:41:29 PM
I expect the following.

1. Anti-tech, anti-intellectual, anti-press bias. Donnie has already picked out several companies to attack (apple, google, new york times...)

2. Fucked up world standing. He's going to shake his dick at someone on twitter or in a diplomatic meeting, and Russia is going to take over half of Latvia and China will take over half the Philippines, and so on.

3. I expect to see much more gerrymandering, poll obstruction to prevent poor/black/etc people from voting, and a loss of health insurance for some twenty million people.

4. Gay people might lose their right to marry, women are going to continue losing their rights to abortion in many states.

5. Democrats are going to lose even harder in 2018.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 09, 2016, 10:25:38 PM
5. Democrats are going to lose even harder in 2018.

There is a high likelihood just based on the seats that are up for election that republicans will make gains in the senate in 2018, possibly getting to the filibuster proof 60 seat count
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cathy on November 09, 2016, 10:40:41 PM
Gay people might lose their right to marry ...

Gay people have always had the right to marry, everywhere in the United States. That is unlikely to change. The former marriage restrictions were based on gender, not on sexual preference. To be sure, those gender-based restrictions were fundamentally unjust, but I see no reason to obscure the issue by using popular news media rhetoric about "gay marriage" and "gay people ... los[ing] their right to marry".

The gender-based restrictions
and therefore it makes little sense to paint this issue as being about the "right to marry" of "gay people". That language is simultaneously under-inclusive and over-inclusive.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 09, 2016, 10:46:48 PM

Manufacturing will not come back. It's not a matter of them leaving the States; it's a matter of simply fewer of them due to automation. Nothing Trump can do will fix that.


Robot tax

I doubt this will actually happen, but it's an interesting thought. Also, if there was such a thing, wouldn't the money just go to the government, and not into creating more jobs? US manufacturing output has doubled in the past 30 years and is still the biggest sector in the US economysource (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-manufacturing-dead-output-has-doubled-in-three-decades-2016-03-28), despite what many people think. A lot of that increased efficiency is from robots/automation, so even if a  tax were imposed I would bet most manufacturing companies would just pay it and continue using the new technology.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: chesebert on November 09, 2016, 10:47:57 PM
Good god. Stop posting like you are writing law review. Does "losing their right to marry another individual of the same gender" work for you?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 09, 2016, 11:02:45 PM
Gay people have always had the right to marry, everywhere in the United States.

Cathy, this is unjustly pedantic even for you.

Saying that gay people weren't unfairly discriminated against because they could legally marry someone of the opposite gender is deliberately missing the entire point. 

You might as well say lynchings were always legal because they didn't actually kill black people, black people just happened to die of asphyxiation after being lynched.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Travis on November 09, 2016, 11:11:47 PM
This morning a number of my coworkers were jokingly taking bets on how quickly NATO would fall apart and which countries Russia would immediately take control of.  Trump made a lot of anti-alliance speeches implying he'd be willing to give up our eastern-most allies for a thaw with Russia.  I hope he or his staff figure out a way to keep his ego/mouth in check when it comes to dealing with other governments. 

I think he'll make maintaining the current size of the military a priority, but his campaign promises of increases are fantasy without major spending.  In the same speech where he almost told the Baltics they'd be on their own, he promised what amounted to $100 billion in more ships, planes, and troops.  He promised numbers without mentioning the price tag, but it's not hard to figure out.  It's in the Republican playbook that he had to give a bigger military speech, so who knows.

With Republicans controlling Congress and the Presidency I'm worried about an anti-science and anti-environmental agenda being pushed through. That was one thing the host of Republican Primary challengers all seemed to agree on.

I hope he's serious about finding a way to jack up funding for infrastructure. We have roads, bridges, pipes, and electrical falling apart.  I read a report from 2010 saying we're $2 trillion short of maintaining it all.

The Republicans will probably see a rollback of their majority if they don't do something with the ACA next year.  Ryan's speech made it sound like a priority, and from what I'm reading a fair chunk of Trump's victory hinged on people's opinions of healthcare so expect to see something soon on that.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cathy on November 09, 2016, 11:20:42 PM
Good god. Stop posting like you are writing law review. Does "losing their right to marry another individual of the same gender" work for you?

My preferred phrasing is to speak of the elimination of gender-based restrictions for marriage (or the restoration of them as the case may be). I prefer not to speak about the gender or sexual preferences of the parties to a proposed marriage. Although it may seem like pedantry, I think my terminology is more inclusive and better promotes equality. In contrast, the popular news media terminology propagates certain problematic narratives about the concept of sexual preference and its relation to romantic relationships, among other issues.


As for your other comment, I'm not sure why you are approaching my posts so antagonistically. I also detected a hint of animosity in the post that I replied to here (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/chase-sapphire-reserve-100-000-points-signup-bonus/msg1275039/#msg1275039). My posts on the forum are written in my normal voice.


Cathy, this is unjustly pedantic even for you.

I have always disliked the term "gay marriage" and its derivative forms (such as speaking of the right to marry of "gay people"). As mentioned above, I think those terms subtly endorse problematic views. My complaint with the terms imparts no view on the underlying subject matter.


Saying that gay people weren't unfairly discriminated against

I didn't say this. It's undeniable that the gender-based restrictions had an adverse, and discriminatory, effect on people who identified or identify as gay. This was not disputed in my earlier post.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 10, 2016, 04:32:27 AM
Gay people might lose their right to marry ...

Gay people have always had the right to marry, everywhere in the United States. That is unlikely to change. The former marriage restrictions were based on gender, not on sexual preference. To be sure, those gender-based restrictions were fundamentally unjust, but I see no reason to obscure the issue by using popular news media rhetoric about "gay marriage" and "gay people ... los[ing] their right to marry".

Gay people did not have the right to marry each other.  That did change, and could revert back to the way things were before, therefore losing their right to marry each other.

Basing marriage restrictions on gender impacts only one population . . . the population interested in marrying the same gender.  The commonly used short form for these marriages is 'gay marriage' since straight people (by virtue of being straight) are not interested in marrying the same gender.


The gender-based restrictions
  • did not affect all people who identified or identify as gay, and
  • did not affect only people who identified or identify as gay,
and therefore it makes little sense to paint this issue as being about the "right to marry" of "gay people". That language is simultaneously under-inclusive and over-inclusive.

The gender based restrictions:
- did effect all gay people who wanted to marry their gay partner.
- only effected the rights of people who are gay, since by definition straight people prefer to have sex with and marry those of the opposite sex.

This is entirely about the "right to marry each other" for "gay people".
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 10, 2016, 05:08:36 AM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 10, 2016, 05:55:53 AM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.

The government isn't.  Loving someone isn't a precondition to get a marriage contract, and in fact has little/nothing to do with being licensed.  A marriage license carries with it specific legal and tax related ramifications.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lyssa on November 10, 2016, 07:04:34 AM
I think/hope he won't be that bad because he seems to be motivated by one thing only: to win, to be the first.

He won. He's president.

It's possible he's going to spend most of his term looking at pictures of himself. I don't belief he's going to persecute minorities because that would require a different kind of motivation. He won't be as bad for women as Ted Cruz would have been. He's the kind of misogynist who slaps his secretary's ass, not the kind of misogynist dedicating his life to closing down Planned Parenthood.

Obama care is most likely gone. That's bad. I don't understand how so many US Americans can consider public health insurance to be the road to socialism. Baffling...

Taxes: I dare not predict what happens here. Maybe nothing, maybe yet more taxcuts for the rich and more crumbling infrastructure as a result.

Foreign policy: I honestly belief Trump is going to be a lot less bad than people think. Everything he said points towards that he does not want the US involved in foreign wars that he beliefs cost the US a lot more than it has to gain (he might be on to something there). I've thought for years that the European lefties wish for US interventionism to end, right until they get what they want...

Regarding his temper and machoism: other heads of state who are of the same kind will respect him for it. That's what lefty liberals don't understand: Being nice and trying to reach a compromise is weakness in the eyes of Putin; Erdogan and the likes of them. Just see where all playing nice has gotten Europe with those two sweethearts. Turkey and Russia won't turn into real democracies any time soon (Turkey is wiping out any progress it had made since Atatürk at a breathtaking speed, controversial in this forum about a year ago (hi GuitarStv... :-)), pretty fucking obvious now). Therefore, things need to be dealt with as they are and not glossed over by 'building bridges', 'keeping doors open' etc. IMHO turkey should be kicked out of NATO. Oman and the Kurds in Northern Irak can provide airbases etc. Yes, there are Islamists in Oman too, but the head of state isn't one of them. Yes, a lot of Kurdish militia are socialists, but still the most trustworthy party in this region of the world.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 10, 2016, 07:07:07 AM
Gay people might lose their right to marry ...

Gay people have always had the right to marry, everywhere in the United States. That is unlikely to change. The former marriage restrictions were based on gender, not on sexual preference. To be sure, those gender-based restrictions were fundamentally unjust, but I see no reason to obscure the issue by using popular news media rhetoric about "gay marriage" and "gay people ... los[ing] their right to marry".

Gay people did not have the right to marry each other.

Sure they did.  It just had to be a gay man marrying a gay woman.  Just like God intended.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rubybeth on November 10, 2016, 08:01:16 AM
The ACA will go away, as will the recent changes to Fair Labor Standards Act (minimum salary of $47,476 for exempt employees), and I also predict Public Student Loan Forgiveness (or any other loan forgiveness programs) will also go away.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 10, 2016, 08:16:47 AM
I think/hope he won't be that bad because he seems to be motivated by one thing only: to win, to be the first.



That's not the only thing he is/was motivated by.

He's motivated to win.

Correlative to this, he is a zero-sum guy: if he is a winner, it means anyone who isn't with him is a loser.

He is also motivated by vindictiveness. We have seen ample evidence of that. If he brings this to the presidency, which I have no reason to think he won't, it will be pretty bad.

He is also motivated by an extreme need to be adored. Which means that he will continue to do things that will make his most ardent supporters stand up and cheer. Not everything, certainly. I mean, I don't at all think he will actually implement policies that will help the working-class white voters who voted for him get better jobs, for example. But, while he's not doing a damn thing about that, he will be loudly crowing about basically dismantling the EPA, removing any climate change policies that were in place, and generally appealing to the "rolling coal" contingent.  Not to mention high-profile acts designed to get people who hate and fear Muslims to go into the back yard and shoot off their guns in exhilaration.

So yeah, he's gonna be motivated by more than just being the first.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cathy on November 10, 2016, 08:38:48 AM
GuitarStv, I think your response to me illustrates the validity of my objection.


The gender based restrictions:
- did effect all gay people who wanted to marry their gay partner.

This is not accurate.

For various reasons, there were gay people who were able to marry their partner of the same sex who under the former system, generally where the state's determination of one person's sex was not accurate.


- only effected the rights of people who are gay

This is not accurate.

The gender-based restrictions also affected, among others:


... since by definition straight people prefer to have sex with and marry those of the opposite sex.

Marriage doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sex, despite what the popular news media tells you. There are loving romantic relationships out there that do not involve sex at all, including some marriages. The parties to those relationships might identify as any of a number of things -- not necessarily asexual, actually. For example, there are plenty of cases where a gay man falls in love with a straight woman, and they might decide to get married. This was allowed in some cases under the former system even though it was a sincere, real relationship involving a gay person. I mention this because this is yet another type of experience that the problematic terms erase.


This is entirely about the "right to marry each other" for "gay people".

No, it's not. That's what the popular news media says, but as you now start to see, those popular news media stories have long-erased the experiences and stories of all sorts of different people, and you continue to propagate that erasure when you use terms and phrases like "gay marriage", the "right to marriage of gay people", and even "same-sex marriage".
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: begood on November 10, 2016, 08:41:17 AM
I can't guess what the impacts of his presidency will be.  He's such a bullshitter that it's impossible to know what he really believes/understands/plans, or how these will change from day to day.

But his election is an impact on integrity, on honesty, education, respect, compassion, tolerance and even the most basic courtesy.  Perhaps the consequences for global economics and security won't be as dire as many fear, but the impact on values is appalling.

Well said, Julard.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Jack on November 10, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
My posts on the forum are written in my normal voice.

Cathy, you should make this guy your avatar picture:

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/62/62f538b129e13afc6c7d9b9278b63f63f4c91e1f8fd1077c36e088039bf538f8.jpg)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 10, 2016, 09:50:21 AM
GuitarStv, I think your response to me illustrates the validity of my objection.


The gender based restrictions:
- did effect all gay people who wanted to marry their gay partner.

This is not accurate.

For various reasons, there were gay people who were able to marry their partner of the same sex who under the former system, generally where the state's determination of one person's sex was not accurate.

Wow..just wow.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: iris lily on November 10, 2016, 10:01:11 AM
The Dow. Yowza.

Are we allowed to talk about this positive here, or is this website only a safe space for Never Trumpers?

Anyway, I expected a Trump win to result in an immediate, large, and extended drop in the Dow. My brainwashing was deep that "the Market Does Not Like Uncertainty" and there is nothing more uncertain than the rule of The Orange One.

Yet, the OBVIOUS outcome took place: confidence in a mega businessman, faith in America great Again results in Wall Street happiness.

I predicted HRC wouod win. i predicted the Dow woild drop muchly when Trump won. N one should,sit by me at the blackjack table.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 10, 2016, 10:07:51 AM
The Dow. Yowza.

Are we allowed to talk about this positive here, or is this website only a safe space for Never Trumpers?

Anyway, I expected a Trump win to result in an immediate, large, and extended drop in the Dow. My brainwashing was deep that "the Market Does Not Like Uncertainty" and there is nothing more uncertain than the rule of The Orange One.

Yet, the OBVIOUS outcome took place: confidence in a mega businessman, faith in America great Again results in Wall Street happiness.

I predicted HRC wouod win. i predicted the Dow woild drop muchly when Trump won. N one should,sit by me at the blackjack table.

There was definitely uncertainty in the market in the 2 weeks leading up to the election. In retrospect, that may have been from Trump's "it's rigged" comments and the possibility of an extended decision, a la 2000.

It's too early to conclude that the increase is from "confidence in a mega businessman," though I guess any Republican in office almost ensures lower taxes and regulations. The increase might just be contained worry being released.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cathy on November 10, 2016, 10:18:56 AM
Wow..just wow.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this, but if you look at the entire context of my post, it's clear what my point is: there are a wide range of experiences that are hidden by the popular news media terminology.

I support equality and inclusion, and therefore I prefer language that does not exclude some people's experiences. This is the same reason why many (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/need-for-touch-in-teen-years/msg1264661/#msg1264661) of (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/wealth-of-people-in-their-30s-has-'halved-in-a-decade'/msg1253919/#msg1253919) my (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/the-massive-incomewealth-gap-of-married-vs-non-married/msg1245729/#msg1245729) posts (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/reaching-fire-married-vs-single/msg925726/#msg925726) acknowledge in passing that a romantic relationship can involve more than two persons; I want to be as inclusive and as nonjudgmental as possible. I would argue that this is a salutary goal.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: iris lily on November 10, 2016, 10:19:29 AM
The Dow. Yowza.

Are we allowed to talk about this positive here, or is this website only a safe space for Never Trumpers?

Anyway, I expected a Trump win to result in an immediate, large, and extended drop in the Dow. My brainwashing was deep that "the Market Does Not Like Uncertainty" and there is nothing more uncertain than the rule of The Orange One.

Yet, the OBVIOUS outcome took place: confidence in a mega businessman, faith in America great Again results in Wall Street happiness.

I predicted HRC wouod win. i predicted the Dow woild drop muchly when Trump won. N one should,sit by me at the blackjack table.

There was definitely uncertainty in the market in the 2 weeks leading up to the election. In retrospect, that may have been from Trump's "it's rigged" comments and the possibility of an extended decision, a la 2000.

It's too early to conclude that the increase is from "confidence in a mega businessman," though I guess any Republican in office almost ensures lower taxes and regulations. The increase might just be contained worry being released.

Oh, no way would I predict that this rise will,contnue, I am just surprised by it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: boarder42 on November 10, 2016, 10:21:51 AM
lots of money was sitting on the sidelines waiting for the election to happen.  and it all got invested.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Jack on November 10, 2016, 10:31:13 AM
Wow..just wow.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this, but if you look at the entire context of my post, it's clear what my point is: there are a wide range of experiences that are hidden by the popular news media terminology.

I support equality and inclusion, and therefore I prefer language that does not exclude some people's experiences. This is the same reason why many (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/need-for-touch-in-teen-years/msg1264661/#msg1264661) of (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/wealth-of-people-in-their-30s-has-'halved-in-a-decade'/msg1253919/#msg1253919) my (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/the-massive-incomewealth-gap-of-married-vs-non-married/msg1245729/#msg1245729) posts (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/reaching-fire-married-vs-single/msg925726/#msg925726) acknowledge in passing that a romantic relationship can involve more than two persons; I want to be as inclusive and as nonjudgmental as possible. I would argue that this is a salutary goal.

I realize that you're an AI or autistic or something and that it might be difficult, but if you want people to stop getting bent out of shape at your technically-correct posts you should more carefully consider the connotation, tone and implication of your words, not just the denotation.

[MOD NOTE:  Tone trolling and insulting someone as mentally deficient are not acceptable here.]


NOTE TO MOD: Who do you think you are to imply that autistic people are "mentally deficient?!" My wife is on the autism spectrum, you jerk! As with many other so-called "disorders" (like ADD and introversion), [high-functioning] autism just means having a brain that works differently, and that is not the same as having one that doesn't work!


[MOD NOTE:  Oh!  I see!  You weren't using "autistic" as an insult?  Unfortunately, a lot of people missed that, which is how the post got flagged.  I would recommend not going route in the future.]


I do get the impression that Cathy is something other than neurotypical. I do not even slightly think she's "deficient" (on the contrary, I think she's some kind of genius or savant). I honestly don't know if she realizes the effect of the connotation of her posts or not, which is why I wrote the post above. I was going for "understanding while disarming with humor," not "trolling." If I missed the mark, I apologize... but I don't think I did. I think the mod and whoever complained to him are way overly-sensitive.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on November 10, 2016, 10:47:40 AM
uncalled-for.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ponyespresso on November 10, 2016, 11:37:06 AM
just look at who Trump wants to run the EPA. He's not the same as Clinton.

No different than Clinton.  They are same.  If you don't realize that then you need some work.  Trump is no different than Clinton.  No wall.  No magical thing to replace ACA.  Just sit and wait there is no difference.  It isn't any different than 'Hope and Change' that so many fools fell for.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on November 10, 2016, 01:38:33 PM
I can't guess what the impacts of his presidency will be.  He's such a bullshitter that it's impossible to know what he really believes/understands/plans, or how these will change from day to day.

But his election is an impact on integrity, on honesty, education, respect, compassion, tolerance and even the most basic courtesy.  Perhaps the consequences for global economics and security won't be as dire as many fear, but the impact on values is appalling.

Well said, Julard.

Day 1 in Trump's America (https://mobile.twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1)

This is breaking my heart right now.

On the one hand, thank you for posting this. On the other hand ... fuck.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 10, 2016, 02:58:50 PM
I have pretty little tolerance for climate change deniers simply because even if models are wrong the potential cost of doing nothing is high and irreversible.

But this isn't uniquely bad about Trump. The Repub party has taken up the mantel of denial on this issue and we are pretty much guaranteed a Repub administration every 8 years.

This is so political that our only real hope at this point is for alternative energy to become so economically viable that it simply puts coal and gas out of business. As long as we have lobbyist and corporate money in our politics we will continue to have climate change deniers selling our futures for a paycheck.

That and we still have to do something about all the jobs that will be lost in the old energy sector.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: oldtoyota on November 10, 2016, 08:51:43 PM
I think/hope he won't be that bad because he seems to be motivated by one thing only: to win, to be the first.

He won. He's president.

It's possible he's going to spend most of his term looking at pictures of himself. I don't belief he's going to persecute minorities because that would require a different kind of motivation. He won't be as bad for women as Ted Cruz would have been. He's the kind of misogynist who slaps his secretary's ass, not the kind of misogynist dedicating his life to closing down Planned Parenthood.


Right. Pence will be in charge of policy--and not DT. Pence is far scarier.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: cliffhanger on November 10, 2016, 09:09:47 PM
I can't guess what the impacts of his presidency will be.  He's such a bullshitter that it's impossible to know what he really believes/understands/plans, or how these will change from day to day.

But his election is an impact on integrity, on honesty, education, respect, compassion, tolerance and even the most basic courtesy.  Perhaps the consequences for global economics and security won't be as dire as many fear, but the impact on values is appalling.

Well said, Julard.

Day 1 in Trump's America (https://mobile.twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1)

This is breaking my heart right now.

On the one hand, thank you for posting this. On the other hand ... fuck.

Ok, so I'll be that guy: Not all of those people are being truthful (http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab)

There are real victims of racism and real victims that are being attacked by idiotic Trump supporters. These other fake victims are assholes who try to ride this media wave on the backs of actual victims. Hopefully they will be prosecuted to the extent of the law. It's unfortunate that I now have to look through these posts and wonder which ones are real.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 10, 2016, 10:23:30 PM
No different than Clinton.  They are same.  If you don't realize that then you need some work.  Trump is no different than Clinton.  No wall.  No magical thing to replace ACA.  Just sit and wait there is no difference.  It isn't any different than 'Hope and Change' that so many fools fell for.

Really? I mean, really?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 10, 2016, 11:35:38 PM
Ok, so I'll be that guy: Not all of those people are being truthful (http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab)

There are real victims of racism and real victims that are being attacked by idiotic Trump supporters. These other fake victims are assholes who try to ride this media wave on the backs of actual victims. Hopefully they will be prosecuted to the extent of the law. It's unfortunate that I now have to look through these posts and wonder which ones are real.

This makes me sick. People should not undermine true victim experiences by making up stories. What kind of person would do this? And who the hell are they trying to win points with?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lyssa on November 11, 2016, 03:10:37 AM
Ok, so I'll be that guy: Not all of those people are being truthful (http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab)

There are real victims of racism and real victims that are being attacked by idiotic Trump supporters. These other fake victims are assholes who try to ride this media wave on the backs of actual victims. Hopefully they will be prosecuted to the extent of the law. It's unfortunate that I now have to look through these posts and wonder which ones are real.

This makes me sick. People should not undermine true victim experiences by making up stories. What kind of person would do this? And who the hell are they trying to win points with?

It happens when people are convinced that they are fighting ultimate evil. Then anything goes. We've seen this in Germany when the 'Alternative for Germany', our new right-wing party reached double digits. Young lefties made up stories about knife attacks, a female youth politician of 'The Left' (our left wing party) adjusted the description of the men who gang raped her to her political narrative. She felt that the accurate description would have 'fueled racism' and prejudice against refugees.

Of course those stories only fed the right-wingers' own feedback loop and now each and every racist attack is subject to doubt...

An honest inquiry in what made this madness possible would be a lot more useful. But it would also necessitate a painfully honest look into the mirror of both political and media elites.

Same for Brexit.

Same for the 'Alternative' (only moderately successful so far).

Soon same for new French president Le Pen?

Voters are going to continue to send their 'Fuck you too' cards to the establishment until the latter starts to actually listen.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: macoconut on November 11, 2016, 08:03:09 AM
Does anyone have an accurate list of Trump's "day one" promises? I can't seem to find a consolidated list from a reputable source (and I'm supposed to be working...not Googling on my phone!).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on November 11, 2016, 08:03:27 AM
I can't guess what the impacts of his presidency will be.  He's such a bullshitter that it's impossible to know what he really believes/understands/plans, or how these will change from day to day.

But his election is an impact on integrity, on honesty, education, respect, compassion, tolerance and even the most basic courtesy.  Perhaps the consequences for global economics and security won't be as dire as many fear, but the impact on values is appalling.

Well said, Julard.

Day 1 in Trump's America (https://mobile.twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1)

This is breaking my heart right now.

On the one hand, thank you for posting this. On the other hand ... fuck.

Ok, so I'll be that guy: Not all of those people are being truthful (http://klfy.com/2016/11/10/lafayette-pd-ul-student-made-up-story-about-attack-stolen-hijab)

There are real victims of racism and real victims that are being attacked by idiotic Trump supporters. These other fake victims are assholes who try to ride this media wave on the backs of actual victims. Hopefully they will be prosecuted to the extent of the law. It's unfortunate that I now have to look through these posts and wonder which ones are real.

I fully understand that there's going to be some made-up bullshit. But the documented crimes against minorities are what I'm really reacting to there. Assuming 70% of what's there is fictitious, that's still a lot of horrible in one day.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: boarder42 on November 11, 2016, 08:18:38 AM
Does anyone have an accurate list of Trump's "day one" promises? I can't seem to find a consolidated list from a reputable source (and I'm supposed to be working...not Googling on my phone!).

first 100 days

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/nov/10/donald-trumps-campaign-promises-first-100-days/
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: macoconut on November 11, 2016, 08:54:47 AM
Does anyone have an accurate list of Trump's "day one" promises? I can't seem to find a consolidated list from a reputable source (and I'm supposed to be working...not Googling on my phone!).

first 100 days

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/nov/10/donald-trumps-campaign-promises-first-100-days/

Thanks, boarder. I saw that one, but was looking for his "day one" statements from his speeches, debates, and rallies.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Poundwise on November 11, 2016, 09:41:39 AM
TLDR;  We will lose a generation of young scientists and their discoveries.

Hello.  I've lurked MMM and the forums for about three years, but never was impelled to post before now.  One reason why my family never went hardcore on the FIRE is because we were never interested in retiring: my husband loves what he does and will not retire until forced to, and I  am a SAHM, looking forward to returning to work when our youngest goes to kindergarten. So what pulled me out of the woodwork?

Well, Trump's stance on science leads us to believe that heavy cuts to scientific research funding are imminent.  My husband, a biologist, is very concerned that the science budget will be cut and looted. Atmospheric and earth sciences are toast.  Luckily for us, since Congress is filled with old people who fear getting sick, biomedical research will survive in some form.  All the same, we can expect many scientists to leave the profession as the already-contracted percentage of grants funded shrinks, and basic research (science that seeks to unravel root causes and find novel systems, and that sometimes leads to the great breakthroughs that causes all research to leap forward) will fall off the priority list.

My husband is very good at his profession. We feel that though it's a risky and not a very remunerative life, the knowledge he gathers is a true, if small, contribution to the good of humanity.   But it seems likely that many like him in mid-career will have to abandon basic research and turn to the commercial sector, turning their talents to prioritize corporate profits.  And what will happen to the ten young people working in his lab, four of them also with young families?  They will look for jobs and some will not find them, and perhaps never return to science.

For myself, I was hoping to return to science after doing my time as an IT consultant and at home. But by the time American science recovers (if ever), I may be too old.  My job for now is to help our family prepare for hard times, hence a closer reading of the MMM site.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: boarder42 on November 11, 2016, 01:19:22 PM
TLDR;  We will lose a generation of young scientists and their discoveries.

Hello.  I've lurked MMM and the forums for about three years, but never was impelled to post before now.  One reason why my family never went hardcore on the FIRE is because we were never interested in retiring: my husband loves what he does and will not retire until forced to, and I  am a SAHM, looking forward to returning to work when our youngest goes to kindergarten. So what pulled me out of the woodwork?

Well, Trump's stance on science leads us to believe that heavy cuts to scientific research funding are imminent.  My husband, a biologist, is very concerned that the science budget will be cut and looted. Atmospheric and earth sciences are toast.  Luckily for us, since Congress is filled with old people who fear getting sick, biomedical research will survive in some form.  All the same, we can expect many scientists to leave the profession as the already-contracted percentage of grants funded shrinks, and basic research (science that seeks to unravel root causes and find novel systems, and that sometimes leads to the great breakthroughs that causes all research to leap forward) will fall off the priority list.

My husband is very good at his profession. We feel that though it's a risky and not a very remunerative life, the knowledge he gathers is a true, if small, contribution to the good of humanity.   But it seems likely that many like him in mid-career will have to abandon basic research and turn to the commercial sector, turning their talents to prioritize corporate profits.  And what will happen to the ten young people working in his lab, four of them also with young families?  They will look for jobs and some will not find them, and perhaps never return to science.

For myself, I was hoping to return to science after doing my time as an IT consultant and at home. But by the time American science recovers (if ever), I may be too old.  My job for now is to help our family prepare for hard times, hence a closer reading of the MMM site.

outside of the scope of this thread, but wanting to retire and decreasing your spending so you have life options are one and the same. If you were on a path to FIRE your husband could do this work he loves to do for a lot less money once FIREd and make society a better place.  once you are not relying on your job for your income the sky is the limit to what you can do. so cut costs become more secure do what you want to do regardless of public funding for it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Poundwise on November 11, 2016, 02:10:04 PM
outside of the scope of this thread, but wanting to retire and decreasing your spending so you have life options are one and the same. If you were on a path to FIRE your husband could do this work he loves to do for a lot less money once FIREd and make society a better place.  once you are not relying on your job for your income the sky is the limit to what you can do. so cut costs become more secure do what you want to do regardless of public funding for it.

I don't want to hijack the thread, but even if my husband worked for free, he would still need money to pay his lab members, buy equipment, pay his hosting institution which takes something like a 10% overhead for administration, rent, etc., and also purchase consumables such as sterile plates, cell media, chemicals, etc.    He's a very thrifty man who even in fat times  used to buy used equipment on ebay until the institution made this difficult, haggles with vendors, trades and shares with other PIs, makes his own equipment in machine shop when possible, and basically stretches the taxpayer dollar as far as possible. But I don't see how he could continue his research without grants.  Hopefully he'll make the new cuts, but that means somebody else will fall off the edge. Less money for science = less science done.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: mtnrider on November 11, 2016, 03:03:09 PM
Does anyone have an accurate list of Trump's "day one" promises? I can't seem to find a consolidated list from a reputable source (and I'm supposed to be working...not Googling on my phone!).

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501476905/what-donald-trump-plans-to-do-on-his-first-day-in-the-white-house

edit: also this list

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a50529/donald-trumps-first-day-in-office/

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 11, 2016, 03:22:35 PM
TLDR;  We will lose a generation of young scientists and their discoveries.

Hello.  I've lurked MMM and the forums for about three years, but never was impelled to post before now.  One reason why my family never went hardcore on the FIRE is because we were never interested in retiring: my husband loves what he does and will not retire until forced to, and I  am a SAHM, looking forward to returning to work when our youngest goes to kindergarten. So what pulled me out of the woodwork?

Well, Trump's stance on science leads us to believe that heavy cuts to scientific research funding are imminent.  My husband, a biologist, is very concerned that the science budget will be cut and looted. Atmospheric and earth sciences are toast.  Luckily for us, since Congress is filled with old people who fear getting sick, biomedical research will survive in some form.  All the same, we can expect many scientists to leave the profession as the already-contracted percentage of grants funded shrinks, and basic research (science that seeks to unravel root causes and find novel systems, and that sometimes leads to the great breakthroughs that causes all research to leap forward) will fall off the priority list.

My husband is very good at his profession. We feel that though it's a risky and not a very remunerative life, the knowledge he gathers is a true, if small, contribution to the good of humanity.   But it seems likely that many like him in mid-career will have to abandon basic research and turn to the commercial sector, turning their talents to prioritize corporate profits.  And what will happen to the ten young people working in his lab, four of them also with young families?  They will look for jobs and some will not find them, and perhaps never return to science.

For myself, I was hoping to return to science after doing my time as an IT consultant and at home. But by the time American science recovers (if ever), I may be too old.  My job for now is to help our family prepare for hard times, hence a closer reading of the MMM site.

outside of the scope of this thread, but wanting to retire and decreasing your spending so you have life options are one and the same. If you were on a path to FIRE your husband could do this work he loves to do for a lot less money once FIREd and make society a better place.  once you are not relying on your job for your income the sky is the limit to what you can do. so cut costs become more secure do what you want to do regardless of public funding for it.
And this an example of ignorance. No, researchers at R1 instructions can't do research without grants.  And if they did not get public funding the other option is working for a company.  Chinese and Indian students are paid by their government to come here, but we are so good.  Drying the grants will end that.  I know labs shut down because of lack of funding, good research not being done because you can't one man shop.  Science needs funding to work. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Northwestie on November 11, 2016, 04:16:55 PM

No different than Clinton.  They are same.  If you don't realize that then you need some work.  Trump is no different than Clinton.  No wall.  No magical thing to replace ACA.  Just sit and wait there is no difference.  It isn't any different than 'Hope and Change' that so many fools fell for.

Pants-on-fire rating for that one.

Trump is looking to put a climate-denier in charge of EPA; Sarah Palin or an oil executive in charge of Department of Interior, and Carson - a creationist - as head of Department of Education -- just for starters.   It's like emptying a barrel of monkeys into leadership of the federal government.  Let's just see what the Rust Belt gains from all this - my guess is they will be in worse shape than they are now.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 11, 2016, 06:02:01 PM

No different than Clinton.  They are same.  If you don't realize that then you need some work.  Trump is no different than Clinton.  No wall.  No magical thing to replace ACA.  Just sit and wait there is no difference.  It isn't any different than 'Hope and Change' that so many fools fell for.

Pants-on-fire rating for that one.

Trump is looking to put a climate-denier in charge of EPA; Sarah Palin or an oil executive in charge of Department of Interior, and Carson - a creationist - as head of Department of Education -- just for starters.   It's like emptying a barrel of monkeys into leadership of the federal government.  Let's just see what the Rust Belt gains from all this - my guess is they will be in worse shape than they are now.

On the plus side, he looks like he really intends to improve  the ACA, despite all the worry. So there's that.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: macoconut on November 12, 2016, 09:15:54 AM
Does anyone have an accurate list of Trump's "day one" promises? I can't seem to find a consolidated list from a reputable source (and I'm supposed to be working...not Googling on my phone!).

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501476905/what-donald-trump-plans-to-do-on-his-first-day-in-the-white-house

edit: also this list

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a50529/donald-trumps-first-day-in-office/

Perfect! Thanks, mtnrider!
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Trudie on November 12, 2016, 01:04:10 PM
When Trump got the nomination I was like "Jesus, he might actually pull this off."  And so he has.  I would also remind various Chicken Littles that he will say ANYTHING if it gets him what he wants.  Yesterday, he wanted to throw Hillary Clinton in jail.  Today, he spoke respectfully of "Madam Secretary" and praised her tenacity.  And remember all the people whom, it was claimed, would never vote for him?  Well, guess what?  LGBTs voted for him.  Women voted for him.  Hispanics voted for him.  Hell, even Muslims voted for him.  Maybe not the majority, but much more than was predicted. 

Remember the kid in junior high who always tried to act tough and macho to fit in?  That's Trump in a nutshell.  He's always been mostly talk.  I think it may be sinking in that for perhaps the first time in his life he's going to be held accountable for what he's said.  And it's scaring the SHIT out of him.

He's out of his depth.  He'll be a puppet and the Republican Congress and Senate will run the show which -- despite the fact that I don't relish many of the policy decisions they'll likely make -- might be a good thing if they put checks on him so he doesn't aggress against other nations and get us blown to smithereens by weapons of mass destruction.  I think that Washington is so intractable that most changes won't happen overnight and may face severe headwinds from the administrative machinery.  I think he will spend a good deal of time in debate and disagreement with his own party because many of his policies and ideas are not fully-formed and in some cases (entitlements) are out of step with his own party.  In sum, odds are high that he'll be ineffective.  It's quite possible that the Republican party will push him further to the margins, and some are speculating that he'll either get frustrated and resign or that he'll be impeached.   I think it's also possible that the most traditional wings of the party (Paul Ryan) will also be fighting the Tea Party pretty heavily.  Might make for some interesting alliances between Democrats and moderate Republicans to get shit done.

In the end... we don't really know.  I'm starting to stockpile cash and am preparing to work until I am 65 (15 more years than I'd planned) since it's likely my ability to buy insurance just went down the crapper.  Who DOESN'T have pre-existing conditions?  Shit, my husband has kidney stone disease and a form of rheumatoid arthritis -- the latter of which has a strong genetic basis.  Sounds like we'll be SOL.  Trump has said he doesn't want to remove the exclusion.  What does that mean, practically (he probably doesn't even know)?  If policies keep pricing people out they're pretty worthless.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 14, 2016, 12:31:31 PM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.

The government isn't.  Loving someone isn't a precondition to get a marriage contract, and in fact has little/nothing to do with being licensed.  A marriage license carries with it specific legal and tax related ramifications.

Agreed. We should remove those too. I guess the only reason for a marriage is for tax related ramifications.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 14, 2016, 12:37:55 PM
Agreed. We should remove those too. I guess the only reason for a marriage is for tax related ramifications.

Marriage confers a long list of rights outside of preferential tax treatment, such a inheritance of property without a will and visitation privileges and decision-making authority in medical emergencies. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 14, 2016, 12:56:27 PM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.

The government isn't.  Loving someone isn't a precondition to get a marriage contract, and in fact has little/nothing to do with being licensed.  A marriage license carries with it specific legal and tax related ramifications.

Agreed. We should remove those too. I guess the only reason for a marriage is for tax related ramifications.

There are important legal considerations associated with marriage:
- If your partner suddenly becomes ill you're automatically considered next of kin and able to make medical decisions for example.
- If your spouse dies, you are legally able to decide if you want to donate parts of his/her body for medical/scientific reasons.
- You are able to decide what happens with any copyrights your spouse held at death.
- Marriage totally changes inheritance.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SouthLand on November 14, 2016, 08:38:48 PM
-A lot of busybody work in healthcare that will ultimately see us return to a similar situation pre-ACA. Healthcare will become a personal responsibility again.

-Closing of the borders. Increased restrictions on immigration. The wall will go up. Some degree of bullying towards Mexico will happen but how much and how far I don't know. Possible increased government oversight of Muslim Americans or Americans of Middle Eastern descent, though things may remain at current levels.

-Possible action taken against traditional targets: rights associated with women, homosexuals, transgenders, and minorities may be limited to some degree, though I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP and Trump try to just ignore these for four years.

-The exit of the US from many international agreements and organizations, perhaps not wholly but to some degree. The US will be less accountable to the rest of the world and abide less to edicts set by such organizations.

-Continued and increased US intervention abroad.

-Possible US nuclear strike against a small threat target (most likely not another nuclear power; non-nuclear, Middle Eastern, "hot spot" most likely).

-Rolling back of the majority of US environmental protection policies. Expect to see advanced climate change within our life time, certainly beyond the point of stopping or reversing.

-A lot of posturing and pedantry from all sides, most of which will have nothing to do with the actual results of American actions.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 15, 2016, 04:30:01 AM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.

The government isn't.  Loving someone isn't a precondition to get a marriage contract, and in fact has little/nothing to do with being licensed.  A marriage license carries with it specific legal and tax related ramifications.

Agreed. We should remove those too. I guess the only reason for a marriage is for tax related ramifications.

There are important legal considerations associated with marriage:
- If your partner suddenly becomes ill you're automatically considered next of kin and able to make medical decisions for example.
- If your spouse dies, you are legally able to decide if you want to donate parts of his/her body for medical/scientific reasons.
- You are able to decide what happens with any copyrights your spouse held at death.
- Marriage totally changes inheritance.

This - which is why any two people should be allowed to sign a contract allowing these changes to take place. It'd be easier to keep marriage and just let whoever the fuck wants to attach themselves to another person in this way do so.

What really needs to be changed is divorce. There's no reason that two people who wished to form a single taxable unit and give each other inheritance rights and medical POA should be penalized or forced to equally divide private property, and in some cases future income, when they decide this arrangement is no longer beneficial.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Drifterrider on November 15, 2016, 04:36:49 AM
Trump will have a Republican Senate for at least two years and a Republican House for probably indefinitely (unless gerrymandering laws are changed), they wont C-block him like they did Obama. He'll have conservative federal judges appointed with no problem. There will be 1-3 Supreme Court Judges up for grabs.

Look for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Expect medical insurance profits to rise.

Expect your middle class taxes to increase and if you're more wealthy, expect your taxes to decrease. Trickle down economics theory will return.

I think relations with other countries will be poor.

I think the ignorant and loud will rule.

They always do.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 15, 2016, 05:31:34 AM
I say we get rid of marriage licenses all together. Problem solved. I see no reason for the government to be involved in an individuals decision on who they love.

The government isn't.  Loving someone isn't a precondition to get a marriage contract, and in fact has little/nothing to do with being licensed.  A marriage license carries with it specific legal and tax related ramifications.

Agreed. We should remove those too. I guess the only reason for a marriage is for tax related ramifications.

There are important legal considerations associated with marriage:
- If your partner suddenly becomes ill you're automatically considered next of kin and able to make medical decisions for example.
- If your spouse dies, you are legally able to decide if you want to donate parts of his/her body for medical/scientific reasons.
- You are able to decide what happens with any copyrights your spouse held at death.
- Marriage totally changes inheritance.

This - which is why any two people should be allowed to sign a contract allowing these changes to take place. It'd be easier to keep marriage and just let whoever the fuck wants to attach themselves to another person in this way do so.

What really needs to be changed is divorce. There's no reason that two people who wished to form a single taxable unit and give each other inheritance rights and medical POA should be penalized or forced to equally divide private property, and in some cases future income, when they decide this arrangement is no longer beneficial.

Wouldnt a simple Will be able to take care of all of these things? How do single people handle the above items?

I stand by my statement: The only reason for marriage - in the eyes of the government - is for tax purposes.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 15, 2016, 05:44:33 AM
Of course one could probably bypass marriage (with perhaps the exception of the tax penalty) with a slew of carefully worded legal documents to effect the same legal rights of each partner. But there's a reason no one does this- we already have a procedure in place for people who want to form this type of partnership.  Wouldn't it be so much easier on everyone to keep the single document we have now?  Would it help if we just changed the name from 'marriage certificate' to 'civil union' or 'partnership will' or something? Seems a lot less work for everybody, with the same effect.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 15, 2016, 07:38:42 AM
I stand by my statement: The only reason for marriage - in the eyes of the government - is for tax purposes.

Do you consider spousal social security benefits to be a tax purpose? How about private pension benefits?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Drifterrider on November 15, 2016, 07:51:02 AM
Gay people might lose their right to marry ...

Gay people have always had the right to marry, everywhere in the United States. That is unlikely to change. The former marriage restrictions were based on gender, not on sexual preference. To be sure, those gender-based restrictions were fundamentally unjust, but I see no reason to obscure the issue by using popular news media rhetoric about "gay marriage" and "gay people ... los[ing] their right to marry".

Gay people did not have the right to marry each other.

Sure they did.  It just had to be a gay man marrying a gay woman.  Just like God intended.

If you and God talk frequently, I'd suggest you ask him to explain mote and beam to you.  Then get back with us.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 15, 2016, 08:59:18 AM
I stand by my statement: The only reason for marriage - in the eyes of the government - is for tax purposes.

Do you consider spousal social security benefits to be a tax purpose? How about private pension benefits?

Yes for SS. Private pensions can already have suvivor benefits built into them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 15, 2016, 09:23:19 AM
So you're saying that you support ending social security survivor benefits?

Many of the non-government benefits of marriage are available to private parties via contract, but contracts are expensive and complicated and marriage is cheap and easy.  I think it is still discriminatory to make gay couples fight through mountains of paperwork to secure rights that are automatically granted to straight people.  That's not really "equal" is it?

And as we've already established, there are many government rights that gay couples simply cannot reproduce privately at any cost.  Social security survivor benefits are just one good example, but I'm sure you can think of some of the others.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cathy on November 15, 2016, 07:38:20 PM
So you're saying that you support ending social security survivor benefits?

Many of the non-government benefits of marriage are available to private parties via contract, but contracts are expensive and complicated and marriage is cheap and easy.

You may be right that under current law, there are certain distinctive advantages to a state-licensed marriage that cannot be replicated through private contract and other private legal devices. However, you frequently like to assert (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/anti-immigrant-republicans-please-help-me-understand/msg1301149/#msg1301149) that "changing the law" is something that can be done "pretty easily". Applying that proposition here, you can conclude only that the fact that marriage currently confers certain legal benefits does not constitute a principled argument in favour of maintaining the concept of state-licensed marriages, since that law can be changed "pretty easily".


Many of the non-government benefits of marriage are available to private parties via contract, but contracts are expensive and complicated and marriage is cheap and easy.  I think it is still discriminatory to make gay couples fight through mountains of paperwork to secure rights that are automatically granted to straight people.  That's not really "equal" is it?

It's obvious that if state-licensed marriages are going to exist, they should be open to all on an equal basis, and in particular there shouldn't be any gender-based restrictions on entering into a marriage. However, the more difficult question, and the one raised by the earlier poster, is whether state-licensed marriages should exist at all. You have not yet articulated an argument as to why they should exist, other than an argument that you yourself would reject in any other context.

The removal of gender-based restrictions has made marriage a more equal institution, but it still meets the needs of only relatively privileged individuals (people in stable dyadic relationships), and more importantly, it remains unclear whether marriage is an institution that should exist in a free society. Marriage is an historically deeply patriarchal institution basically rooted in the transfer of women as property. Legally, it no longer serves that function today in the United States and Canada, but it's difficult to deny that many of the social conventions, and even some of the default legal rules, associated with marriage developed in that historical context. And more importantly, once we are free from the historical context, it's unclear what affirmative societal benefit is advanced by the existence of state-licensed marriages.

In a free society, people should be left to arrange their interpersonal relationships as they see fit (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/personals/fi-and-marriage-and-pre-nups/msg1215523/#msg1215523), without the need for the state to privilege one particular form of relationship over any other.

The argument that "contracts are expensive and complicated and marriage is cheap and easy" is counter-factual. The large volume of statutory and case law dealing with marriage demonstrates that marriage is neither cheap, nor easy. In fact, marriage involves a large array of complex legal issues. A private contract may actually be far simpler because it can contain only provisions that are relevant to the parties, rather than importing all of the hundreds of years of law regarding marriages, and it can prescribe mechanisms for dispute resolution that are far less expensive than litigation (such as specifying pre-determined outcomes for certain issues, and supplying an arbitration procedure for certain claims). I am not convinced that contracts are more expensive, or more difficult, than marriage, other than the fact that the current legal order privileges marriages in certain ways that cannot be replicated via contract (which, again, you would say can be changed "pretty easily").
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 15, 2016, 08:05:42 PM
You may be right that under current law, there are certain distinctive advantages to a state-licensed marriage that cannot be replicated through private contract and other private legal devices.

That was the whole point about social security's survivor benefits.  Only a legal spouse can get those.

Quote
However, you frequently like to assert (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/anti-immigrant-republicans-please-help-me-understand/msg1301149/#msg1301149) that "changing the law" is something that can be done "pretty easily". Applying that proposition here, you can conclude only that the fact that marriage currently confers certain legal benefits does not constitute a principled argument in favour of maintaining the concept of state-licensed marriages, since that law can be changed "pretty easily".

I would never argue such a thing.  The post you cite is about whether the legality and the morality of a thing are necessarily intertwined.  I even pointed out in that thread that some things which are currently illegal shouldn't be, and some things which currently aren't illegal should be.

The fact that state-licensed marriages exist does not mean that marriages are moral or immoral.  The fact that state-licensed marriages are (were) selectively available to only certain groups of citizens is what is immoral.  To extend the analogy, drinking fountains aren't immoral (or illegal) but racially segregated drinking fountains are.  The legality of the situation has no bearing on whether or not drinking fountains should exist, which is a question best answered by other means.  In this case, I would argue that society has used other means to determine that state-licensed marriages should exist, and morality dictates that they should then be available to everyone equally.

Quote
it remains unclear whether marriage is an institution that should exist in a free society.

It may be unclear to you.  I don't dispute the institution's deep roots in gender oppression.  I might suggest that the way to fix that problem is to grant the privileges of marriage to more people, not abolish the institution entirely.  Cotton farming also has a long history of oppression, but we still farm cotton.  We just don't do it the horrible way anymore.

Quote
The argument that "contracts are expensive and complicated and marriage is cheap and easy" is counter-factual.

I clearly meant "cheap and easy to enter into" and not "cheap and easy for the state to administer."  In Vegas you can get married by a drive-thru Elvis impersonator without ever unbuckling your seatbelt.  In virtually every state a wedding license costs less than $100.  Easy!  Cheap!  Legally binding for life!
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 16, 2016, 07:20:54 AM
it remains unclear whether marriage is an institution that should exist in a free society.

It may be unclear to you.  I don't dispute the institution's deep roots in gender oppression.  I might suggest that the way to fix that problem is to grant the privileges of marriage to more people, not abolish the institution entirely.  Cotton farming also has a long history of oppression, but we still farm cotton.  We just don't do it the horrible way anymore.



This may be true but then you have to define where you are going to draw the limits of marriage. Polygamy is the first example that comes to mind. Does a person have to marry another human?

The problem with defining limits is that every individual will have their own idea of where those limits should be. Why is changing the laws regarding marriage the preference over changing the laws regarding SS to allow people to designate who should receive their survivor benefits?

Thank you Cathy and Sol for this discussion.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 16, 2016, 07:47:27 AM
To change the subject somewhat, the Trump Presidency is going to be a complete clown show.

    After exchange w Trump transition team, changed my recommendation: stay away. They're angry, arrogant, screaming "you LOST!" Will be ugly.
    — Eliot A Cohen (@EliotACohen) November 15, 2016

The realistic impact will be enrichment at the hands of the public and eventual impeachment, leaving Pence in charge. With all the infighting, there's certain to be gridlock.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 16, 2016, 07:58:26 AM
To change the subject somewhat, the Trump Presidency is going to be a complete clown show.

    After exchange w Trump transition team, changed my recommendation: stay away. They're angry, arrogant, screaming "you LOST!" Will be ugly.
    — Eliot A Cohen (@EliotACohen) November 15, 2016

The realistic impact will be enrichment at the hands of the public and eventual impeachment, leaving Pence in charge. With all the infighting, there's certain to be gridlock.
I would like to think infighting will slow down the damage.  I am not optimistic about that.  Trump/Ryan/McConnell are basically on the same page and we are screwed.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 16, 2016, 08:06:33 AM
To change the subject somewhat, the Trump Presidency is going to be a complete clown show.

    After exchange w Trump transition team, changed my recommendation: stay away. They're angry, arrogant, screaming "you LOST!" Will be ugly.
    — Eliot A Cohen (@EliotACohen) November 15, 2016

The realistic impact will be enrichment at the hands of the public and eventual impeachment, leaving Pence in charge. With all the infighting, there's certain to be gridlock.
I would like to think infighting will slow down the damage.  I am not optimistic about that.  Trump/Ryan/McConnell are basically on the same page and we are screwed.

I agree. Thanks to Trump, the Republicans control both houses of Congress, the presidency, and are about to rebalance the Supreme Court. They aren't gonna be fighting with him on much.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on November 16, 2016, 08:07:18 AM

This may be true but then you have to define where you are going to draw the limits of marriage. Polygamy is the first example that comes to mind. Does a person have to marry another human?


When dogs, cats, horses, and whatever start paying taxes and communicating with us, or we make contact with intelligent alien life, we can have that discussion. At a contractual level, it requires parties to willingly enter into the arrangement. Non-humans can't do that.

A polygamist marriage option, while I don't have any specific objections to it, seems unworkable from a practical legal standpoint.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 16, 2016, 08:16:54 AM
To change the subject somewhat, the Trump Presidency is going to be a complete clown show.

    After exchange w Trump transition team, changed my recommendation: stay away. They're angry, arrogant, screaming "you LOST!" Will be ugly.
    — Eliot A Cohen (@EliotACohen) November 15, 2016

The realistic impact will be enrichment at the hands of the public and eventual impeachment, leaving Pence in charge. With all the infighting, there's certain to be gridlock.
I would like to think infighting will slow down the damage.  I am not optimistic about that.  Trump/Ryan/McConnell are basically on the same page and we are screwed.

I agree. Thanks to Trump, the Republicans control both houses of Congress, the presidency, and are about to rebalance the Supreme Court. They aren't gonna be fighting with him on much.

Don't get me wrong. They'll make sure that their pet projects are pushed through. However, we're already seeing signs of rats-leaving-the-ship syndrome. Whether Trump can stop that is unknown but, given his personality, it's doubtful. With the general disdain that establishment Republicans have for Trump, and the Reality-tv nature of his transition, he may be feuding more with Republicans than Democrats.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on November 16, 2016, 08:29:32 AM

This may be true but then you have to define where you are going to draw the limits of marriage. Polygamy is the first example that comes to mind. Does a person have to marry another human?


When dogs, cats, horses, and whatever start paying taxes and communicating with us, or we make contact with intelligent alien life, we can have that discussion. At a contractual level, it requires parties to willingly enter into the arrangement. Non-humans can't do that.

A polygamist marriage option, while I don't have any specific objections to it, seems unworkable from a practical legal standpoint.


I will concede the non-human point but I think I have heard stories of people leaving money to their cats and dogs with instructions on where the animals should be housed, etc.  I don’t believe they are willing participants in that contract.

Polygamy is not unworkable. Would it be very difficult, yes, but who is going to deny the right of every person to marry who they want because changing the law/contracts would be difficult?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on November 16, 2016, 08:34:25 AM
I will concede the non-human point but I think I have heard stories of people leaving money to their cats and dogs with instructions on where the animals should be housed, etc.  I don’t believe they are willing participants in that contract.

Polygamy is not unworkable. Would it be very difficult, yes, but who is going to deny the right of every person to marry who they want because changing the law/contracts would be difficult?

I would be surprised if the cat and dog trustees didn't have human guardians ultimately responsible for the money and fulfillment of the contract. And in most cases, that's non-binding.

As I said, I raise no specific objections to polygamy, and honestly don't care one way or the other.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Sockigal on November 16, 2016, 09:21:37 AM
This thread is about the realistic impacts of Trump as president.  The general consensus is that his campaign was primarily bullshit, saying what he needed to say to get in.  Epically when it came to the LGBT community rights.

Let me tell you a story.  This is a true story, I cannot share names and locations of the people in this story because I need to respect their privacy.

My youngest son is transgender.  I do not care to argue your belief in this matter, my opinion and beliefs will not change and neither will yours.  Because my son is in the LGBT community, I have gotten involved, very involved.  I am a member of several support groups, including a north American support group for gender diverse children.

Now, everyone know Trumps hate speech towards the LCBT community and the promises he has made to revert marriage equality, and even to start shock conversion therapy again.  Since the election has ended, with Trump as the president elect, the north American support group has exploded with activity.  There has been a total of 15 suicides committed by youth in this group, primarily 16-20 years old ( all but one, who was 14).  They have all left notes, and they all say that they have taken their life.  The notes are all different, of course, but say basically that with Trump in power, they cannot be who they are anyway.  The 1-800 help lines for LGBT youth are jammed full as are those for transgender youth as well.  This is a real effect of this election so far.  Who gives a fuck about policy, about taxes?  Our youth is killing themselves over this.

For those asking who gets to choose what racism is.  This is blatant homophobia causing these deaths...

As a parent of two gay teens, the topic of suicide has me very, very worried. I do care about all the other implications in the financial and the environmental sector, but I really care more about the human element. There is a great lack of compassion and empathy spreading through our country. Some groups of people are so much more affected by what they see happening around them and they are scared. The topic of the thread is what are the impacts from a Trump Presidency in the future, but those who are part of minority groups are feeling and have been feeling the wave of anti-compassion and division every day since Trump had decided to run for President.

My daughter saw Nazi symbols spray painted outside the student commons of her college last week. What can you even say to your gay child who goes to school and has to confront symbols of hate. This is just one of many reports of hate crimes committed across the country. My heart goes out to those families who have loved ones who don't feel like they can belong in our society right now. And with the tearing apart of family units that has occurred due to this election, unfortunately many are feeling even more hopeless and isolated right now. I have had to cut off my ties to my family due to this whole mess, which I hated to do. It's a very difficult time in our country right now. So the greatest impacts right now are masses of frightened minority groups and splintering of family units.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 16, 2016, 09:30:51 AM
This thread is about the realistic impacts of Trump as president.  The general consensus is that his campaign was primarily bullshit, saying what he needed to say to get in.  Epically when it came to the LGBT community rights.

Let me tell you a story.  This is a true story, I cannot share names and locations of the people in this story because I need to respect their privacy.

My youngest son is transgender.  I do not care to argue your belief in this matter, my opinion and beliefs will not change and neither will yours.  Because my son is in the LGBT community, I have gotten involved, very involved.  I am a member of several support groups, including a north American support group for gender diverse children.

Now, everyone know Trumps hate speech towards the LCBT community and the promises he has made to revert marriage equality, and even to start shock conversion therapy again.  Since the election has ended, with Trump as the president elect, the north American support group has exploded with activity.  There has been a total of 15 suicides committed by youth in this group, primarily 16-20 years old ( all but one, who was 14).  They have all left notes, and they all say that they have taken their life.  The notes are all different, of course, but say basically that with Trump in power, they cannot be who they are anyway.  The 1-800 help lines for LGBT youth are jammed full as are those for transgender youth as well.  This is a real effect of this election so far.  Who gives a fuck about policy, about taxes?  Our youth is killing themselves over this.

For those asking who gets to choose what racism is.  This is blatant homophobia causing these deaths...

As a parent of two gay teens, the topic of suicide has me very, very worried. I do care about all the other implications in the financial and the environmental sector, but I really care more about the human element. There is a great lack of compassion and empathy spreading through our country. Some groups of people are so much more affected by what they see happening around them and they are scared. The topic of the thread is what are the impacts from a Trump Presidency in the future, but those who are part of minority groups are feeling and have been feeling the wave of anti-compassion and division every day since Trump had decided to run for President.

My daughter saw Nazi symbols spray painted outside the student commons of her college last week. What can you even say to your gay child who goes to school and has to confront symbols of hate. This is just one of many reports of hate crimes committed across the country. My heart goes out to those families who have loved ones who don't feel like they can belong in our society right now. And with the tearing apart of family units that has occurred due to this election, unfortunately many are feeling even more hopeless and isolated right now. I have had to cut off my ties to my family due to this whole mess, which I hated to do. It's a very difficult time in our country right now. So the greatest impacts right now are masses of frightened minority groups and splintering of family units.
Oh and it can get even worse, what if her RA is a violent supporter and she knows has a key to her dorm room?  Or the supervisor etc.  College students in dorms often are very vulnerable and we chose to make certain groups even more so.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on November 16, 2016, 09:47:26 AM
This thread is about the realistic impacts of Trump as president.  The general consensus is that his campaign was primarily bullshit, saying what he needed to say to get in.  Epically when it came to the LGBT community rights.

Let me tell you a story.  This is a true story, I cannot share names and locations of the people in this story because I need to respect their privacy.

My youngest son is transgender.  I do not care to argue your belief in this matter, my opinion and beliefs will not change and neither will yours.  Because my son is in the LGBT community, I have gotten involved, very involved.  I am a member of several support groups, including a north American support group for gender diverse children.

Now, everyone know Trumps hate speech towards the LCBT community and the promises he has made to revert marriage equality, and even to start shock conversion therapy again.  Since the election has ended, with Trump as the president elect, the north American support group has exploded with activity.  There has been a total of 15 suicides committed by youth in this group, primarily 16-20 years old ( all but one, who was 14).  They have all left notes, and they all say that they have taken their life.  The notes are all different, of course, but say basically that with Trump in power, they cannot be who they are anyway.  The 1-800 help lines for LGBT youth are jammed full as are those for transgender youth as well.  This is a real effect of this election so far.  Who gives a fuck about policy, about taxes?  Our youth is killing themselves over this.

For those asking who gets to choose what racism is.  This is blatant homophobia causing these deaths...

As a parent of two gay teens, the topic of suicide has me very, very worried. I do care about all the other implications in the financial and the environmental sector, but I really care more about the human element. There is a great lack of compassion and empathy spreading through our country. Some groups of people are so much more affected by what they see happening around them and they are scared. The topic of the thread is what are the impacts from a Trump Presidency in the future, but those who are part of minority groups are feeling and have been feeling the wave of anti-compassion and division every day since Trump had decided to run for President.

My daughter saw Nazi symbols spray painted outside the student commons of her college last week. What can you even say to your gay child who goes to school and has to confront symbols of hate. This is just one of many reports of hate crimes committed across the country. My heart goes out to those families who have loved ones who don't feel like they can belong in our society right now. And with the tearing apart of family units that has occurred due to this election, unfortunately many are feeling even more hopeless and isolated right now. I have had to cut off my ties to my family due to this whole mess, which I hated to do. It's a very difficult time in our country right now. So the greatest impacts right now are masses of frightened minority groups and splintering of family units.
Oh and it can get even worse, what if her RA is a violent supporter and she knows has a key to her dorm room?  Or the supervisor etc.  College students in dorms often are very vulnerable and we chose to make certain groups even more so.

I got one of these when I traveled to Africa: https://www.amazon.com/GE-Personal-Security-Door-Alarm/dp/B0000YNR4M/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479314775&sr=8-2&keywords=travel+door+alarm

It obviously doesn't solve the problem, but it's better than nothing. Just sucks when you forget you set it and have to go pee in the middle of the night ... sucker is loud.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 16, 2016, 11:35:40 AM
This thread is about the realistic impacts of Trump as president.  The general consensus is that his campaign was primarily bullshit, saying what he needed to say to get in.  Epically when it came to the LGBT community rights.

Let me tell you a story.  This is a true story, I cannot share names and locations of the people in this story because I need to respect their privacy.

My youngest son is transgender.  I do not care to argue your belief in this matter, my opinion and beliefs will not change and neither will yours.  Because my son is in the LGBT community, I have gotten involved, very involved.  I am a member of several support groups, including a north American support group for gender diverse children.

Now, everyone know Trumps hate speech towards the LCBT community and the promises he has made to revert marriage equality, and even to start shock conversion therapy again.  Since the election has ended, with Trump as the president elect, the north American support group has exploded with activity.  There has been a total of 15 suicides committed by youth in this group, primarily 16-20 years old ( all but one, who was 14).  They have all left notes, and they all say that they have taken their life.  The notes are all different, of course, but say basically that with Trump in power, they cannot be who they are anyway.  The 1-800 help lines for LGBT youth are jammed full as are those for transgender youth as well.  This is a real effect of this election so far.  Who gives a fuck about policy, about taxes?  Our youth is killing themselves over this.

For those asking who gets to choose what racism is.  This is blatant homophobia causing these deaths...

As a parent of two gay teens, the topic of suicide has me very, very worried. I do care about all the other implications in the financial and the environmental sector, but I really care more about the human element. There is a great lack of compassion and empathy spreading through our country. Some groups of people are so much more affected by what they see happening around them and they are scared. The topic of the thread is what are the impacts from a Trump Presidency in the future, but those who are part of minority groups are feeling and have been feeling the wave of anti-compassion and division every day since Trump had decided to run for President.

My daughter saw Nazi symbols spray painted outside the student commons of her college last week. What can you even say to your gay child who goes to school and has to confront symbols of hate. This is just one of many reports of hate crimes committed across the country. My heart goes out to those families who have loved ones who don't feel like they can belong in our society right now. And with the tearing apart of family units that has occurred due to this election, unfortunately many are feeling even more hopeless and isolated right now. I have had to cut off my ties to my family due to this whole mess, which I hated to do. It's a very difficult time in our country right now. So the greatest impacts right now are masses of frightened minority groups and splintering of family units.
Oh and it can get even worse, what if her RA is a violent supporter and she knows has a key to her dorm room?  Or the supervisor etc.  College students in dorms often are very vulnerable and we chose to make certain groups even more so.

I got one of these when I traveled to Africa: https://www.amazon.com/GE-Personal-Security-Door-Alarm/dp/B0000YNR4M/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479314775&sr=8-2&keywords=travel+door+alarm

It obviously doesn't solve the problem, but it's better than nothing. Just sucks when you forget you set it and have to go pee in the middle of the night ... sucker is loud.

Ah Africa . . . land of the real life vagina dentata.

http://gizmodo.com/5569537/condoms-with-teeth-fight-rape-in-south-africa (http://gizmodo.com/5569537/condoms-with-teeth-fight-rape-in-south-africa)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RosieTR on November 16, 2016, 12:36:21 PM
I suppose now that a complete white supremacist/anti-Semite/anti-Muslim has been appointed to the inner circle, I think it will be very, very bad. I have been thinking a lot about black swan events, since when you have a narcissist linked up with a person who wants to enact a theocracy, and throw in a couple of new world order people for good measure, you don't need too much of a spark to ignite that. I could see a terrorist attack on US soil occurring, and that being used as an excuse to enact quasi-military rule, or maybe full on military rule. Maybe that's a worst-case scenario. Best case scenario is that there's so much infighting and turnover due to Trump's idea that this is all a reality show where he gets to fire people, little gets done. This already seems to be happening.

I think there will for sure be a strongly conservative SC judge, maybe more than one. Passing actual legislation may be more difficult, with a relatively even Senate and many of the GOP in the senate being more reasonable-all of them knowing they have a reelection bid ahead at some point and are beholden to their entire state rather than just a narrow district of friendlies.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Jack on November 16, 2016, 02:04:18 PM
I could see a terrorist attack on US soil occurring, and that being used as an excuse to enact quasi-military rule, or maybe full on military rule.

Hopefully enough of the military would realize that their oath of allegiance is to support and defend the Constitution, and to only obey orders of the President subject to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (along with things like the Geneva Convention, which I assume are incorporated by reference) to prevent that. I'd like to think we'd end up with a civil war (with the military splintered to support both sides) sooner than a military dictatorship.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Abe on November 16, 2016, 05:19:00 PM
Multiple current joint chiefs of staff have said they would not carry out torture as Trump advocated at one point (though to be fair he doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture). They'd probably be fired and replaced with someone willing to torture, though.

Re: what to say about symbols of hate on college campus: I was treated by a swastika when I started freshman year in a fairly liberal university in the south. Apparently I was in the nice dorm that rich kids thought was reserved for "their people" as I recall one saying. My parents told me: this is the way the world is. You can either hide, or you can resist by carrying on with your life. Those people will never see you as an equal, but rise above them and it won't matter how they see you. Most bigots  don't hate you enough to bother doing anything more than casual nonsense and give up if they encounter resistance. For what it's worth, the guy who drew the swastika on my door was dumb enough to admit it while I recorded and was kicked out.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 17, 2016, 07:15:51 AM
Multiple current joint chiefs of staff have said they would not carry out torture as Trump advocated at one point (though to be fair he doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture). They'd probably be fired and replaced with someone willing to torture, though.



I don't know if I mentioned here before but you probably don't need to worry about the military.  Military officers have 2 methods to employ when encountering illegal or questionable orders.  The first is to question and repeat.  "Are you sure you want to do that sir?  It could cause XXXX".  This gives the person giving the orders a chance to take back the order without appearing dumb or you appearing insubordinate.

The other option is to resign.  This is the "nuclear option" as you are effectively saying that I would rather quit than carry out that order.  There is no mechanism for an officer to refuse and order and still remain in the service.

If you ever see on the news a sizeable number of senior officers resigning in a short time frame, you know something is going on in the administration.  Senior officers will carry out orders they do not agree with all the time, but if it rises to a point that you think it is illegal or immoral, there are only the two options above.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 17, 2016, 07:30:22 AM
Multiple current joint chiefs of staff have said they would not carry out torture as Trump advocated at one point (though to be fair he doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture). They'd probably be fired and replaced with someone willing to torture, though.



I don't know if I mentioned here before but you probably don't need to worry about the military.  Military officers have 2 methods to employ when encountering illegal or questionable orders.  The first is to question and repeat.  "Are you sure you want to do that sir?  It could cause XXXX".  This gives the person giving the orders a chance to take back the order without appearing dumb or you appearing insubordinate.

The other option is to resign.  This is the "nuclear option" as you are effectively saying that I would rather quit than carry out that order.  There is no mechanism for an officer to refuse and order and still remain in the service.

If you ever see on the news a sizeable number of senior officers resigning in a short time frame, you know something is going on in the administration.  Senior officers will carry out orders they do not agree with all the time, but if it rises to a point that you think it is illegal or immoral, there are only the two options above.

I think the issue with this is that resigning does not stop the irder being carried out. As Jack pointed out, the next in command is just asked to do the same thing, over and iver again until someone is found who will do it. It's happened before in administrations.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 17, 2016, 07:54:18 AM
Multiple current joint chiefs of staff have said they would not carry out torture as Trump advocated at one point (though to be fair he doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture). They'd probably be fired and replaced with someone willing to torture, though.



I don't know if I mentioned here before but you probably don't need to worry about the military.  Military officers have 2 methods to employ when encountering illegal or questionable orders.  The first is to question and repeat.  "Are you sure you want to do that sir?  It could cause XXXX".  This gives the person giving the orders a chance to take back the order without appearing dumb or you appearing insubordinate.

The other option is to resign.  This is the "nuclear option" as you are effectively saying that I would rather quit than carry out that order.  There is no mechanism for an officer to refuse and order and still remain in the service.

If you ever see on the news a sizeable number of senior officers resigning in a short time frame, you know something is going on in the administration.  Senior officers will carry out orders they do not agree with all the time, but if it rises to a point that you think it is illegal or immoral, there are only the two options above.

I think the issue with this is that resigning does not stop the irder being carried out. As Jack pointed out, the next in command is just asked to do the same thing, over and iver again until someone is found who will do it. It's happened before in administrations.

You are right, it will probably happen.  But a couple of generals in a row resigning because they are being asked to do something wrong is a big sign to the person doing the asking, the rest of the military, and the public.  That is big attention when the order is to do something shady that might not otherwise be in the public eye like setting up a torture factory or dropping bombs on the families and neighbors of suspected terrorists.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 17, 2016, 09:15:03 AM
Multiple current joint chiefs of staff have said they would not carry out torture as Trump advocated at one point (though to be fair he doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture). They'd probably be fired and replaced with someone willing to torture, though.



I don't know if I mentioned here before but you probably don't need to worry about the military.  Military officers have 2 methods to employ when encountering illegal or questionable orders.  The first is to question and repeat.  "Are you sure you want to do that sir?  It could cause XXXX".  This gives the person giving the orders a chance to take back the order without appearing dumb or you appearing insubordinate.

The other option is to resign.  This is the "nuclear option" as you are effectively saying that I would rather quit than carry out that order.  There is no mechanism for an officer to refuse and order and still remain in the service.

If you ever see on the news a sizeable number of senior officers resigning in a short time frame, you know something is going on in the administration.  Senior officers will carry out orders they do not agree with all the time, but if it rises to a point that you think it is illegal or immoral, there are only the two options above.

I think the issue with this is that resigning does not stop the irder being carried out. As Jack pointed out, the next in command is just asked to do the same thing, over and iver again until someone is found who will do it. It's happened before in administrations.

You are right, it will probably happen.  But a couple of generals in a row resigning because they are being asked to do something wrong is a big sign to the person doing the asking, the rest of the military, and the public.  That is big attention when the order is to do something shady that might not otherwise be in the public eye like setting up a torture factory or dropping bombs on the families and neighbors of suspected terrorists.
But for an unreasonable person, who does not care about his immorality, resigning does no good. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 18, 2016, 08:21:22 AM
Another prediction: The new AG, Sessions, is against marijuana. Expect federal drug laws to be enforced harshly.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 18, 2016, 09:58:50 AM
Predict a war on pornography, reinvigorated drug war, less civil liberties.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 18, 2016, 10:11:30 AM
Predict a war on pornography, reinvigorated drug war, less civil liberties.

Yeah, porn weirdly popped up in the RNC platform this year. F'ing weird. It's like they wanted some kind of campaign to rally their evangelical base and they pulled one out of their hat.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 18, 2016, 10:19:07 AM
Predict a war on pornography, reinvigorated drug war, less civil liberties.

Yeah, porn weirdly popped up in the RNC platform this year. F'ing weird. It's like they wanted some kind of campaign to rally their evangelical base and they pulled one out of their hat.

Haha - I'm imagining the Family Guy tank of manatee's from South Park - Perhaps that's how the platform was picked. :D
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 18, 2016, 11:00:14 AM
Another prediction: The new AG, Sessions, is against marijuana. Expect federal drug laws to be enforced harshly.

It will be fun to see the gymnastics required to say that abortion laws should be decided on a state by state basis but not drug laws.

I love States rights people wanting everything to be settled by the States... except for things they want to happen everywhere.

It will also be fun to see them go against the popular will of people in several swings states with regards to Mary Jane. I think their desire to jail more poor and minority people will override any political cost that might be associated with this.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on November 18, 2016, 11:03:45 AM
Another prediction: The new AG, Sessions, is against marijuana. Expect federal drug laws to be enforced harshly.

It will be fun to see the gymnastics required to say that abortion laws should be decided on a state by state basis but not drug laws.

I love States rights people wanting everything to be settled by the States... except for things they want to happen everywhere.

It will also be fun to see them go against the popular will of people in several swings states with regards to Mary Jane. I think their desire to jail more poor and minority people will override any political cost that might be associated with this.

Not to mention line the pockets of investors in for-profit prisons (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/09/prison-stocks-are-flying-on-trump-victory.html)

This, to me, is one of the greatest potential tragedies of a Trump presidency. Anyone who supports for-profit prisons supports evil. Full stop. Finally ridding our society of that disgrace would have been among the most laudable legacies of the Obama administration. So it goes.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 18, 2016, 11:13:47 AM
It will also be fun to see them go against the popular will of people in several swings states with regards to Mary Jane. I think their desire to jail more poor and minority people will override any political cost that might be associated with this.

Like virtually everything else in the GOP platform, this should have negligible impact on me, as a wealthy suburban white professional married man.  I can totally see why so many people like me support these policies, which may be bad for other people but really don't affect me much.  Empathy?  What's that?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 18, 2016, 11:39:45 AM
This, to me, is one of the greatest potential tragedies of a Trump presidency. Anyone who supports for-profit prisons supports evil. Full stop. Finally ridding our society of that disgrace would have been among the most laudable legacies of the Obama administration. So it goes.

Yes. To me, it is obvious that certain things should not be driven by the profit motive and hence why we need a government:

1) Health care
2) Policing (including jails, courts, other enforcement)
3) Military and defense
4) Perhaps other things

Sadly, I may have been influenced by the socialist democracy of my upbringing (Canada) and may just be brainwashed. I'm sure capitalism actually does the above better.... Just look at the US! Prisons are for profit and you guys jail people at a higher rate than any other country in the world! Success!
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on November 18, 2016, 11:42:10 AM
So much for "Trump is against more foreign wars"...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/michael-flynn-national-security-adviser-donald-trump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Looks like we get the "bomb the shit out of them" version of Trump.

Sigh.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 18, 2016, 12:02:55 PM
Another prediction: The new AG, Sessions, is against marijuana. Expect federal drug laws to be enforced harshly.

It will be fun to see the gymnastics required to say that abortion laws should be decided on a state by state basis but not drug laws.

I love States rights people wanting everything to be settled by the States... except for things they want to happen everywhere.

It will also be fun to see them go against the popular will of people in several swings states with regards to Mary Jane. I think their desire to jail more poor and minority people will override any political cost that might be associated with this.

Not to mention line the pockets of investors in for-profit prisons (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/09/prison-stocks-are-flying-on-trump-victory.html)

This, to me, is one of the greatest potential tragedies of a Trump presidency. Anyone who supports for-profit prisons supports evil. Full stop. Finally ridding our society of that disgrace would have been among the most laudable legacies of the Obama administration. So it goes.

There are a lot of things Obama could have done that would have been great. Unfortunately, he was unable to push through on some things that would really have made positive change in the country. 

As far as drug legalization; I could see Trump bowing to the tobacco lobbies - they are uniquely set up to capitalize on MJ distribution on a large scale, and he may be able to fit it in as a large source of federal tax revenue.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 18, 2016, 12:22:52 PM
So much for "Trump is against more foreign wars"...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/michael-flynn-national-security-adviser-donald-trump.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Looks like we get the "bomb the shit out of them" version of Trump.

Sigh.

-W

It's not war, he just wants to nuke em.  War over.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 18, 2016, 12:42:26 PM
Interesting article on how the Republicans will destroy Obamacare.  Repeal with a 2 year delay, replace with nothing.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/repeal-and-delay-the-republican-plan-to-destroy-obamacare.html

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 18, 2016, 12:57:36 PM
Interesting article on how the Republicans will destroy Obamacare.  Repeal with a 2 year delay, replace with nothing.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/repeal-and-delay-the-republican-plan-to-destroy-obamacare.html

Of course. Because there were only ever two options for the Republicans on this, if they gained control:

1) "Repeal" Obamacare but in reality just tweak a couple of things, because there's no way to keep the preexisting conditions and keeping kids on their parents' plans until 26 unless the rest of the plan is in place. Make a couple of minor changes, tout them as amazing improvements that remove government overreach, and rename it "Trumpcare" or something.

2) Repeal it completely, and hope their supporters are too busy consuming fake news to notice.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 18, 2016, 03:13:56 PM
I agree. Thanks to Trump, the Republicans control both houses of Congress, the presidency, and are about to rebalance the Supreme Court. They aren't gonna be fighting with him on much.

I blame those who didn't vote.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/5cd9lq/if_did_not_vote_was_a_candidate_in_2016_it_would/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/5cd9lq/if_did_not_vote_was_a_candidate_in_2016_it_would/)

Fuck you, no voters.
 
I also give a smaller FU to those who voted for Stein, Johnson, and Other. But at least I respect them because at least they got their asses out there and had an opinion.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Johnez on November 18, 2016, 03:32:34 PM
Those people will never see you as an equal, but rise above them and it won't matter how they see you.

Just had to quote this, I will remember this if my kids face these issues. Thanks.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 20, 2016, 10:34:26 PM

I also give a smaller FU to those who voted for Stein, Johnson, and Other. But at least I respect them because at least they got their asses out there and had an opinion.

This. Even though they may not have helped Trump lose, at least they did get out there...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 21, 2016, 07:10:32 PM
Interesting article on how the Republicans will destroy Obamacare.  Repeal with a 2 year delay, replace with nothing.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/repeal-and-delay-the-republican-plan-to-destroy-obamacare.html

Of course. Because there were only ever two options for the Republicans on this, if they gained control:

1) "Repeal" Obamacare but in reality just tweak a couple of things, because there's no way to keep the preexisting conditions and keeping kids on their parents' plans until 26 unless the rest of the plan is in place. Make a couple of minor changes, tout them as amazing improvements that remove government overreach, and rename it "Trumpcare" or something.

2) Repeal it completely, and hope their supporters are too busy consuming fake news to notice.

Would that be the worst thing in the world to improve the ACA? Who cares who gets credit for it. (I mean, besides Barack Obama and Donald Trump) if its better than it was, its a win for everybody.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 21, 2016, 08:56:15 PM
Interesting article on how the Republicans will destroy Obamacare.  Repeal with a 2 year delay, replace with nothing.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/repeal-and-delay-the-republican-plan-to-destroy-obamacare.html

Of course. Because there were only ever two options for the Republicans on this, if they gained control:

1) "Repeal" Obamacare but in reality just tweak a couple of things, because there's no way to keep the preexisting conditions and keeping kids on their parents' plans until 26 unless the rest of the plan is in place. Make a couple of minor changes, tout them as amazing improvements that remove government overreach, and rename it "Trumpcare" or something.

2) Repeal it completely, and hope their supporters are too busy consuming fake news to notice.

Would that be the worst thing in the world to improve the ACA? Who cares who gets credit for it. (I mean, besides Barack Obama and Donald Trump) if its better than it was, its a win for everybody.

Obama himself has said he predicts they will make cosmetic changes and re-brand it without his name, at which point Republicans will be miraculously in favor of it. Obama understands what is really going on. And he has said he's all for it. Because he actually gives a shit what happens to uninsured people.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on November 21, 2016, 09:48:55 PM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 21, 2016, 10:03:05 PM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

The broader surfacing of the white supremacists/Nazis often reminds me of Jake and Elwood.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ukFAvYP3UU

And yes, their recent time in the limelight is a result of Trump's campaign and presidency. Shame on him for not denouncing those views.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 22, 2016, 07:50:31 AM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 22, 2016, 08:13:58 AM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well.

I'm no Trump supporter, but I would like to believe the heil Trump and nazi salute people are an emboldened fringe element. 

But we've seen so many people on these very pages claim that Trump is not racist that this sort of thing is absolutely relevant.  Even if you yourself don't think you are racist, you have to realize that some hardcore racists are thrilled about Trump's election because they think he is racist and that Americans voted for him because they are racist.  Remember that when you think of your minority friends and try to understand the unease they feel.

There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: DoubleDown on November 22, 2016, 08:55:48 AM
There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.

I agree with you about the part I bolded above, but I'm also certain that just about every one of those who voted for Trump do not give one fuck about it. I won't be asking the people I know who voted for Trump, but I can accurately foresee their responses. It would be something along the lines of "Oh, that's just a whole lot of nothing, don't get all worked up about it." That is, it would be the same mentality in voting for him in the first place: Ignore all the glaring and horrible deficits in Trump, and vote for him because he tells it like it is to Make America Great Again.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Northwestie on November 22, 2016, 09:20:35 AM
Starting off on a good foot with the press - yesterday Trump met with news staffers and executives and ended up chiding them over their bad coverage - including bad photos that emphasized his double chin -- really!

This morning he tweeted that he canceled a meeting with the "nasty" NYT because they were making unfair demands.  The NYT quickly clarified that Trump wanted to cancel and on-the-record meeting with reporters and the NYTs would not meet his demands of off-the-record.  Trump re-tweeted and relented to the on-the-record requirement.

Oh brother.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 22, 2016, 12:56:59 PM
There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.

I agree with you about the part I bolded above, but I'm also certain that just about every one of those who voted for Trump do not give one fuck about it. I won't be asking the people I know who voted for Trump, but I can accurately foresee their responses. It would be something along the lines of "Oh, that's just a whole lot of nothing, don't get all worked up about it." That is, it would be the same mentality in voting for him in the first place: Ignore all the glaring and horrible deficits in Trump, and vote for him because he tells it like it is to Make America Great Again.

So far, the response is along the lines of:

1) no, trump never said or implied anything racist and any evidence you supply is typical left wing hysteria
2) you don't get it, calling trump supporters racist is exactly why we voted for trump because you hurt our feelings and we are tired of it
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RosieTR on November 22, 2016, 01:52:29 PM
Starting off on a good foot with the press - yesterday Trump met with news staffers and executives and ended up chiding them over their bad coverage - including bad photos that emphasized his double chin -- really!

This morning he tweeted that he canceled a meeting with the "nasty" NYT because they were making unfair demands.  The NYT quickly clarified that Trump wanted to cancel and on-the-record meeting with reporters and the NYTs would not meet his demands of off-the-record.  Trump re-tweeted and relented to the on-the-record requirement.

Oh brother.

Very, very concerning. Trump not understanding/caring what one of the most fundamental freedoms of the United States IS, is deeply concerning. The weird use of tweets, as well. I still can't understand how someone who can't really handle Twitter is supposed to handle...anything else.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Northwestie on November 22, 2016, 01:57:30 PM
Starting off on a good foot with the press - yesterday Trump met with news staffers and executives and ended up chiding them over their bad coverage - including bad photos that emphasized his double chin -- really!

This morning he tweeted that he canceled a meeting with the "nasty" NYT because they were making unfair demands.  The NYT quickly clarified that Trump wanted to cancel and on-the-record meeting with reporters and the NYTs would not meet his demands of off-the-record.  Trump re-tweeted and relented to the on-the-record requirement.

Oh brother.

Very, very concerning. Trump not understanding/caring what one of the most fundamental freedoms of the United States IS, is deeply concerning. The weird use of tweets, as well. I still can't understand how someone who can't really handle Twitter is supposed to handle...anything else.

I at least had some hope that he would be humbled by the position.  He looked a bit scared after his meeting with Obama at the WH, but, as expected this has worn off.  The guy has a huge ego and a thin skin.  Add in his lack of world knowledge - and we'll see what mess he makes of things shortly.

The meeting took place in a big boardroom and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks,” the other source said.

“Trump kept saying, ‘We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful, dishonest media who got it all wrong.’ He addressed everyone in the room, calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars,” the source said.

“Trump didn’t say [NBC reporter] Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate — which was Martha Raddatz, who was also in the room.”

The stunned reporters tried to get a word in edgewise to discuss access to a Trump administration.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: DoubleDown on November 22, 2016, 02:15:53 PM
The guy has a huge ego and a thin skin.  Add in his lack of world knowledge - and we'll see what mess he makes of things shortly.

I think I already mentioned in this or another thread that Professor Allan Lichtman, who developed a methodology for accurately predicting presidential winners every single time over the last 3 or 4 decades, correctly picked Trump to win when every other poll and pundit (including the hallowed Nate Silver) and indicator said Clinton would win. I laughed at it at the time, thinking "Well dude, sorry your methodology is going to suffer its first loss in 40 years." He also predicted Trump would be impeached by his own Republican party within about 2 years. Now I've tried not to hang too much hope on this, but I actually can see it happening. Not that a Pence presidency would be any fun, but it would at least be about the best Schadenfreude ever to watch Trump go down in disgrace.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ncornilsen on November 22, 2016, 05:33:13 PM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk


There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well.

I'm no Trump supporter, but I would like to believe the heil Trump and nazi salute people are an emboldened fringe element. 

But we've seen so many people on these very pages claim that Trump is not racist that this sort of thing is absolutely relevant.  Even if you yourself don't think you are racist, you have to realize that some hardcore racists are thrilled about Trump's election because they think he is racist and that Americans voted for him because they are racist.  Remember that when you think of your minority friends and try to understand the unease they feel.

There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.

I don't know what you want from Trump supporters. I see that a bunch of racists such as the vile Alt-Right or KKK have cooked up in their minds that Trump was elected 'because' he was racist, and now they think they can come out of the shadows. I see that there are reports of petty race crimes... It's obvious that a lot of those people are the above demographic feeling emboldened, and I'm shocked by how brazen they are. I'm sadly not shocked that a significant number of these incidents were either Clinton supporters doing something 'ironically' or were outright made up. That doesn't deserve a pass either.

I see the things trump has actually said, and it's bad stuff. But I also find that it's not as black-and-white as "Trump called Mexican's rapists!" but rather, he said some things that have small elements of truth, are worded without the nuance needed to keep them from being taken as racist/bigoted. there's just enough plausible deniability for the "never Clinton" people to look past it. The Media seizes on lack of nuance to feed the narrative that he is a racist, and the vile people sieze on it to feel like they've got a buddy in the Whitehouse. I even think the poor wording was by design on Trumps part, and find it really shitty that he did it.

I voted for trump. To be fair - I live in a solidly blue state, mailed the ballot in 2 weeks before the election, and voted for trump mainly to undermine Clinton's 'mandate' when she 'inevitably' won... but I voted for trump. And I still think he will be less detrimental to this country in the long run.  I cast my vote knowing full well that Trump's election would create a real perception of doom for some people in minority groups. Expecting him to loose made that a lot easier, but I am truly sorry for the stress, but I do not believe the fears will be borne out.

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on November 22, 2016, 05:43:31 PM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk


There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well.

I'm no Trump supporter, but I would like to believe the heil Trump and nazi salute people are an emboldened fringe element. 

But we've seen so many people on these very pages claim that Trump is not racist that this sort of thing is absolutely relevant.  Even if you yourself don't think you are racist, you have to realize that some hardcore racists are thrilled about Trump's election because they think he is racist and that Americans voted for him because they are racist.  Remember that when you think of your minority friends and try to understand the unease they feel.

There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.

I don't know what you want from Trump supporters.
I see that a bunch of racists such as the vile Alt-Right or KKK have cooked up in their minds that Trump was elected 'because' he was racist, and now they think they can come out of the shadows. I see that there are reports of petty race crimes... It's obvious that a lot of those people are the above demographic feeling emboldened, and I'm shocked by how brazen they are. I'm sadly not shocked that a significant number of these incidents were either Clinton supporters doing something 'ironically' or were outright made up. That doesn't deserve a pass either.

I see the things trump has actually said, and it's bad stuff. But I also find that it's not as black-and-white as "Trump called Mexican's rapists!" but rather, he said some things that have small elements of truth, are worded without the nuance needed to keep them from being taken as racist/bigoted. there's just enough plausible deniability for the "never Clinton" people to look past it. The Media seizes on lack of nuance to feed the narrative that he is a racist, and the vile people sieze on it to feel like they've got a buddy in the Whitehouse. I even think the poor wording was by design on Trumps part, and find it really shitty that he did it.

I voted for trump. To be fair - I live in a solidly blue state, mailed the ballot in 2 weeks before the election, and voted for trump mainly to undermine Clinton's 'mandate' when she 'inevitably' won... but I voted for trump. And I still think he will be less detrimental to this country in the long run.  I cast my vote knowing full well that Trump's election would create a real perception of doom for some people in minority groups. Expecting him to loose made that a lot easier, but I am truly sorry for the stress, but I do not believe the fears will be borne out.

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.

I want you in the strongest possible terms to denounce the racism that many of his supporters seem to feel entitled to now spout. At every available opportunity. And to hold the candidate that you helped elect accountable for denouncing it, too.

As often as necessary.

Because if his supporters do not, there will be no curb on the racist violence committed in his name.

Is that clear enough?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 22, 2016, 05:44:24 PM

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.

That's some 60 dimensional chess right there... would you have voted differently if you were in a swing state?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ncornilsen on November 22, 2016, 06:06:17 PM

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.

That's some 60 dimensional chess right there... would you have voted differently if you were in a swing state?

Let me clarify aomething... Trump won't wind those things back... others will do it as a reaction to him.

And yeah, probably. I didn't think he'd win.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 22, 2016, 06:09:56 PM

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.

That's some 60 dimensional chess right there... would you have voted differently if you were in a swing state?

Let me clarify something... Trump won't wind those things back... others will do it as a reaction to him.


And yeah, probably. I didn't think he'd win.

Important clarification and I sincerely hope that is the case. But I also see many elected republicans unable to resist the appeal of holding all 3 branches of government and are correspondingly unwilling to take a principled stand against the statements and actions of Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 22, 2016, 07:17:03 PM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk


There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well.

I'm no Trump supporter, but I would like to believe the heil Trump and nazi salute people are an emboldened fringe element. 

But we've seen so many people on these very pages claim that Trump is not racist that this sort of thing is absolutely relevant.  Even if you yourself don't think you are racist, you have to realize that some hardcore racists are thrilled about Trump's election because they think he is racist and that Americans voted for him because they are racist.  Remember that when you think of your minority friends and try to understand the unease they feel.

There is definitely an active resurgence of open racism in America today due to Trump.  You can pretend you don't support it, but you have to at least see it.  If you voted for him, this is at least partly on your shoulders.

I don't know what you want from Trump supporters.
I see that a bunch of racists such as the vile Alt-Right or KKK have cooked up in their minds that Trump was elected 'because' he was racist, and now they think they can come out of the shadows. I see that there are reports of petty race crimes... It's obvious that a lot of those people are the above demographic feeling emboldened, and I'm shocked by how brazen they are. I'm sadly not shocked that a significant number of these incidents were either Clinton supporters doing something 'ironically' or were outright made up. That doesn't deserve a pass either.

I see the things trump has actually said, and it's bad stuff. But I also find that it's not as black-and-white as "Trump called Mexican's rapists!" but rather, he said some things that have small elements of truth, are worded without the nuance needed to keep them from being taken as racist/bigoted. there's just enough plausible deniability for the "never Clinton" people to look past it. The Media seizes on lack of nuance to feed the narrative that he is a racist, and the vile people sieze on it to feel like they've got a buddy in the Whitehouse. I even think the poor wording was by design on Trumps part, and find it really shitty that he did it.

I voted for trump. To be fair - I live in a solidly blue state, mailed the ballot in 2 weeks before the election, and voted for trump mainly to undermine Clinton's 'mandate' when she 'inevitably' won... but I voted for trump. And I still think he will be less detrimental to this country in the long run.  I cast my vote knowing full well that Trump's election would create a real perception of doom for some people in minority groups. Expecting him to loose made that a lot easier, but I am truly sorry for the stress, but I do not believe the fears will be borne out.

For the record, I voted for Trump because he WILL drain the swamp... because he is the swamp. He is every newt (gingrich), orange goblin and slimy snail X10. He's the swamp so much, we'll pave over the thing and build a planned parenthood right on top of him. He will teach a new generation to distrust executive power, to see how an orange buffoon can abuse it. Clinton would have been one more step down the path to fascism. Not because she is one, no.. she would merely cement and continue the growth of executive and federal power. she would continue with the shady, behind the scenes corruption that's not-quite-a-scandal, so that someday, a fascist would find a nice seat with all the controls already built in. Trump might wind that kind of thing back.

I want you in the strongest possible terms to denounce the racism that many of his supporters seem to feel entitled to now spout. At every available opportunity. And to hold the candidate that you helped elect accountable for denouncing it, too.

As often as necessary.

Because if his supporters do not, there will be no curb on the racist violence committed in his name.

Is that clear enough?
I want you to stand up for women who are sexually harassed and assaulted.  I want you to learn around rape culture, and about rapists (Google Dr. David Lasik) and stand up and tell others that behaviors that contribute to assaults need to stop.  And I'd also like to know why the fact that Trump admitted, braggingly about sexually assaulting women was not enough for you not to vote him.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 23, 2016, 04:23:28 AM
Realistic impact of Trump's Presidency:

The neo-nazis alt-right will have a conference in DC blocks from the Holocaust museum. Their leader, Richard Spencer, will proclaim "Hail Trump!" and the attendees will give the Nazi salute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

There will be radio silence from Trump and his people about this.

His supporters, as well
.
Not strictly correct. He denounced them publically yesterday (In his peculiar, often-misconstrued-yet-oddly-direct Trump way.)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/donald-trump-disavow-groups-new-york-times/index.html

I don't really understand the upset about a protected speech gathering? It reminds me of the "They're gonna build a mosque near Ground Zero!!!!" hysteria.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 23, 2016, 06:06:03 AM
Not strictly correct. He denounced them publically yesterday (In his peculiar, often-misconstrued-yet-oddly-direct Trump way.)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/donald-trump-disavow-groups-new-york-times/index.html

I don't really understand the upset about a protected speech gathering? It reminds me of the "They're gonna build a mosque near Ground Zero!!!!" hysteria.

You see a peaceful group trying to build a place of worship to practice their religion as being no different than a hate group dedicated to a message of racial superiority and bigotry gathering to praise the next president for supporting their cause?  Really?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 23, 2016, 06:10:22 AM
Not strictly correct. He denounced them publically yesterday (In his peculiar, often-misconstrued-yet-oddly-direct Trump way.)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/donald-trump-disavow-groups-new-york-times/index.html

I don't really understand the upset about a protected speech gathering? It reminds me of the "They're gonna build a mosque near Ground Zero!!!!" hysteria.

You see a peaceful group trying to build a place of worship to practice their religion as being no different than a hate group dedicated to a message of racial superiority and bigotry gathering to praise the next president for supporting their cause?  Really?

Of course not. I see the overblown reaction to these actions as similar.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Abe on November 23, 2016, 06:24:57 PM
Remember back in the 90s when supremacists would go form militia-communes out in Montana to play pretend "ethno-state"? That was so much more pleasant than them wanting to run the government.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 23, 2016, 06:30:12 PM
Remember back in the 90s when supremacists would go form militia-communes out in Montana to play pretend "ethno-state"? That was so much more pleasant than them wanting to run the government.

Unless you happened to live near one of them, then it kind of sucked.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Abe on November 23, 2016, 06:49:11 PM
That's true. I lived in a KKK-run county during the 90s; was just being facetious. Still better than them thinking they have a chance of them running the nation's intelligence apparatus and so on.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 23, 2016, 07:31:34 PM
Still better than them thinking they have a chance of them running the nation's intelligence apparatus and so on.

Was that statement an optimistic assertion that they won't actually run the nation's intelligence apparatus? 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: TheOldestYoungMan on November 23, 2016, 07:47:46 PM

I want you to stand up for women who are sexually harassed and assaulted.  I want you to learn around rape culture, and about rapists (Google Dr. David Lasik) and stand up and tell others that behaviors that contribute to assaults need to stop.  And I'd also like to know why the fact that Trump admitted, braggingly about sexually assaulting women was not enough for you not to vote him.

Well, if they weren't going to vote third party (and who would amirite?  waste of your vote!) then they might have looked at HRC's support of a serial harasser of women, of her failure to denounce a known serial harasser of women, of her active participation in intimidation of women trying to speak up about harassment of women, of her bragging about defending an actual rapist to the point where he escaped punishment, and then compared that to Trump talking about how when you're rich, women will let you touch them, is talking vs. doing.  Her attacking him on this debates was called out as the height of hypocrisy.  It was a big ole pitch in the dirt and she couldn't help swinging at it.  I get that she doesn't understand how people perceive her on this issue, same as Trump doesn't get it.  That's the problem with people who fundamentally don't respect women.

And then they might have just not voted at all, or come to the conclusion that on this particular issue both candidates suck so look at other issues.  When life gives you shit, you just uh...you just uh..make shit-ade.

It should have been a slam dunk disqualifier for Trump.  I don't think there's any other candidate where that tape wouldn't have tanked the election.  Except that his opponent was HRC, and so there's no good choice.  There's just different styles of bad.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 23, 2016, 09:32:29 PM
When life gives you shit, you just uh...you just uh..make shit-ade.

I read that similar to this:
(http://i.imgur.com/wQc9RPi.gif)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 24, 2016, 02:02:42 AM
To answer OP's question: Autocratic Kleptocracy.

Sorry to know what that means now. All the BS is distraction. "Drain the Swamp" indeed. I would love for Trump to prove me wrong however, I have seen no news that makes me feel good to be right.

Thought this was interesting to share

http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/navigating-post-truth-politics-russia-and-america (http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/navigating-post-truth-politics-russia-and-america)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 24, 2016, 05:02:42 AM
To answer OP's question: Autocratic Kleptocracy.

Sorry to know what that means now. All the BS is distraction. "Drain the Swamp" indeed. I would love for Trump to prove me wrong however, I have seen no news that makes me feel good to be right.

Thought this was interesting to share

http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/navigating-post-truth-politics-russia-and-america (http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-23/navigating-post-truth-politics-russia-and-america)

That was a pretty terrible article. Not only is the subject's view severely slanted, it's also full of misinformation. Whether the PeOTUS is lying through his teeth or not, Trump has walked back almost all of his most divisive campaign rhetoric and has struck a markedly different tone than when he was campaigning. This doesn't excuse him, or imply that he won't try to overstep his authority, or continue to use misinformation to achieve his goals, but to compare his family to the mafia and state that this shows he'll be bad in the same ways that Putin is bad is rather shallow and misguided, in my opinion.

I think the strangest thing one can do, at this point, is assume that they can predict Donald Trump's behavior from a distance.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on November 24, 2016, 10:25:44 AM
Trump's "base" is mad Romney is up for consideration as Secretary of State:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/24/politics/kellyanne-conway-romney-tweets/index.html

Indeed, why would we want a single person that is not an uber-extremist (yet ironically, still an insider but we don't talk about that) serve in his administration? The horror of it. Trump sure is going against his "mandate." God forbid he make a single not completely horrifying choice. Sigh...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 25, 2016, 10:16:30 AM
That was a pretty terrible article. Not only is the subject's view severely slanted, it's also full of misinformation. Whether the PeOTUS is lying through his teeth or not, Trump has walked back almost all of his most divisive campaign rhetoric and has struck a markedly different tone than when he was campaigning. This doesn't excuse him, or imply that he won't try to overstep his authority, or continue to use misinformation to achieve his goals, but to compare his family to the mafia and state that this shows he'll be bad in the same ways that Putin is bad is rather shallow and misguided, in my opinion.

I think the strangest thing one can do, at this point, is assume that they can predict Donald Trump's behavior from a distance.

The article was a summary of the 6:04 radio program. Hoping your listened to that interview, it goes with your post. I can't speak to the mafia statement as I have not read Hungarian sociologist Bálint Magya's work, but the author speaking lays it out in the clip.

"Power associated as a source of enrichment, personal affirmation and domination." That sounds about right to me.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rocketpj on November 25, 2016, 11:54:57 AM
If you are wanting a model for what Trump will do in his first year you could probably look at Brazil. 

- Massive and likely irreversible selloff of public assets, as fast as possible, with as much as possible being diverted towards Trump's people.  If not directly then indirectly (think a 40 year booking at one of his hotels, paid in advance).

- Open warfare with the media who dare to report on them.

- Massive and probably irreversible attack on science and evidence in general.

- Worst case, appointment of cronies to the SC, which will in turn protect him from any liability for the above.

Don't underestimate his depravity.  He may drain the swamp, but only to build a huge golf course for himself.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on November 25, 2016, 12:09:32 PM
If you are wanting a model for what Trump will do in his first year you could probably look at Brazil. 

- Massive and likely irreversible selloff of public assets, as fast as possible, with as much as possible being diverted towards Trump's people.  If not directly then indirectly (think a 40 year booking at one of his hotels, paid in advance).

- Open warfare with the media who dare to report on them.

- Massive and probably irreversible attack on science and evidence in general.

- Worst case, appointment of cronies to the SC, which will in turn protect him from any liability for the above.

Don't underestimate his depravity.  He may drain the swamp, but only to build a huge golf course for himself.

Just to be clear, we can check back in with you late January 2018 and see how your model holds up, right? I assume you are OK with that sort of integrity check. Or are you not willing to own that model?

Ditto for all these threads, both pro and con. Feel free to let us know how long you need to prove your viewpoint. You have to tell us now how long, you don't get to choose your timing based on actions. So many people are convinced x or y is going to happen, put it out for an internet peer review.

If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 25, 2016, 02:21:47 PM
If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I think most people here would love to be proved wrong by a Trump presidency. The name calling doesn't help with the discussion though.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 25, 2016, 03:00:34 PM
Feel free to let us know how long you need to prove your viewpoint. You have to tell us now how long, you don't get to choose your timing based on actions. So many people are convinced x or y is going to happen, put it out for an internet peer review.

You mean just like all those red states did with "Obama is going to take our guns!"?

Yea, didn't exactly pan out that way, despite all of the wailing about the end of western civilization when he got elected.

The difference between then and now, as I see it, is that Obama never even claimed he was going to do all of the things that conservative radio warned people would result if he got elected, while Trump is openly promising to do things that everyone is worried about.  It's not scaremongering when you quote what Trump openly proclaims.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rocketpj on November 25, 2016, 03:03:02 PM
If you are wanting a model for what Trump will do in his first year you could probably look at Brazil. 

- Massive and likely irreversible selloff of public assets, as fast as possible, with as much as possible being diverted towards Trump's people.  If not directly then indirectly (think a 40 year booking at one of his hotels, paid in advance).

- Open warfare with the media who dare to report on them.

- Massive and probably irreversible attack on science and evidence in general.

- Worst case, appointment of cronies to the SC, which will in turn protect him from any liability for the above.

Don't underestimate his depravity.  He may drain the swamp, but only to build a huge golf course for himself.

Just to be clear, we can check back in with you late January 2018 and see how your model holds up, right? I assume you are OK with that sort of integrity check. Or are you not willing to own that model?

Ditto for all these threads, both pro and con. Feel free to let us know how long you need to prove your viewpoint. You have to tell us now how long, you don't get to choose your timing based on actions. So many people are convinced x or y is going to happen, put it out for an internet peer review.

If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I would dearly love to be proven wrong.  If I am wrong I will be delighted.  Believe it or not, my statements weren't about winning an internet argument.

So I will thank you for not projecting whatever fantasy of unaccountability you seem to have onto me.  I expect a number of bad things to happen to your country with a Trump presidency.  I would love to be wrong.  I don't think I will be, unfortunately.

Generally I think that when someone says they intend to do something terrible, we should believe them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on November 25, 2016, 03:16:50 PM
If you are wanting a model for what Trump will do in his first year you could probably look at Brazil. 

- Massive and likely irreversible selloff of public assets, as fast as possible, with as much as possible being diverted towards Trump's people.  If not directly then indirectly (think a 40 year booking at one of his hotels, paid in advance).

- Open warfare with the media who dare to report on them.

- Massive and probably irreversible attack on science and evidence in general.

- Worst case, appointment of cronies to the SC, which will in turn protect him from any liability for the above.

Don't underestimate his depravity.  He may drain the swamp, but only to build a huge golf course for himself.

Just to be clear, we can check back in with you late January 2018 and see how your model holds up, right? I assume you are OK with that sort of integrity check. Or are you not willing to own that model?

Ditto for all these threads, both pro and con. Feel free to let us know how long you need to prove your viewpoint. You have to tell us now how long, you don't get to choose your timing based on actions. So many people are convinced x or y is going to happen, put it out for an internet peer review.

If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I would dearly love to be proven wrong.  If I am wrong I will be delighted.  Believe it or not, my statements weren't about winning an internet argument.

So I will thank you for not projecting whatever fantasy of unaccountability you seem to have onto me.  I expect a number of bad things to happen to your country with a Trump presidency.  I would love to be wrong.  I don't think I will be, unfortunately.

Generally I think that when someone says they intend to do something terrible, we should believe them.

Not fantasy. How long will it take for the terrible things to happen? Hoping to be wrong is not the same as admitting to be wrong should the doomsday not come.

I said the same thing to some anti obama folks. They came in saying they were going to lose their 401k accounts shortly after 2008 election. Like sol and the guns, still waiting, but they won't admit to being wrong. Still a couple months to go i guess.

I firmly believe accountability is a big part of integrity, and politics need more of it. So I ask about it sometimes.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on November 25, 2016, 03:21:45 PM
If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I think most people here would love to be proved wrong by a Trump presidency. The name calling doesn't help with the discussion though.

I hope I am calling no one names. If the shoe fits, you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize. I hope no shoe fits, and that nothing too bad happens in the next few years. I just want to know at what point both sides have to check the results and admit their rights and wrongs.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on November 25, 2016, 03:22:32 PM
Bad things are already happening in this instance. Trump's appointments have been almost universally terrible. He has explicitly stated he will delegate an unusual amount of authority and is now stocking his cabinet with creationists, climate change deniers, white nationalists, anti public school activists, and hawks that make HRC look like a hippy. Yes, they technically haven't been able to enact any policy yet, but they represent much stronger evidence that bad things will come to pass than anything Obama did in the same timeframe.

Plus, you know, Trump has actually said he's going to do horrible things. Might have been a campaign tactic, but Obama's election is not remotely comparable so far as the amount of actual evidence that was used to infer a probable outcome. Would still very gladly admit I'm wrong if somehow every one of the extremists that will end up in control of the country turn against their lengthy histories and actually effect positive change, of course.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wenchsenior on November 25, 2016, 04:33:53 PM
If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I think most people here would love to be proved wrong by a Trump presidency. The name calling doesn't help with the discussion though.

I would be beyond thrilled to be wrong and happy to broadcast it. I've already humbled myself to the handful of people on this forum (some no longer here) who called this election correctly.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 25, 2016, 04:48:01 PM
you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize.

Classic.

Donald Trump would be proud.  "I'm not saying you're a piece of shit.  I would never say that, because it wouldn't be proper.  But some people are saying you're a huge piece of shit.  I don't say that, but everyone knows that you're a huge piece of shit."

24 hours later...  "I never said he was a piece of shit, you're quoting me out of context.  Some other people have said that he's a piece of shit, but not me.  It's not me saying that, what a shitty thing for him to say, attacking me like that.  Only a real piece of shit would say that."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on November 25, 2016, 07:14:53 PM
you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize.

Classic.

Donald Trump would be proud.  "I'm not saying you're a piece of shit.  I would never say that, because it wouldn't be proper.  But some people are saying you're a huge piece of shit.  I don't say that, but everyone knows that you're a huge piece of shit."

24 hours later...  "I never said he was a piece of shit, you're quoting me out of context.  Some other people have said that he's a piece of shit, but not me.  It's not me saying that, what a shitty thing for him to say, attacking me like that.  Only a real piece of shit would say that."

I'll be clearer. If you are convinced that x will happen, and x does not happen, and you sidestep, backpedal, deny, etc., you are a 'pick your disparaging descriptive word'. That is my only point. And, if x does happen, please, post and say 'damn it, I was right, this sucks'. Ditto for the opposite of those.

One small example is Chuck Todd. Last November or so he said on national tv, 'well, that will do it for trump, watch next week he will fade away'. I never heard him say 'wow, did I screw that up. You'd think someone who does this for a living would be better than that'. I never heard that. Others have, and I respect that. Have integrity, that is my desire. I am fine with no one caring about my desire, but you should be true to yourself.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BudgetSlasher on November 25, 2016, 07:19:54 PM
The guy has a huge ego and a thin skin.  Add in his lack of world knowledge - and we'll see what mess he makes of things shortly.

I think I already mentioned in this or another thread that Professor Allan Lichtman, who developed a methodology for accurately predicting presidential winners every single time over the last 3 or 4 decades, correctly picked Trump to win when every other poll and pundit (including the hallowed Nate Silver) and indicator said Clinton would win. I laughed at it at the time, thinking "Well dude, sorry your methodology is going to suffer its first loss in 40 years." He also predicted Trump would be impeached by his own Republican party within about 2 years. Now I've tried not to hang too much hope on this, but I actually can see it happening. Not that a Pence presidency would be any fun, but it would at least be about the best Schadenfreude ever to watch Trump go down in disgrace.

I agree I would not put too much faith in that prediction.

He predicted a Trump win using a method that has accurately predict many election cycles and he predicted Trump would be impeached based not on his system, but on his gut; there is a big difference between the two.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 25, 2016, 08:13:35 PM
So in January of 2018 do we need to say we're wrong if Trump decides not to accomplish the bad things he said he was going to do, or only if he tried to accomplish them, but they didn't happen?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: marty998 on November 25, 2016, 11:26:52 PM

If you are wanting a model for what Trump will do in his first year you could probably look at Brazil. 

- Massive and likely irreversible selloff of public assets, as fast as possible, with as much as possible being diverted towards Trump's people.  If not directly then indirectly (think a 40 year booking at one of his hotels, paid in advance).

- Open warfare with the media who dare to report on them.

- Massive and probably irreversible attack on science and evidence in general.

- Worst case, appointment of cronies to the SC, which will in turn protect him from any liability for the above.

Don't underestimate his depravity.  He may drain the swamp, but only to build a huge golf course for himself.

Nobody believed Copernicus. But the earth still went on revolving around the sun.

Even if Trump attacks science, it doesn't stop reality from being true, no matter which way it is spun.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 26, 2016, 04:09:49 AM
Even if Trump attacks science, it doesn't stop reality from being true, no matter which way it is spun.

Very true however, funding for research matters if we want to be globally competitive.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on November 26, 2016, 04:29:40 AM
Even if Trump attacks science, it doesn't stop reality from being true, no matter which way it is spun.

Very true however, funding for research matters if we want to be globally competitive.

Yeah, that was my first thought also as to a possible impact. But how much can the administration influence  funding? I am too lazy to go research it, but I'd guess enough for sure that people in some areas would feel it. the problem would be we could get behind and not (as a nation) even realize it. Sort of analogous to Kodak. i could imagine some meeting a long time ago where a decision to not fund a project on digital media felt small and fine at the time.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 26, 2016, 04:34:29 AM
So in January of 2018 do we need to say we're wrong if Trump decides not to accomplish the bad things he said he was going to do, or only if he tried to accomplish them, but they didn't happen?

If 2018 is the deadline, yes. Then we will start a check -in thread where everyone who thought Trump was going to xrash the economy and flood Miami and give everyone asthma can say "I was wrong. Big league wrong."*

 I would argue for Q3 2019 before passing judgment, seeing as how slow Congress has been at work lately. But that's purely a gut reaction.

*Or whatever the National Trump Re-education center curriculum approves . :)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 26, 2016, 07:32:38 AM
Feel free to let us know how long you need to prove your viewpoint. You have to tell us now how long, you don't get to choose your timing based on actions. So many people are convinced x or y is going to happen, put it out for an internet peer review.

You mean just like all those red states did with "Obama is going to take our guns!"?

Not to totally derail the thread, but it's not as if Obama didnt try different ways to attack gun rights. The m855 ammo ban was not confiscation of all the guns, but it was a pretty blatant, science denying attempt to attack the availability of a wide swath of firearms.

The fact that huge numbers of people stood up for their rights against a government that they felt was doing wrong and stopped said government action from occurring  doesn't mean the government wasn't doing wrong.   Just because there were no riots or school walk outs or looted buildings or marches or protests at govenrment buildings doesn't mean that people didn't stand up for what they believed in, against a government they felt was wrong. Their tactics also happened to be effective at achieveing their stated goal.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: radram on November 26, 2016, 09:07:39 AM
you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize.

Classic.

Donald Trump would be proud.  "I'm not saying you're a piece of shit.  I would never say that, because it wouldn't be proper.  But some people are saying you're a huge piece of shit.  I don't say that, but everyone knows that you're a huge piece of shit."

24 hours later...  "I never said he was a piece of shit, you're quoting me out of context.  Some other people have said that he's a piece of shit, but not me.  It's not me saying that, what a shitty thing for him to say, attacking me like that.  Only a real piece of shit would say that."

I'll be clearer. If you are convinced that x will happen, and x does not happen, and you sidestep, backpedal, deny, etc., you are a 'pick your disparaging descriptive word'. That is my only point. And, if x does happen, please, post and say 'damn it, I was right, this sucks'. Ditto for the opposite of those.

One small example is Chuck Todd. Last November or so he said on national tv, 'well, that will do it for trump, watch next week he will fade away'. I never heard him say 'wow, did I screw that up. You'd think someone who does this for a living would be better than that'. I never heard that. Others have, and I respect that. Have integrity, that is my desire. I am fine with no one caring about my desire, but you should be true to yourself.

Silverado,
This sounds like fun, so I will play.

Regarding ACA:
Full repeal of ACA with no replace gets discussed, debated, passed through the house and senate, and placed on Trumps desk. Just as discussed (in the 60 minutes article from a few weeks back), Trump Veto's the bill.

They start over with a repeal and replace plan that Trump signs. 

No mandate, 26 year-olds on parents plan, no denial of pre-existing conditions. There is now a catastrophic option, covering nothing until some large out of pocket max (lets say $25,000). This new option will cost about $2,000 less per year as the current bronze plans but will cover nothing unless you have a serious health event.  There will no longer be ACA credits for health insurance, but there will be some sort of off-set to help make the catastrophic plan affordable to the poor. Prevention services will be reduced to help contain costs.  Healthy people will love the new system. Sick people will not like it as much.

If you are unhealthy you will pay more or not get services, if you are well you will pay less. Many will think that is exactly the way it ought to be. Many will think we are abandoning our sick.

My family will pay more and utilize less services.

Regarding Medicare:
They go with the Ryan Plan voucher idea. Saves government money.  Costs people more. It might be a real problem, but not for 25 years. I hope my goggle reminder goes off in 2041 so I can come back here and gloat :)

Regarding Inheritance:
Full repeal of any taxes for inheritance. This will not effect 99.98% of current estates. The revenue difference will be offset by a combination of deficit increases and less services.

Regarding Taxes
Rates changes much like Trump has been discussing. Increased deficits and decreasing spending on services to offset the tax revenue decrease.

Regarding Military Spending
The largest percentage increase in modern history. All deficit driven.

Regarding infrastructure
Almost nothing changes.   No money. All improvements are deficit driven.

Overall, usual "don't tax and spend a little less" deficit increasing policies.  4 years from now, increased inflation, increased annual deficits, and a greater wealth gap. Trump falls short of his campaign promise to eliminate the debt(not deficit) in 10 years by $40 trillion, because congress does not go along with his idea to default on our debt.

If he runs in 2020, he wins again under the "give my ideas a chance" mantra.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on November 26, 2016, 10:34:58 AM
Trump falls short of his campaign promise to eliminate the debt(not deficit) in 10 years by $40 trillion, because congress does not go along with his idea to default on our debt.
I thought Amendment 14 would prevent the USA from defaulting on its debt, which means that neither Trump nor Congress has any say in the matter -  unless there is a further constitutional amendment.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on November 26, 2016, 10:54:28 AM
Even if Trump attacks science, it doesn't stop reality from being true, no matter which way it is spun.

Very true however, funding for research matters if we want to be globally competitive.

Yeah, that was my first thought also as to a possible impact. But how much can the administration influence  funding? I am too lazy to go research it, but I'd guess enough for sure that people in some areas would feel it. the problem would be we could get behind and not (as a nation) even realize it. Sort of analogous to Kodak. i could imagine some meeting a long time ago where a decision to not fund a project on digital media felt small and fine at the time.
The administration has a huge impact, the only ones with more are Congress and they have already cut grants to the bone.  We are losing great researchers to industry, other countries and other fields and we can't afford to keep losing at this rate.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 26, 2016, 12:06:40 PM
We are losing great researchers to industry, other countries and other fields and we can't afford to keep losing at this rate.

Well, "can't" might be a bit of an overstatement, given that it's already happening.

America's glory days are in the past, if we've now decided to stop being innovators or technology leaders.  Empires rise and fall for a variety of reasons, but a key decision point for all of them is the moment they deliberately decide to forego long-term planning in favor of short-term benefits.  That's a guaranteed path to eventual failure.

That decision could be environmental or natural resource based, like the many pre-European empires that stripped their lands of food and fuel.  It could be military based, like overextending your borders into hostile lands where the people feel like subjects instead of citizens.  It can certainly be information based, like the Chinese and Arabic decisions to support their current stability at the cost of future knowledge and technology expansions. 

It would not surprise if Donald Trump tries to make that same bad decision in all three of those realms.  Good leaders need a bigger vision, and that is not something he has ever excelled at. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on November 26, 2016, 12:08:26 PM
For reference, R&D funding as a percentage of GDP across all areas (including defense) is down about 40% from 1976 levels (http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/RDGDP%3B.jpg).

In terms of inflation adjusted dollars, research spending has been increasing (slowly) over the same time period (at roughly 1%/year: http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/DefNon%3B.jpg)

So you could look at it a couple of ways - if you are concerned with total dollars, research funding has been improving. But it has been improving much more slowly than the overall economy.

Given the general hostility toward science that has been the theme for the GOP for quite a while, I'd assume funding cuts for nondefense areas will decline. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. Defense agencies (ie DARPA, DOE to some extent, and the various branches of the military) often fund a lot of basic research that doesn't have immediate military applications because they *do* think long term, so a sufficient increase in defense research funding could mostly counteract (in theory) cuts in nondefense research.

-Walt
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 26, 2016, 01:44:15 PM
a sufficient increase in defense research funding could mostly counteract (in theory) cuts in nondefense research.

This is not making me feel better about our government being run by creationists and climate change deniers.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on November 26, 2016, 02:09:23 PM
a sufficient increase in defense research funding could mostly counteract (in theory) cuts in nondefense research.

This is not making me feel better about our government being run by creationists and climate change deniers.

Yeah, but they loves them some military spending. And the military, in general (har), is actually pretty concerned about climate change and much less interested in politicizing the science that they fund, since they need shit to work.

That said, it's pretty sad when you're depending on your military to make decent R&D decisions instead of your politicians. What are we, Turkey?

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on November 26, 2016, 03:13:29 PM
A friend of mine put it best:

"Do you know why libertarians want smaller government? It isn't because they are opposed to all the good a benevolent leader could accomplish as they've been accused of time after time. It is because they wish to limit the damage a bad ruler can do."

Whether by actual action or by general discourse/reaction, this election will definitely have a drastic impact on the future.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 26, 2016, 03:46:04 PM
a sufficient increase in defense research funding could mostly counteract (in theory) cuts in nondefense research.

This is not making me feel better about our government being run by creationists and climate change deniers.
Unfortunately, that feeling will probably persist for four years. I wish there was a way to make everyone happy; sadly I cant think of any that are reasonable.  "Elections have consequences."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 26, 2016, 03:50:24 PM
A friend of mine put it best:

"Do you know why libertarians want smaller government? It isn't because they are opposed to all the good a benevolent leader could accomplish as they've been accused of time after time. It is because they wish to limit the damage a bad ruler can do."

Most of the libertarians I'm familiar with are just ornery and arguing for smaller government in all cases gives them something most people will fight them on.  :P
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 27, 2016, 03:36:57 AM
A relevant article I just came across. And this is before we really talk about reducing research funding:

[url][/http://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/11/26/university-of-wisconsinmadison-drops-in-research-rankingurl]
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: radram on November 27, 2016, 07:54:40 AM
A relevant article I just came across. And this is before we really talk about reducing research funding:

[url][/http://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/11/26/university-of-wisconsinmadison-drops-in-research-rankingurl]

This is an expected result of education cuts in Wisconsin. When a researcher leaves, they usually take their research funding with them.  I expect them to drop further as the University struggles to attract new talents. I think our governor is realizing this and has stated he will replace some of the cuts in the next budget. Time will tell, but the damage might already have been done.  A reputation takes decades to build, yet can be destroyed in moments.

If Trump and the GOP are successful in less funding as a whole, that may actually make UW-Madison rise back up in the rankings due to all funding lowering nationwide. A tide lowers all ships even easier than it raises them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 27, 2016, 03:42:49 PM

"Power associated as a source of enrichment, personal affirmation and domination." That sounds about right to me.

Interesting.  As Donald Trump's actions since being elected have (so far) gone against at least two of those three points, i still disagree that the articles author was insightful or accurate.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 27, 2016, 05:06:25 PM
As Donald Trump's actions since being elected have (so far) gone against at least two of those three points, i still disagree that the articles author was insightful or accurate.

Which three do you think Trump has "gone against"?  It's a serious question, because I honestly can't tell.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 27, 2016, 06:54:01 PM
Tonight Trump is on a Tweet storm about recounts and election results.  I think he has dementia.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on November 27, 2016, 07:00:36 PM
Tonight Trump is on a Tweet storm about recounts and election results.  I think he has dementia.

Apparently he is claiming he only lost the popular vote due to voter fraud?  Did I read that right?

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on November 27, 2016, 07:10:09 PM
This latest twitter thing is embarrassing to me as an American citizen. One of many such embarrassments I am sure are coming.

I guess claiming voter fraud after you *won* an election, by his standards, is not that high on the embarrassing-tweet scale. Or did he use the c-word or call some ethnicity/gender/nationality all chronic masturbators or something?

Nothing like a gracious victor.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: oldtoyota on November 27, 2016, 07:14:51 PM
A relevant article I just came across. And this is before we really talk about reducing research funding:

[url][/http://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/11/26/university-of-wisconsinmadison-drops-in-research-rankingurl]

This is an expected result of education cuts in Wisconsin. When a researcher leaves, they usually take their research funding with them.  I expect them to drop further as the University struggles to attract new talents. I think our governor is realizing this and has stated he will replace some of the cuts in the next budget. Time will tell, but the damage might already have been done.  A reputation takes decades to build, yet can be destroyed in moments.

If Trump and the GOP are successful in less funding as a whole, that may actually make UW-Madison rise back up in the rankings due to all funding lowering nationwide. A tide lowers all ships even easier than it raises them.

I'd be surprised if your governor replaces some of the cuts. Hope he does though.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: oldtoyota on November 27, 2016, 07:15:45 PM
Tonight Trump is on a Tweet storm about recounts and election results.  I think he has dementia.

No. It is called lying and/or gaslighting.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 27, 2016, 07:31:40 PM
Tonight Trump is on a Tweet storm about recounts and election results.  I think he has dementia.

No. It is called lying and/or gaslighting.

Thank you for mentioning the gaslighting. It had been a few months since I thought of Trump in that framework and it is very apt. It is also disrespectful and disgusting.

http://www.healthyplace.com/abuse/emotional-psychological-abuse/gaslighting-definition-techniques-and-being-gaslighted/

http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/10/8/13206832/trump-leaked-audio-sexual-assault-rape-gaslighting-abuse
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 28, 2016, 02:14:00 AM

"Power associated as a source of enrichment, personal affirmation and domination." That sounds about right to me.

Interesting.  As Donald Trump's actions since being elected have (so far) gone against at least two of those three points, i still disagree that the articles author was insightful or accurate.

Could you expound on your reasoning?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 28, 2016, 03:55:51 AM
As Donald Trump's actions since being elected have (so far) gone against at least two of those three points, i still disagree that the articles author was insightful or accurate.

Which three do you think Trump has "gone against"?  It's a serious question, because I honestly can't tell.

Enrichment - turning down the presidential paycheck. An easy $400K/year for him, that turning down does not increase either of the other two stated power sources.

Domination - he has walked back his promises to jail political opponents and walked back his originally stated intentions to freeze out/attack journalistic interests that are unfavorable.  He has also stated that his advisors/cabinet/VP will be running more day-to-day operations.  Pretty much the opposite of domination.

(This is not to say that at least some of these drivers do not exist in his plans in at least some capacity, but clearly there is an argument that these are not his primary drivers for power, at least in context of the United States Presidency.)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on November 28, 2016, 04:16:38 AM
As Donald Trump's actions since being elected have (so far) gone against at least two of those three points, i still disagree that the articles author was insightful or accurate.

Which three do you think Trump has "gone against"?  It's a serious question, because I honestly can't tell.

Enrichment - turning down the presidential paycheck. An easy $400K/year for him, that turning down does not increase either of the other two stated power sources.
$400k is chump change compared to what he will be in a position to make by not selling his business interests or putting them into a "blind" trust, and by doing deals on the back of being President including deals with foreign powers.

Domination - he has walked back his promises to jail political opponents and walked back his originally stated intentions to freeze out/attack journalistic interests that are unfavorable.  He has also stated that his advisors/cabinet/VP will be running more day-to-day operations.  Pretty much the opposite of domination

(This is not to say that at least some of these drivers do not exist in his plans in at least some capacity, but clearly there is an argument that these are not his primary drivers for power, at least in context of the United States Presidency.)
Trump had bugger all chance of getting a successful prosecution of HRC off the ground, and he's always known it.  Did he promise to jail anyone else?  He will manipulate the media to his heart's content and he will either back, sack or counteract his advisers/cabinet/VP as the whim takes him.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 28, 2016, 04:27:12 AM
This may be true- but again, why turn down easy money? If enrichment was a primary goal it would contraindicate turning down easy cash. While enrichment may be a side-effect of his actions, it seems that he's done the opposite of what he would do if it were his primary focus.

Point the second - HRC: Trump will probably have a bugger of a time with a lot of things. But if domination were his primary end goal, why would he forfeit even attempting the actions that would so clearly display his domination of political opponents?

I think the arguments presented so far fall pretty flat, and while they may sound good in the echo chamber, when faced with the light of truth they are a little weak. These are the type of evidence that I considered as I formed my argument against the original statements.  There are so many things to dislike about Donald Trump; I'm not sure why people would feel the need to make up more.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on November 28, 2016, 04:56:08 AM
Turning down easy money?  It's an easy win for him.  It makes him look good to his supporters (hey, he's draining the swamp, right?).  He may also be thinking that it will make scrutiny of his finances harder, so less likelihood of them being investigated/challenged.  And he would have to pay federal taxes on it, which may be the biggest reason of all for him not to take it.

It's not domination to try and fail - Trump would be on a loser if he tried to prosecute HRC and being is loser is the opposite of domination - and Trump hates to lose.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on November 28, 2016, 12:07:06 PM
Turning down easy money?  It's an easy win for him.  It makes him look good to his supporters (hey, he's draining the swamp, right?).  He may also be thinking that it will make scrutiny of his finances harder, so less likelihood of them being investigated/challenged.  And he would have to pay federal taxes on it, which may be the biggest reason of all for him not to take it.

It's not domination to try and fail - Trump would be on a loser if he tried to prosecute HRC and being is loser is the opposite of domination - and Trump hates to lose.

Plus he likely can't turn down the money.  It's a super easy promise to make when he doesn't have a choice.  He could donate it back to the government, but we would never know since he doesn't release financial records
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 28, 2016, 12:10:30 PM

Plus he likely can't turn down the money.  It's a super easy promise to make when he doesn't have a choice.  He could donate it back to the government, but we would never know since he doesn't release financial records

This may be an actual point. Claiming to turn down money while not actually doing it would not support my argument very well. Speculation, but a fair point.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RosieTR on November 28, 2016, 12:22:37 PM
Turning down easy money?  It's an easy win for him.  It makes him look good to his supporters (hey, he's draining the swamp, right?).  He may also be thinking that it will make scrutiny of his finances harder, so less likelihood of them being investigated/challenged.  And he would have to pay federal taxes on it, which may be the biggest reason of all for him not to take it.

It's not domination to try and fail - Trump would be on a loser if he tried to prosecute HRC and being is loser is the opposite of domination - and Trump hates to lose.

It may not make his finances harder to investigate, but it's more a symbolic situation that he is not beholden to any sort of salary. Meaning that symbolically, he would not be working for the American people. I don't know as it would make much difference, but it's not like refusing a salary is some sort of angel move on his part.
This article describes it more fully if you care:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-salary-george-washington-214458
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 28, 2016, 05:43:24 PM
Trump bought into an Infowars (Alex Jones) story about "millions of illegal voters" throwing the election.  Infowars got the story from some twitter guy who made it up.
So the President-elect tweets based on bullsh#t.  We are so screwed.

Can't wait for the Area 51 files.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 28, 2016, 06:22:01 PM
When your own president spreads made up bullshit.... *face palm*
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 28, 2016, 06:42:07 PM
When your own president spreads made up bullshit.... *face palm*
... while simultaneously declining security briefings from the intelligence services.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/24/donald-trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-amid-warnings/

The logical conclusion is that we actually elected Pence but still have to listen to Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on November 28, 2016, 06:54:01 PM
When your own president spreads made up bullshit.... *face palm*

He did this throughout his campaign.  It's consistent with how he's behaving now as president elect and with how he will behave as president.  It's  partly what got him elected in the first place.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on November 29, 2016, 04:36:05 AM
When your own president spreads made up bullshit.... *face palm*
... while simultaneously declining security briefings from the intelligence services.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/24/donald-trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-amid-warnings/

The logical conclusion is that we actually elected Pence but still have to listen to Trump.

Great. Now we can have more threads about how "60 million more Americans voted for Hillary than for Pence."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: golden1 on November 29, 2016, 07:32:54 AM
I don't know....if the transition is any indication, the most important impact might be worse mental health outcomes for millions of Americans.  It's tough to not be demoralized by what is going on right now. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 29, 2016, 09:04:12 AM
Trump continues to Twitterbomb the Interwebs.  Now flag burning.  He is a master troll.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on November 29, 2016, 09:07:47 AM
Further news about Trump appointments after Environment and Health appointments -

Early Years Child Care - Herod Agrippa

Supreme Court Justice - Pontius Pilate
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on November 29, 2016, 10:00:36 AM
Why would Pilate be a poor appointment?  He put aside his personal wishes/beliefs to fulfill the letter of the law.  That's like . . . totally what you want from an SCJ.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Northwestie on November 29, 2016, 10:28:49 AM
I saw an article this morning with interviews of folks in rural KY and TN - yep - they voted for Trump but are now concerned he'll follow thru and remove their health care and are worried about the extra costs.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on November 29, 2016, 10:32:19 AM
I saw an article this morning with interviews of folks in rural KY and TN - yep - they voted for Trump but are now concerned he'll follow thru and remove their health care and are worried about the extra costs.

Good, you reap what you sow (or vote for)......even still,  they will probably vote (R) next time.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 29, 2016, 11:22:59 AM
I saw an article this morning with interviews of folks in rural KY and TN - yep - they voted for Trump but are now concerned he'll follow thru and remove their health care and are worried about the extra costs.

Good, you reap what you sow (or vote for)......even still,  they will probably vote (R) next time.
Matt Bevin ran on getting rid of Medicaid expansion in KY.  He won, got rid of Kynect (the state run ACA web site), made things a lot more inconvenient.  The people he hurt will probably give him a second term.  Amazing.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 29, 2016, 03:19:00 PM
Trump continues to Twitterbomb the Interwebs.  Now flag burning.  He is a master troll.

It's all about confusion and deception to remove focus from real problems/crime/moral ethical violations/personal or family enrichment.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on November 29, 2016, 04:56:14 PM
Trump continues to Twitterbomb the Interwebs.  Now flag burning.  He is a master troll.

It's all about confusion and deception to remove focus from real problems/crime/moral ethical violations/personal or family enrichment.

Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.

You're giving Trump too much credit. I don't think he's calculating the pros and cons of a twitter storm and then doing it after a conclusion like you've reached above. I think he just blurts shit out cause that's how he is.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 29, 2016, 06:08:48 PM
When your own president spreads made up bullshit.... *face palm*
... while simultaneously declining security briefings from the intelligence services.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/24/donald-trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-amid-warnings/

The logical conclusion is that we actually elected Pence but still have to listen to Trump.

I think we all assumed this would be the case, but listening to Trump on a regular base with the legitimacy that his office brings is as unhealthy as all of us trolling twitter.

It will be interesting to see how his cabinet members will likely try to play on Trumps emotions to get him to sign off on shit. But in general I agree that it is likely he will try to leave as much management as possible in the hands of Pence and others with experience.

I wonder how long it will take for the insiders to convince Trump to fire the cabinet members he hires now that are too incompetent for the positions he is giving them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 29, 2016, 06:19:24 PM
Trump continues to Twitterbomb the Interwebs.  Now flag burning.  He is a master troll.

It's all about confusion and deception to remove focus from real problems/crime/moral ethical violations/personal or family enrichment.

Maybe, but I think you give him too much credit. Trump really is a troll. He just can't help but argue in his own self defense with whatever ammo the interwebs give him.

There is no master plan behind it. He is simply infamous for this kind of crap and he has learned over a life time that the truth is irrelevant if people agree with you or it a lie gets you what you want.

Why go after flag burners, he doesn't give a shit about the flag. Not like a veteran or real patriot does. But he is definitely annoyed that people are burning the flag because they hate him.

Why post a stupid tweet about the popular vote. Because he is butt hurt people keep reminding him that he is losing it by millions of votes. A normal politician would laugh and enjoy victory but Trump can't handle any negative press.

Literally every stupid ranting tweet he makes is an immediate reaction to a personal attack. I truly hope that this is lowest the office of the president ever sinks. I literally feel like we can freely say to almost every child in America not only could you possibly be the president, you are likely to be overqualified.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on November 29, 2016, 06:22:47 PM
Literally every stupid ranting tweet he makes is an immediate reaction to a personal attack. I truly hope that this is lowest the office of the president ever sinks. I literally feel like we can freely say to almost every child in America not only could you possibly be the president, you are likely to be overqualified.
I think the election results showed pretty clearly that overqualification was, in fact, disqualifying.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 29, 2016, 06:35:20 PM
Literally every stupid ranting tweet he makes is an immediate reaction to a personal attack. I truly hope that this is lowest the office of the president ever sinks. I literally feel like we can freely say to almost every child in America not only could you possibly be the president, you are likely to be overqualified.
I think the election results showed pretty clearly that overqualification was, in fact, disqualifying.

Touche. Though I would probably argue Hillary was a special case. She had the long history of service, but also a boat load of negatives that put her firmly in the camp of political insider. She also had little to no big political wins to draw on from Obama or her recent history.

Like anything else a long resume isn't going to help if its content isn't as impressive as its length.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: rocketpj on November 30, 2016, 12:57:41 AM
If you are not open to a check and be willing to admit you are wrong, well, you suck.

I think most people here would love to be proved wrong by a Trump presidency. The name calling doesn't help with the discussion though.

I hope I am calling no one names. If the shoe fits, you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize. I hope no shoe fits, and that nothing too bad happens in the next few years. I just want to know at what point both sides have to check the results and admit their rights and wrongs.

Astonishing.  Is this really about ethics in forum posting?

Meanwhile, Trump blasts out a tweetstorm about stolen votes to mask the fact he just had to pay a $25 Million settlement for fraud.

Did anyone know that HE is charging the US government $1M/day in rent for all the space the Secret Service is taking up in his tower?  So all the talk about his not accepting pay is somewhat beside the point, when he can milk $365M/year by just choosing to live in his tower rather than the White House.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on November 30, 2016, 01:30:19 AM
He's also charging the Secret Service everytime he uses his own jet - $1.6 million so far -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3804129/Secret-Service-spent-1-6-million-flights-agents-protect-Trump-goes-reimburse-Donald-private-jet.html
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 30, 2016, 02:03:41 AM
Trump continues to Twitterbomb the Interwebs.  Now flag burning.  He is a master troll.

It's all about confusion and deception to remove focus from real problems/crime/moral ethical violations/personal or family enrichment.

Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.

You're giving Trump too much credit. I don't think he's calculating the pros and cons of a twitter storm and then doing it after a conclusion like you've reached above. I think he just blurts shit out cause that's how he is.

Yeah, you and RangerOne have it right. But doesn't change the fact that it's still happening.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 30, 2016, 02:52:12 PM
And as much as I don't want Trump to fail for the country's sake I can't root for a person who is so petty and simple minded. For every reasonable thing he is told to say, he says twenty stupid things on twitter which just reminds me how shitty a person our future president is. Whether you think he is going to be dangerous or benign, helpful or harmful is all up for debate but it is an absolute embarrassment that someone like this is able to hold the highest leadership position in the land and speaks very poorly of our political system.

And it is deeply upsetting that the DNC had the gall to ram Clinton down the throats of liberals like she was owed the office of the president because of her sex and loyalty to the party.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on November 30, 2016, 04:07:33 PM
I can't believe he isn't aware enough to know that a US President should not be tweeting.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on November 30, 2016, 06:01:10 PM
Tweeting is Trumps thing. As long as the Republican base is okay with it, no one is going to stop him. If he starts pissing them off they are going to take his account...

Generally tweeting has only ever gotten people into trouble or fired for saying dumb shit.

Trump has already said so much dumb shit I can hardly think of a tweet that would cross the line. I will be interested to see it if he ever writes it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KBecks on November 30, 2016, 06:04:22 PM
He is using the tweets to circumvent the media.  He can say whatever he wants, he's the President-elect.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KBecks on November 30, 2016, 06:05:50 PM
And it is deeply upsetting that the DNC had the gall to ram Clinton down the throats of liberals like she was owed the office of the president because of her sex and loyalty to the party.

Bet you're going to love seeing her again in 2020!   You know she almost won this time, that popular vote!
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ender on November 30, 2016, 06:30:43 PM
He's also charging the Secret Service everytime he uses his own jet - $1.6 million so far -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3804129/Secret-Service-spent-1-6-million-flights-agents-protect-Trump-goes-reimburse-Donald-private-jet.html

From that article:

Quote
Politico reported on Thursday that the Secret Service has paid Clinton's campaign far more than Trump's for its travel – $2.6 million in all.


Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on November 30, 2016, 08:00:34 PM
He's also charging the Secret Service everytime he uses his own jet - $1.6 million so far -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3804129/Secret-Service-spent-1-6-million-flights-agents-protect-Trump-goes-reimburse-Donald-private-jet.html
From that article:
Quote
Politico reported on Thursday that the Secret Service has paid Clinton's campaign far more than Trump's for its travel – $2.6 million in all.

Context, please. The article continues:
Quote
Clinton has had Secret Service protection continuously since 1992, meaning agents have flown with her from the beginning of her campaign.
Their airfare is currently paid to Executive Fliteways, an upstate New York company.
In Trump's case, the reimbursements defray his own costs.

Emphasis mine.

That's the point of the article, and of former player's post.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: aprilchem on December 01, 2016, 08:49:12 AM
I don't usually comment on these types of posts, but there's one idea that I haven't seen in this thread thus far (although I haven't read every single post).

I'm a college professor, and am neither a historian nor a political scientist (I'm a physical scientist) but I associate with a lot of them. I am also very liberal, which isn't necessarily pertinent to this discussion but is honest. 

To a person, nearly all of my friends who are experts are convinced that something very bad is on the horizon.  We just elected an extremely weak, unqualified president and our nation is at odds right now.  Britain is weak because of the Brexit vote.  Russia and Turkey are strong.  Terrorism will thrive under Trump (at least in my opinion), especially if he follows through on his plans to register Muslims in the US.  The world is in a similar place (instability-wise) to where it was before the start of WWI, but now we have nuclear weapons, more effective chemical weapons, and long-range missiles.  Some little thing (a la Archduke Ferdinand) is likely to happen that will start a major war, and millions are likely to die as a result. 

This might sound terribly negative, but given the evidence I do believe it's likely to be true.  The issue is that we don't know where or when this will happen, and who will be affected.   But I believe my life as an American citizen will be very changed 5 years from now from what it is today, and I'm doing my best to prepare for whatever is going to happen.  I really hope that I am wrong. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 01, 2016, 09:17:37 AM
I don't usually comment on these types of posts, but there's one idea that I haven't seen in this thread thus far (although I haven't read every single post).

I'm a college professor, and am neither a historian nor a political scientist (I'm a physical scientist) but I associate with a lot of them. I am also very liberal, which isn't necessarily pertinent to this discussion but is honest. 

To a person, nearly all of my friends who are experts are convinced that something very bad is on the horizon.  We just elected an extremely weak, unqualified president and our nation is at odds right now.  Britain is weak because of the Brexit vote.  Russia and Turkey are strong.  Terrorism will thrive under Trump (at least in my opinion), especially if he follows through on his plans to register Muslims in the US.  The world is in a similar place (instability-wise) to where it was before the start of WWI, but now we have nuclear weapons, more effective chemical weapons, and long-range missiles.  Some little thing (a la Archduke Ferdinand) is likely to happen that will start a major war, and millions are likely to die as a result. 

This might sound terribly negative, but given the evidence I do believe it's likely to be true.  The issue is that we don't know where or when this will happen, and who will be affected.   But I believe my life as an American citizen will be very changed 5 years from now from what it is today, and I'm doing my best to prepare for whatever is going to happen.  I really hope that I am wrong.

I agree. In fact, I can't believe this isn't a fear that is widely shared. Domestically, Trump is likely to have a negative impact on many things, including the economy, but people who are relatively well-off now with a decent amount of social capital don't seem all that worried about his presidency. Internationally, though, having a temperamental, arrogant, incompetent president who doesn't know or care what he doesn't know could trigger, in concordance with other international events, something massive. And Trump will be far too ignorant to know how to try to fix it. Not to mention the members of his cabinet that he is likely to pick are going to be fairly incompetent/unqualified as well. And every single day that he blows off a security briefing in favor of hanging out at Trump tower holding court, I become more convinced of this.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ender on December 01, 2016, 10:30:16 AM
The world is in a similar place (instability-wise) to where it was before the start of WWI, but now we have nuclear weapons, more effective chemical weapons, and long-range missiles.  Some little thing (a la Archduke Ferdinand) is likely to happen that will start a major war, and millions are likely to die as a result. 

How do you figure that the world is similarly as unstable now than it was prior to the start of WWI?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 01, 2016, 11:00:12 AM
The world is in a similar place (instability-wise) to where it was before the start of WWI, but now we have nuclear weapons, more effective chemical weapons, and long-range missiles.  Some little thing (a la Archduke Ferdinand) is likely to happen that will start a major war, and millions are likely to die as a result. 

How do you figure that the world is similarly as unstable now than it was prior to the start of WWI?

Yeah, I agree with ender's question. I think that assertion is baseless. By pretty much every measure the world is more peaceful now than at any point in history, especially before WWI. (Note there are no large scale wars, no major famines, no massive epidemics - all of which were occurring just prior to WWI and WWII actually).

The world has never been a safer, more stable, place.

War deaths since 1945: https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace-after-1945/ (https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace-after-1945/)

War deaths since 1400: https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace-long-run/#global-deaths-in-conflicts-since-the-year-1400ref (https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace-long-run/#global-deaths-in-conflicts-since-the-year-1400ref)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 01, 2016, 11:27:59 AM
This was written back in July, but I think it makes some good points.  https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.veiqsevng
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 01, 2016, 11:39:20 AM
This was written back in July, but I think it makes some good points.  https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.veiqsevng

Yes. Nicely put. This is pretty much what I would have articulated, had I taken the time and effort to do so.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 01, 2016, 11:57:43 AM
This was written back in July, but I think it makes some good points.  https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.veiqsevng

Yes. Nicely put. This is pretty much what I would have articulated, had I taken the time and effort to do so.

Rationally thinking through the scenarios posited by the article would be a worthwhile exercise for almost anyone, especially those who think everything is going gangbusters. I'm not saying this piece will change their mind, or even that his conclusions are accurate, but having studied history at a graduate level myself, the author is spot on about how all of this has happened before and will happen again. Brexit may not be "it." Trump may not be "it," but global forces are trending in a very reminiscent way right now. Sadly, I'm not sure we're any more capable of learning from the past now than we were previously.

From the article:

"What can we do? Well, again, looking back, probably not much. The liberal intellectuals are always in the minority. See Clay Shirky’s Twitter Storm on this point. The people who see that open societies, being nice to other people, not being racist, not fighting wars, is a better way to live, they generally end up losing these fights. They don’t fight dirty. They are terrible at appealing to the populace. They are less violent, so end up in prisons, camps, and graves. "
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 01, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
The article references another one that was written in May, also a good read:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 01, 2016, 12:54:03 PM
We can probably expect more interactions with world leaders that play out like this, sadly (Sad!).

http://www.pid.gov.pk/?p=30445

Quote
PR No. 298 PM TELEPHONES PRESIDENT-ELECT USA Islamabad: November 30, 2016

Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif called President-elect USA Donald Trump and felicitated him on his victory. President Trump said Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif you have a very good reputation. You are a terrific guy. You are doing amazing work which is visible in every way. I am looking forward to see you soon. As I am talking to you Prime Minister, I feel I am talking to a person I have known for long. Your country is amazing with tremendous opportunities. Pakistanis are one of the most intelligent people. I am ready and willing to play any role that you want me to play to address and find solutions to the outstanding problems. It will be an honor and I will personally do it. Feel free to call me any time even before 20th January that is before I assume my office.

On being invited to visit Pakistan by the Prime Minister, Mr. Trump said that he would love to come to a fantastic country, fantastic place of fantastic people. Please convey to the Pakistani people that they are amazing and all Pakistanis I have known are exceptional people, said Mr. Donald Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: golden1 on December 01, 2016, 01:36:58 PM
I don't know whether to thank you for linking that article or just to go cry in a corner.   I have felt this way for the past year and a half, like a slow tidal wave building towards some triggering event.  All of the chess pieces are in place now.  A destabilized Europe, an aging nuclear arsenal, radicalized youth combined with xenophobia, an increase in authoritarian and totalitarian leaders in major world powers, weak and fractured media, weak opposition parties. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 01, 2016, 01:45:44 PM
I don't usually comment on these types of posts, but there's one idea that I haven't seen in this thread thus far (although I haven't read every single post).

I'm a college professor, and am neither a historian nor a political scientist (I'm a physical scientist) but I associate with a lot of them. I am also very liberal, which isn't necessarily pertinent to this discussion but is honest. 

To a person, nearly all of my friends who are experts are convinced that something very bad is on the horizon.  We just elected an extremely weak, unqualified president and our nation is at odds right now.  Britain is weak because of the Brexit vote.  Russia and Turkey are strong.  Terrorism will thrive under Trump (at least in my opinion), especially if he follows through on his plans to register Muslims in the US.  The world is in a similar place (instability-wise) to where it was before the start of WWI, but now we have nuclear weapons, more effective chemical weapons, and long-range missiles.  Some little thing (a la Archduke Ferdinand) is likely to happen that will start a major war, and millions are likely to die as a result. 

This might sound terribly negative, but given the evidence I do believe it's likely to be true.  The issue is that we don't know where or when this will happen, and who will be affected.   But I believe my life as an American citizen will be very changed 5 years from now from what it is today, and I'm doing my best to prepare for whatever is going to happen.  I really hope that I am wrong.

I see this too, as a studier of history in a family of history fanatics. It's not just Trump, it's the fact that we have many world leaders of his type: narcissistic, thin-skinned bullies. They all seem to be supporting each other for the moment (think, Trump and Putin) but one of them will make a "tiny hands" joke about another and then shit's going to get real. At the least, I'm worried about a Cold War style stalemate between powers.

This is not to say that I'm certain these things will happen, but in my dark moments and when I take a good look at world politics, this is what I think about.

Ender and Dividendman - Total deaths from war have gone down, but we have the potential for much bigger conflicts now. Think about it, the Holocaust would not have been possible prior to the technology of the time (gas chambers and such). Part of the reason we've had fewer wars recently is because we're so interconnected. Not only can we see the horrors of war more (pictures, video) but we have greater access to mediators. Other governments/the UN will step in if there are potential conflicts. However, this doesn't totally protect us from war, and in fact makes another great world war more likely as more countries would be involved in any conflict. Before it was France v. England with maybe Spain halfheartedly thrown in. Now it's Europe v. Russia and Asia, or something else equally huge. The periods between war will likely get longer, but the wars themselves will be catastrophically worse. Especially when you throw in our globalized food, so people who don't go to war could very well starve due to lack of getting food from where it used to come from.
The article linked by jrhampt expresses so much more clearly than I can what I've been seeing in terms of world trends.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 01, 2016, 02:02:51 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 01, 2016, 02:06:43 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I'm guessing you didn't read the linked piece. All it takes is for the first domino to fall, even if all of the rest are perfectly content staying upright. This has played out time and time again in history, and before every single disaster people like you were confident the worst could never come to pass. Anyway, I'm not yet sure that I think we are at that point, but the warning signs are present and increasingly quantifiable. Regardless, I don't think anyone here would disagree that we hope you are right.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on December 01, 2016, 02:29:12 PM
Trump could lead to a number of bad things at home or abroad and I do take Brexit, Trump and what is happening in France as overall bad signs of a breakdown in our international cooperation.

But the truth is its still too complicated to assume the worst, and even if you do there is little you can do to combat it.

I really could not say how a war in Europe with Russia would look. Surely there is a line they wouldn't cross. I am skeptical an large player would use a nuke simply since the cost of retaliation is too high unless they were given no choice.

Our economic dependencies globally are too interwoven to encourage for a full scale global war to be at all desirable. Ever major global government knows this, though dictator like Putin will certainly seek an opening to redraw lines of influence and seize resources.

Trump may be ignorant of much of this but our government is still run by mostly insiders and he is going to take queues form a number of people. Until we reach the point where we are openly hanging members of congress and a president has direct support to do so form the majority of the military I think we are still in some what stable shape.

Economic turmoil and extreme persecution of Muslims with some minority spill over I think are our most likely dangers for the next 4-8 years.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 01, 2016, 02:40:17 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I'm guessing you didn't read the linked piece. All it takes is for the first domino to fall, even if all of the rest are perfectly content staying upright. This has played out time and time again in history, and before every single disaster people like you were confident the worst could never come to pass. Anyway, I'm not yet sure that I think we are at that point, but the warning signs are present and increasingly quantifiable. Regardless, I don't think anyone here would disagree that we hope you are right.

I did read it. It was long. I just don't agree with the conclusions (although since it was written before the election I do agree with the parts about trying to stop Trump and Sanders precisely because they win by whipping up popular sentiment based on no compromise ideals - I would have preferred Clinton win).

Saying things like "people like you were confident the worst could never come to pass" is just the same as people like you predicting the worst is always coming, just around the corner. You can go to any point in the last 50 years and have people like you showing how the world is coming to an end. How "this time it's different".

Really? From 1950 to 1990 the world was on the cusp of a nuclear engagement between two superpowers. I don't think we're anywhere near that now and somehow we have people claiming it's more likely now than then. Look at the major wars that happened since WWII

War in Korea
Russia/China war
Cuban missle Crises
Suez crises
Vietnam
Israel/Arab various wars
USSR/Afghan war
Iran/Iraq war
India and Pakistan wars with both sides having nukes
Gulf wars

I'm sure I'm missing a bunch, but these were actual wars, where each party has allies that are superpowers (or superpowers themselves are involved) and many claimed the wars would spin out of control and entangle the whole world.

Today we have no significant state to state war actually occurring, and yet you think we're more likely now than in the last 50 years to have this WWIII occur? I just think it's recency bias. The world is so much more stable now than it's been ever.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 01, 2016, 03:05:54 PM
You sure are making a lot of assumptions about me simply because I am willing to entertain an idea you are not. I never said WWIII is around the corner nor do you have any evidence whatsoever that I am a habitual doomsayer or fear-monger. Did I say we are closer to nuclear war than during the Cuban Missile Crisis? Obviously we are not, but then that was obviously not the point being made. Just because some people who are not me have predicted Armageddon during times that I did not in no way invalidates what I am talking about, which involves different geopolitical trends than existed in the very recent past (which had a whole host of other frightening conditions, as you note), but that have emerged periodically throughout history.

And I didn't say anything was inevitable, only that maybe *gasp* it's worth thinking about history when evaluating the present. But then I also predicted we would not do so as a society, and I see nothing thus far to feel insecure in that prediction. Note what I at no time predicted was the impending end of the world.

All of that said, the U.S. appears to be the least likely country to suffer too extremely (outside of oppressed minority groups anyway), so yay us, I suppose.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 01, 2016, 05:53:50 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I can see that there are some parallels here to the extent that a leader with views perceived to be different than our own is viewed more negatively. That's just human nature.

I also think that it is a false equivalence. The fear of Obama (he'll take our guns!) was, for the most part, not actually based on his public statements or on gross misreadings of them with zero allowance for nuance. The issues with Trump are generally based on his stated, reaffirmed, actions and statements. He is clearly a person who will say what he needs to to get his way. However, his rhetoric during this campaign appears to have substance as he assembles his cabinet. Specifically: his appointment to EPA denies climate change, his H&HS person wants to dismantle our medicare system, his appointment for Attny General has been denied appointment in the past due to overtly racist sentiments, his chief strategist facilitated/promoted (via Breitbart) white nationalists / alt-right points of view, and the list goes on.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 01, 2016, 06:54:05 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I can see that there are some parallels here to the extent that a leader with views perceived to be different than our own is viewed more negatively. That's just human nature.

I also think that it is a false equivalence. The fear of Obama (he'll take our guns!) was, for the most part, not actually based on his public statements or on gross misreadings of them with zero allowance for nuance. The issues with Trump are generally based on his stated, reaffirmed, actions and statements. He is clearly a person who will say what he needs to to get his way. However, his rhetoric during this campaign appears to have substance as he assembles his cabinet. Specifically: his appointment to EPA denies climate change, his H&HS person wants to dismantle our medicare system, his appointment for Attny General has been denied appointment in the past due to overtly racist sentiments, his chief strategist facilitated/promoted (via Breitbart) white nationalists / alt-right points of view, and the list goes on.

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I believe it's going to be shitty for a whole host of reasons including the ones you mention above, I just don't think it's going to be a WWI/II type catastrophe.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 01, 2016, 07:07:30 PM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I can see that there are some parallels here to the extent that a leader with views perceived to be different than our own is viewed more negatively. That's just human nature.

I also think that it is a false equivalence. The fear of Obama (he'll take our guns!) was, for the most part, not actually based on his public statements or on gross misreadings of them with zero allowance for nuance. The issues with Trump are generally based on his stated, reaffirmed, actions and statements. He is clearly a person who will say what he needs to to get his way. However, his rhetoric during this campaign appears to have substance as he assembles his cabinet. Specifically: his appointment to EPA denies climate change, his H&HS person wants to dismantle our medicare system, his appointment for Attny General has been denied appointment in the past due to overtly racist sentiments, his chief strategist facilitated/promoted (via Breitbart) white nationalists / alt-right points of view, and the list goes on.

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I believe it's going to be shitty for a whole host of reasons including the ones you mention above, I just don't think it's going to be a WWI/II type catastrophe.

I hope it all turns our rainbows and kittens, too. I think that domestically it is going to be very, very hard on those who supported him most. I do not say that with relish or ill will, but with resignment.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on December 01, 2016, 10:57:59 PM
Sarah Palin head of the VA. Kill me now!

OK posting mainly to follow but that one was unexpected in a bad way.

There's even talk of privatizing the VA.

With all of this remaking of America, it'll be interesting to see what goes through before the tables flip.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cressida on December 02, 2016, 01:28:16 AM
And it is deeply upsetting that the DNC had the gall to ram Clinton down the throats of liberals like she was owed the office of the president because of her sex and loyalty to the party.

Clinton won the Democratic nomination because a majority of Democratic primary voters preferred her. The DNC did not choose, and did not have the power to choose, the Democratic nominee.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 02, 2016, 03:49:09 AM
I think there are parallels between the conservatives calling it the end of the world when Barack Anti-Christ Obama was elected and now liberals are doing the same thing with their Anti-Christ.

It's just fear mongering. People love to think the worst.

I still believe it is less likely for the US to get involved in a war with Trump as President than Clinton.

I also believe that the world is so interconnected that a large scale war won't be palatable to anyone and therefore won't occur.

I'm guessing you didn't read the linked piece. All it takes is for the first domino to fall, even if all of the rest are perfectly content staying upright. This has played out time and time again in history, and before every single disaster people like you were confident the worst could never come to pass. Anyway, I'm not yet sure that I think we are at that point, but the warning signs are present and increasingly quantifiable. Regardless, I don't think anyone here would disagree that we hope you are right.

Could it be argued that the domino has already fallen? I mean, a group of unhappy people flew planes into buildings 15 years ago. This lead half the world to invade a handful of foreign countries and overthrow their governments, creating huge reactionary forces that have killed hundreds of thousands of people.  The greatest country in the world imprisoned alleged enemies without trial, tortured them, and executed its own citizens without trial for associating with said enemies.

Is it blind to see that the terrible things mentioned in the article are already happening? That the dominos have already fallen, long before Trump or Brexit or anything the author is listing as a precursor- its more a comment on a current trend than a future course of the world.  Maybe I'm just an optimist, figuring things are super bad now and will someday get better.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 02, 2016, 03:54:28 AM
And it is deeply upsetting that the DNC had the gall to ram Clinton down the throats of liberals like she was owed the office of the president because of her sex and loyalty to the party.

Clinton won the Democratic nomination because a majority of Democratic primary voters preferred her. The DNC did not choose, and did not have the power to choose, the Democratic nominee.

I think this misses quite a bit of nuance. Scheduling debates for low viewer turn out after Clinton polled lower after each debate with Bernie, DNC executives giving Clinton debate questions before anyone else, assigning superdelegates to her even when Bernie won the majority of democratic votes in the state; these are some of the things that upset many democratic voters, and show it clearly wasn't a fair and equal primary election.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 02, 2016, 06:00:32 AM
I think the Mattis announcement is really, really interesting. It's the first appointment where I can look at it, and not lose my shit. Obviously, it's far from a done deal (active duty waiver and all that), but from what I've read, he seems really thoughtful about how war happens and at what cost. Whether or not he'll get swept up in the Trumpstorm of insanity remains to be seen. I'm cautiously optimistic about this one.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/could-one-retired-general-really-save-donald-trumps-pen-1789495945
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 02, 2016, 10:02:40 AM
I think the Mattis announcement is really, really interesting. It's the first appointment where I can look at it, and not lose my shit. Obviously, it's far from a done deal (active duty waiver and all that), but from what I've read, he seems really thoughtful about how war happens and at what cost. Whether or not he'll get swept up in the Trumpstorm of insanity remains to be seen. I'm cautiously optimistic about this one.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/could-one-retired-general-really-save-donald-trumps-pen-1789495945

I mostly agree, although his hawkishness on Iran makes me quite nervous. Still, way better than most of the other appointees thus far and definitely as good as anyone a mainstream GOP president was likely to have produced.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 02, 2016, 10:08:07 AM
I think the Mattis announcement is really, really interesting. It's the first appointment where I can look at it, and not lose my shit. Obviously, it's far from a done deal (active duty waiver and all that), but from what I've read, he seems really thoughtful about how war happens and at what cost. Whether or not he'll get swept up in the Trumpstorm of insanity remains to be seen. I'm cautiously optimistic about this one.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/could-one-retired-general-really-save-donald-trumps-pen-1789495945

I mostly agree, although his hawkishness on Iran makes me quite nervous. Still, way better than most of the other appointees thus far and definitely as good as anyone a mainstream GOP president was likely to have produced.

Yeah, that's the thing that stands out as being the most worrisome with him, but I think (hope) that's tempered by the fact that he appears to deeply respect the lives of the people he commands.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 02, 2016, 10:13:28 AM

Could it be argued that the domino has already fallen? I mean, a group of unhappy people flew planes into buildings 15 years ago. This lead half the world to invade a handful of foreign countries and overthrow their governments, creating huge reactionary forces that have killed hundreds of thousands of people.  The greatest country in the world imprisoned alleged enemies without trial, tortured them, and executed its own citizens without trial for associating with said enemies.

Is it blind to see that the terrible things mentioned in the article are already happening? That the dominos have already fallen, long before Trump or Brexit or anything the author is listing as a precursor- its more a comment on a current trend than a future course of the world.  Maybe I'm just an optimist, figuring things are super bad now and will someday get better.

I think this is a fair point and despite dividendman's assumptions to the contrary, I actually prefer to stay optimistic in general as well, if only for my own sanity. But I also believe in seriously contemplating dark alternatives so that I am not blindsided if they do come to pass (although as per the quote above, I am not optimistic about my chances in that world). Also not sure there is much evidence that we have reversed the disturbing course began on 9/11, alas.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cressida on December 02, 2016, 12:19:24 PM
And it is deeply upsetting that the DNC had the gall to ram Clinton down the throats of liberals like she was owed the office of the president because of her sex and loyalty to the party.

Clinton won the Democratic nomination because a majority of Democratic primary voters preferred her. The DNC did not choose, and did not have the power to choose, the Democratic nominee.

I think this misses quite a bit of nuance. Scheduling debates for low viewer turn out after Clinton polled lower after each debate with Bernie, DNC executives giving Clinton debate questions before anyone else, assigning superdelegates to her even when Bernie won the majority of democratic votes in the state; these are some of the things that upset many democratic voters, and show it clearly wasn't a fair and equal primary election.

The debates were either scheduled far in advance or were held after it was already clear that Bernie had no chance to win the nomination. If you're talking about Donna Brazile, she wasn't a DNC executive when she provided a hint about a debate question. I have no idea what you're referring to in your third point, but whatever happened, it was almost certainly insignificant in comparison to Clinton's overall delegate lead, which was a result, again, of voters preferring her.

This "DNC stole the primary for Hillary" narrative is just stupid and wrong.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 02, 2016, 12:25:22 PM
The debates were either scheduled far in advance or were held after it was already clear that Bernie had no chance to win the nomination. If you're talking about Donna Brazile, she wasn't a DNC executive when she provided a hint about a debate question. I have no idea what you're referring to in your third point, but whatever happened, it was almost certainly insignificant in comparison to Clinton's overall delegate lead, which was a result, again, of voters preferring her.

This "DNC stole the primary for Hillary" narrative is just stupid and wrong.

And these sorts of dismissals and sidestepping of the issues probably played a large part in Clinton's eventual loss to Donald Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 02, 2016, 12:53:45 PM
Bernie supporters who were poor losers contributed to Hillary 's loss, yes.  The Republicans weren't the only ones in this election who ignored math and fell for fake news.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Cressida on December 02, 2016, 02:10:58 PM
Bernie supporters who were poor losers contributed to Hillary 's loss, yes.  The Republicans weren't the only ones in this election who ignored math and fell for fake news.

+10

To be clear, I'm not putting Trump's victory on Bernie supporters. There were a whole lot of factors leading to that, and disgruntled Bernie supporters were only one of many.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 02, 2016, 05:59:26 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on December 02, 2016, 06:22:00 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.
It is just possible that Trump having not yet taken office the Chinese will feel able to turn a diplomatic blind eye.  In which case, it could be a good move on Trump's part.

On the other hand, Trump is playing chicken with a nuclear armed dictatorship.

Four more years of this.  It's a long time to live on a tightrope.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 02, 2016, 06:38:44 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.
It is just possible that Trump having not yet taken office the Chinese will feel able to turn a diplomatic blind eye.  In which case, it could be a good move on Trump's part.

On the other hand, Trump is playing chicken with a nuclear armed dictatorship.

Four more years of this.  It's a long time to live on a tightrope.

I think we can hope for the rest of the world being more mature and just not taking him seriously... which is a really f'd up thing to hope for. Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve... especially given that he has also escalated tensions regarding the US position in the India-Pakistan relationship (who actually have ongoing armed conflict and nukes). Hard to find a silver lining in his recent string of diplomatic encounters. As near as I can tell, Trump is acting like he's trying to sell them condos.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 02, 2016, 08:50:28 PM
And now we have diplomacy by Twitter:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/trumps-choice-on-cuba?mbid=social_twitter

on Monday morning, following a series of blustery anti-Castro pronouncements on the Sunday talk shows by his aides Kellyanne Conway and Reince Priebus, and by Senator Ted Cruz and Senator Marco Rubio, Trump tweeted again: “If Cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and the U.S. as a whole, I will terminate deal.” A few minutes after that tweet, I asked a Cuban diplomat if he’d seen it. He hadn’t. When I read it to him, he said, in a low voice, “No, no, no. This isn’t going to end well.”
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 02, 2016, 09:41:52 PM
Today's developments, in which President Elect Trump overturns decades of diplomatic negotiations with China by casually phoning the leader of Taiwan and then hours later reverses the nation's course on Cuban relations with a tweet, have suddenly made me realize that this thread is going to stay very interesting until Trump leaves office (I almost said "for the next four years" but then thought better of it).

So let's review.  Who predicted that Trump would ignore the pleas of the State Department and attempt to remake the global diplomatic framework that supports US economic dominance by using twitter?  Was that on somebody's list?  If we missed it, then we should all be ashamed of ourselves in retrospect, because OF COURSE he would.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 03, 2016, 12:03:40 AM
I wonder if this is what the citizens of Rome felt like in 400 A.D., when things started to decline?  Now, I'm not saying that Trump single-handedly brings the fall of the US, but there are some interesting parallels, with the election of Trump and subsequent 'Corruption and Political Instability' as being one more of the 8 reasons Rome fell (http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/8-reasons-why-rome-fell).  See if you can match up some of the others reasons to our current circumstances...  Of course, significant pieces are missing, like the rise of a rival power (maybe China?) and heightened attacks from barbarians (maybe terrorists or domestic threats?).

Of course, this is all just as speculative as saying our future looks like Idiocracy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA).  :)

Anyway, posting on this thread to get involved, I have yet to read through the entirety of what others have said to see all of the positive aspects that I'm missing.  Also, I'm not saying that Hillary wasn't corrupt, but I do believe that she would have maintained political stability more so than Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 03:56:22 AM
Everything I've read states that the Tsai Ing-wen called Trump, not the other way around.  I think that's a very important distinction to be made.  China has to fly off the handle at this, which is completely expected and boringly predictable - the actual reaction that will matter is the Trump administration's reaction - do they walk back the conversation and downplay it? Or do they double down on the action - the latter would be a clear mistake in U.S. - China relations.

Taking a phone call from Taiwan, in absence of supportive action or further conversations: probably not that big of deal. Continued conversations? Clearly a pivot on decades of U.S. policy. Despite what some of the reactionary pundits are hyping, China is not going to start a nuclear war over a phone call.

Edit: This has to be taken as well with a reflection from China's perspective - their economy is changing, growth is slowing, Chinese manufacturers are opening factories in the United States and essentially exporting jobs. China is going through changes and growing pains just like any world power and this may temper their reactions in ways that it wouldn't have 35 years ago.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Malaysia41 on December 03, 2016, 05:04:09 AM
I'm glad I found this thread, because I feel like I'm losing my mind. There aren't many people I can talk to on this subject. Most of my family is pro Trump. One is outright hateful toward me.

In terms of previous posts here, it seems to me the dominoes are falling (yes, maybe they have been falling for >15 years) and we're in for something very bad. Even as I hope for the best, I wake up, read about Trump - his appointments, his behavior, and his tweets, and the hope dies. Every day.

And it's not just Trump. His win has emboldened GOP reps. The recent tweets out of the House Science Committee sickens me:

Yesterday, @HouseScience tweeted a Brietbart article by an English major who readily admits he doesn't have time to read peer reviewed science. This is the guy who made hay about Climate gate in 2009 that, after 4 independent investigations, turned up ZERO wrongdoing. (Watch This BBC Documentary (https://youtu.be/C3JEaigwAbg) . James Delingpole's statements here: https://youtu.be/C3JEaigwAbg?t=37m51s (https://youtu.be/C3JEaigwAbg?t=37m51s) )

Earlier, @HouseScience mocked Climate scientists for being depressed. I'm not kidding. (https://twitter.com/HouseScience/status/804080425912193024)

The chairman of the committee is a regular author on Breitbart. His stated priority as chairman is to "reduce the regulatory burden on american families."

After Trump won, I decided to focus on one important issue, and fight for it. For me, it's climate change. I read, research, and post simple, thoughtful posts nearly every day on facebook. I exchange emails with my pro Trump brother (through gritted teeth), and read up about the handful of non-climate-scientist deniers who are causing so many problems. Whether it's an anti-communist ideology, or on behalf of Exxon Mobil and whoever is anonymously donating to the 'Donors Trust' foundation, they are a destructive force.

Speaking of Exxon Mobil (XOM). They are the primary fossil fuel company behind climate denial activity. Even as their reported support has waned, it's very likely they are donating to a front group called 'Donors Trust'. It occurred to me that Vanguard ETFs must be a significant shareholder. I calculated they hold at least 5.7% of XOM (see my excel snapshot below).  I'm thinking we could call the fund managers of VTI, VOO, VDE  and others and demand they, as shareholder reps, demand that XOM stop employing these disinformation tactics from the big tobacco playbook. If you want to work with me on this feel free to PM.

I truly hope this lawsuit is effective. (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/18112016/exxon-climate-change-research-oil-reserves-stranded-assets-lawsuit) But it's probably not enough. It's too small. We need a class action suit of people with standing, who can expose the climate change denial in the same way the tobacco industry was exposed.

I'm extremely discouraged by the appointment of Myron Ebell to the EPA, and the dangerous statements by Trump. I've found a few gems - like GOP house Rep Bob Ingles of South Carolina who is vocal about the reality of the science. But he was ousted in 2012.

This is a tremendous amount of information to go through - and it is but one topic in an array of terribly discouraging fronts.

Chin up, yes. But I'm preparing for things getting much worse.

tl;dr: so my take on the impact of a Trump presidency is that we'll lose significant ground on climate change mitigation.  I believe it's a crisis. Trump and his appointees could have a very negative impact on our global ecosystems. ... And I'm glad I have you all to talk with about it all.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 05:42:07 AM
I see this too, as a studier of history in a family of history fanatics. It's not just Trump, it's the fact that we have many world leaders of his type: narcissistic, thin-skinned bullies. They all seem to be supporting each other for the moment (think, Trump and Putin) but one of them will make a "tiny hands" joke about another and then shit's going to get real. At the least, I'm worried about a Cold War style stalemate between powers.

This is not to say that I'm certain these things will happen, but in my dark moments and when I take a good look at world politics, this is what I think about.

Ender and Dividendman - Total deaths from war have gone down, but we have the potential for much bigger conflicts now. Think about it, the Holocaust would not have been possible prior to the technology of the time (gas chambers and such). Part of the reason we've had fewer wars recently is because we're so interconnected. Not only can we see the horrors of war more (pictures, video) but we have greater access to mediators. Other governments/the UN will step in if there are potential conflicts. However, this doesn't totally protect us from war, and in fact makes another great world war more likely as more countries would be involved in any conflict. Before it was France v. England with maybe Spain halfheartedly thrown in. Now it's Europe v. Russia and Asia, or something else equally huge. The periods between war will likely get longer, but the wars themselves will be catastrophically worse. Especially when you throw in our globalized food, so people who don't go to war could very well starve due to lack of getting food from where it used to come from.
The article linked by jrhampt expresses so much more clearly than I can what I've been seeing in terms of world trends.

I'm not sure a person can study history and think that wars will get catastrophically worse. Wars have been getting 'better', smaller and less frequent and overall less deadly for world powers than at any time in history.  There are so many reasons for this, some of which you've mentioned, that I find it difficult to believe that most informed people would argue that the planet overall, and especially developed countries, are moving closer to global conflict.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: music lover on December 03, 2016, 06:55:38 AM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings and no one on the left bothered to complain, yet Trump isn't even in office and suddenly the left is having a meltdown because he hasn't attended every single briefing.

How does one reason with such hypocrisy?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: music lover on December 03, 2016, 07:04:44 AM
Today's developments, in which President Elect Trump overturns decades of diplomatic negotiations with China by casually phoning the leader of Taiwan...

He "overturned" decades of diplomatic relations? I highly doubt that.

Maybe you're used to 8 years of ineffective milquetoast leadership, but the fact is that Trump doesn't need China's permission to speak to Taiwan, or anyone else for that matter.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: accolay on December 03, 2016, 07:25:04 AM
It's snowing in Hell: I agree with Sarah Palin.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sarah-palin-calls-out-trump-s-carrier-deal-warns-against-n691426 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sarah-palin-calls-out-trump-s-carrier-deal-warns-against-n691426)

I only agree with her article calling out the deal as "crony capitalism." The rest of the article is full of a lot of the same old hooey.

Original Article:
http://www.youngcons.com/sarah-palin-but-wait-the-good-guys-wont-win-with-more-crony-capitalism/ (http://www.youngcons.com/sarah-palin-but-wait-the-good-guys-wont-win-with-more-crony-capitalism/)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: TheOldestYoungMan on December 03, 2016, 09:00:36 AM

Speaking of Exxon Mobil (XOM). They are the primary fossil fuel company behind climate denial activity.

If you're speaking of the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, the Democratic Party was as well.  If you're talking about the 90's, it wasn't really settled.  Actual science wasn't available until after decades of chicken little, so it's a little strange to indict a company that was legitimately concerned with keeping energy prices low when, you know, there were no viable alternatives.

Did their activities delay action?  There's good arguments for that.

Are they still?  No.  That can't really be argued.  All signs point to industry trying to make the transition.

The demonization of individual companies or industries is easy if you decide to become a single issue person.  You lose the complexity of reality, like how oil companies produce the fertilizer that ended famine.  Or produced the synthetic materials that made modern medicine possible.  Or you know, literally enabled the entire world you enjoy to exist at virtually every level.

There were a lot of motivations to oppose bad policy like "tax the shit out of these specific companies despite the fact that we all rely on energy and there isn't an alternative at the moment."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Malaysia41 on December 03, 2016, 09:11:29 AM
The Rockefeller foundation wrote up an extensive investigation into Exxon Mobil and climate change denial efforts. (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-family-fund-vs-exxon). It's pretty well established exactly when they abandoned clear eyed honest science and started manufacturing doubt.



Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: music lover on December 03, 2016, 09:35:58 AM
The Rockefeller foundation wrote up an extensive investigation into Exxon Mobil and climate change denial efforts. (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-family-fund-vs-exxon). It's pretty well established exactly when they abandoned clear eyed honest science and started manufacturing doubt.

Yup...we're supposed to believe that Exxon Oil has "proven" damaging climate change, even though no one else has managed to do so, and then they kept it hidden, and only the efforts of the left leaning Rockefeller Foundation have uncovered this massive cover up.

Time for a new tin foil hat... :)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 03, 2016, 09:37:16 AM
And just in case folks don't believe in a link between a Trump presidency and increased environmental degradation, the Trump effect is already happening in Texas...  http://www.expressnews.com/business/eagle-ford-energy/article/EPA-plans-to-withdraw-pollution-rule-for-7-Texas-10645121.php

Quote
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it plans to withdraw a rule that would require seven Texas coal-fired power plants to reduce pollution coming from their stacks, providing at least a short-term reprieve for power companies fearful that the costs of ever stricter regulations would doom their plants.

The rule would have mandated that the Texas plants, as well as eight others in Oklahoma, update scrubbers and other air pollution control devices to preserve air quality near national parks and wilderness areas, including Big Bend National Park on the Texas border with Mexico, and Guadalupe Mountains National Park on the New Mexico border.

Quote
Environmental advocates said they expect the EPA to rework and resubmit the rule, but its future is uncertain as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office.

Trump has pledged to support the coal industry and undo regulations adopted under President Barack Obama that threaten it. The EPA did not respond to requests for comment. Power companies also declined to comment.

Environmental advocates said the EPA’s move represents a setback to efforts to reduce air pollution in Texas. For years, Texas and the EPA have battled over whether the state or federal government should set air standards. Texas developed its own plan to manage air quality, but the EPA in 2014 said it did not go far enough in reducing pollution and imposed a regional power plant rule.

The EPA’s pollution plan would have cut 200,000 tons per year of sulfur dioxide emitted into the air in Texas, according to the Sierra Club, a national environmental advocacy group.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 09:44:19 AM
The Rockefeller foundation wrote up an extensive investigation into Exxon Mobil and climate change denial efforts. (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-family-fund-vs-exxon). It's pretty well established exactly when they abandoned clear eyed honest science and started manufacturing doubt.

I think the point that this article shows is that it was wildly known, by massive amounts of important people and large swaths of the scientific community that this was occurring, 35-40 years ago. And no one has done anything. Not a single, damn thing. It's not as if one single company came to this conclusion and no one else in the world knew about it - four decades of this information, and people are still flying around in jets and driving cars and burning coal for lights.

No. It just means that no one is doing anything that matters to address it. Absolutely no one.  Even the people who have huge followings and could motivate large amounts of people are still flying to Ecuador every year, or jetting off to Paris on their private jet or whatever. The scientists still drive to work in their fossil fuel-powered cars and eat food grown several hundred miles away using huge amounts of fuels before being trucked to their area using huge amount of carbon before being persevered using huge amounts of carbon.  They are still posting results on computers powered by fossil fuels and working in labs powered by carbon, wearing clothes made thousands of miles away in factories powered by fossil fuels before being transported using carbon....

etc.

It's not that climate change isn't real, or isn't a problem. It's that there's nothing anyone can do to stop it and NO ONE is willing to do even the small things that could be done to mitigate the effects.

At some point, one looks at the data, sees that it's too late to do anything to stop climate change, and that no one is doing anything anyway, and starts looking at other options.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: TheOldestYoungMan on December 03, 2016, 09:48:38 AM
And just in case folks don't believe in a link between a Trump presidency and increased environmental degradation, the Trump effect is already happening in Texas...  http://www.expressnews.com/business/eagle-ford-energy/article/EPA-plans-to-withdraw-pollution-rule-for-7-Texas-10645121.php

Quote
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it plans to withdraw a rule that would require seven Texas coal-fired power plants to reduce pollution coming from their stacks, providing at least a short-term reprieve for power companies fearful that the costs of ever stricter regulations would doom their plants.

The rule would have mandated that the Texas plants, as well as eight others in Oklahoma, update scrubbers and other air pollution control devices to preserve air quality near national parks and wilderness areas, including Big Bend National Park on the Texas border with Mexico, and Guadalupe Mountains National Park on the New Mexico border.

Quote
Environmental advocates said they expect the EPA to rework and resubmit the rule, but its future is uncertain as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office.

Trump has pledged to support the coal industry and undo regulations adopted under President Barack Obama that threaten it. The EPA did not respond to requests for comment. Power companies also declined to comment.

Environmental advocates said the EPA’s move represents a setback to efforts to reduce air pollution in Texas. For years, Texas and the EPA have battled over whether the state or federal government should set air standards. Texas developed its own plan to manage air quality, but the EPA in 2014 said it did not go far enough in reducing pollution and imposed a regional power plant rule.

The EPA’s pollution plan would have cut 200,000 tons per year of sulfur dioxide emitted into the air in Texas, according to the Sierra Club, a national environmental advocacy group.

Sound energy policy doesn't constitute environmental degradation.  Building a lower polluting energy grid should be a huge priority.  The idea that you need to go out of your way to shut down the existing grid before that new power is available is false.  Texas is investing a ton of efforts at renewable energy sources.  We would've replaced almost all of our coal decades ago if we'd been allowed to build the nuclear plants we wanted, but environmentalists stopped us from doing that.

Not to mention elimination of some of the cheapest power is going to be a huge burden on the poor.  Why does the left insist on waging war on the poor?  Why tax the poor with all this expensive energy?  Man.  Have some humanity (see how annoying that is?)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 09:54:56 AM
And just in case folks don't believe in a link between a Trump presidency and increased environmental degradation, the Trump effect is already happening in Texas...  http://www.expressnews.com/business/eagle-ford-energy/article/EPA-plans-to-withdraw-pollution-rule-for-7-Texas-10645121.php

Quote
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it plans to withdraw a rule that would require seven Texas coal-fired power plants to reduce pollution coming from their stacks, providing at least a short-term reprieve for power companies fearful that the costs of ever stricter regulations would doom their plants.

The rule would have mandated that the Texas plants, as well as eight others in Oklahoma, update scrubbers and other air pollution control devices to preserve air quality near national parks and wilderness areas, including Big Bend National Park on the Texas border with Mexico, and Guadalupe Mountains National Park on the New Mexico border.

Quote
Environmental advocates said they expect the EPA to rework and resubmit the rule, but its future is uncertain as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office.

Trump has pledged to support the coal industry and undo regulations adopted under President Barack Obama that threaten it. The EPA did not respond to requests for comment. Power companies also declined to comment.

Environmental advocates said the EPA’s move represents a setback to efforts to reduce air pollution in Texas. For years, Texas and the EPA have battled over whether the state or federal government should set air standards. Texas developed its own plan to manage air quality, but the EPA in 2014 said it did not go far enough in reducing pollution and imposed a regional power plant rule.

The EPA’s pollution plan would have cut 200,000 tons per year of sulfur dioxide emitted into the air in Texas, according to the Sierra Club, a national environmental advocacy group.

The EPA has been getting smacked around in court for its 111(D) ruling since 2014.  I never expected it to stand as written, no matter who was in office. It was unworkable for most of the country and their implementation was pretty slimy to-boot.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 03, 2016, 10:42:03 AM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings and no one on the left bothered to complain, yet Trump isn't even in office and suddenly the left is having a meltdown because he hasn't attended every single briefing.

How does one reason with such hypocrisy?

One can forgive a president with years of experience skipping briefings.  How many did he miss in the months after the election when he needed to get up to speed?  Are you being purposefully obtuse? 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 03, 2016, 10:42:46 AM
Not to mention elimination of some of the cheapest power is going to be a huge burden on the poor.  Why does the left insist on waging war on the poor?  Why tax the poor with all this expensive energy?  Man.  Have some humanity (see how annoying that is?)

I'm not sure if you were trying to be humorous or if you don't understand externalities (http://philschatz.com/economics-book/contents/m48669.html)

I'm not in support of paying more over the life cycle of an energy resource, but the idea that we should be willing to pollute just to make more money in the short term is an outdated concept for a first world country.  This is what the third world does in order to boot strap up to where we are.  And the poor aren't going to be saved by their relatively tiny usage of cheap energy getting 1% cheaper, but those billionaires are probably going to be 1% richer.  Go USA!  :)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 03, 2016, 11:13:08 AM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

This is classic Trump, btw.  You're on video saying "grab them by the pussy?"  Make the false claim that Bill Clinton is a rapist, even though he's not even running for office.  You've been charged with defrauding the American public?  Make the false claim that Hillary Clinton is being charged with mishandling classified information (she wasn't).  You're resume is full of repeated business failures?  Make the false claim that your opponent's record of service to her country is meaningless because [honestly I'm not sure why he claimed that].  For every one of Trump's weaknesses and failures as a candidate, his "defense" has always been a baseless attack on the opposition for the exact same thing.  Try to sow dissent, introduce confusion, muddle the issue.

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.

If you want to defend Trump's blatant disregard for diplomatic protocols, please do so on some grounds other than "I think the other guy sort of did that too."  For example, I know people who think Twitter is the CORRECT avenue to negotiate international treaties and that Trump is saving America by cutting out all that formal bullshit and just publicly announcing every step in his process in a 3am tweet.  If you believe that, or have some other defense of Trump's repeated diplomatic missteps, go ahead and make your case.  But you can stop making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people.

I expect your response to this post to be "sol is making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people!"
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 03, 2016, 11:14:07 AM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings and no one on the left bothered to complain, yet Trump isn't even in office and suddenly the left is having a meltdown because he hasn't attended every single briefing.

How does one reason with such hypocrisy?

One can forgive a president with years of experience skipping briefings.  How many did he miss in the months after the election when he needed to get up to speed?  Are you being purposefully obtuse?

music lover is a hyper partisan rightwinger, so yes. Also, his claim is false and, unsurprisingly, based on a partisan rightwing propaganda article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.fb1ab726aeb3

Now, it's legitimate to ask if Trump is maybe doing the same (reading it daily but not always having an in person meeting), although given his frightful lack of experience and foreign policy knowledge, I would still call even that a dereliction of duties if he really wants to take the job seriously.

The Twitter stuff falls into the category of so obviously bad that I would be surprised if Trump supporters even make much of an effort to defend it. Too much cognitive dissonance to be found there. Completely ignoring it is the safer option.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 11:32:50 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.fb1ab726aeb3

Now, it's legitimate to ask if Trump is maybe doing the same (reading it daily but not always having an in person meeting), although given his frightful lack of experience and foreign policy knowledge, I would still call even that a dereliction of duties if he really wants to take the job seriously.

The Twitter stuff falls into the category of so obviously bad that I would be surprised if Trump supporters even make much of an effort to defend it. Too much cognitive dissonance to be found there. Completely ignoring it is the safer option.

This was my first thought. Can't find any source commenting that he's reading them, though.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wienerdog on December 03, 2016, 01:22:05 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 03, 2016, 01:29:30 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/
Diplomacy is mostly gray area and it is natural to have parallel interests that do not appear to dovetail well. This would have been a good time to have staff smart enough to say, "Sorry, it appears that Mr. Trump is in a meeting. Would you like me to connect you to his voice mail?"
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 01:37:33 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/

I'm changing my vote. If China didn't start a war when the U.S. gave missiles to Taiwan, there is even less chance of war over a phone call than I thought.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wienerdog on December 03, 2016, 01:50:59 PM
Diplomacy is mostly gray area and it is natural to have parallel interests that do not appear to dovetail well. This would have been a good time to have staff smart enough to say, "Sorry, it appears that Mr. Trump is in a meeting. Would you like me to connect you to his voice mail?"

Why would that be the smart thing to do?  The call was setup by his campaign staff.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 03, 2016, 02:10:07 PM

FWIW:

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/12/03/2003660473

"Trump reportedly agreed to the call, which was arranged by Taiwan-friendly members of his campaign staff after his aides briefed him on issues regarding Taiwan and the situation in the Taiwan Strait, sources said."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: music lover on December 03, 2016, 02:33:45 PM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

That is information provided by the government. You could look it up...or heaven forbid, you could have actually have been aware of it for the last 8 years. But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on December 03, 2016, 03:49:15 PM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

That is information provided by the government. You could look it up...or heaven forbid, you could have actually have been aware of it for the last 8 years. But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.
Do you have an official source for it?  The Washington Post (link provided by Lagom) thinks it was generous to only give the story three Pinocchios.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 03, 2016, 04:18:30 PM
But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.

I'm just going to repeat myself...

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: radram on December 03, 2016, 05:25:48 PM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

This is classic Trump, btw.  You're on video saying "grab them by the pussy?"  Make the false claim that Bill Clinton is a rapist, even though he's not even running for office.  You've been charged with defrauding the American public?  Make the false claim that Hillary Clinton is being charged with mishandling classified information (she wasn't).  You're resume is full of repeated business failures?  Make the false claim that your opponent's record of service to her country is meaningless because [honestly I'm not sure why he claimed that].  For every one of Trump's weaknesses and failures as a candidate, his "defense" has always been a baseless attack on the opposition for the exact same thing.  Try to sow dissent, introduce confusion, muddle the issue.

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.

If you want to defend Trump's blatant disregard for diplomatic protocols, please do so on some grounds other than "I think the other guy sort of did that too."  For example, I know people who think Twitter is the CORRECT avenue to negotiate international treaties and that Trump is saving America by cutting out all that formal bullshit and just publicly announcing every step in his process in a 3am tweet.  If you believe that, or have some other defense of Trump's repeated diplomatic missteps, go ahead and make your case.  But you can stop making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people.

I expect your response to this post to be "sol is making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people!"

Music lover appears to be going back to a claim from around 2012:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.79e627fc657f

To summarize, every president changes how they receive and respond to intelligence. The "skipped meetings" in question appear to have never been scheduled meetings at all. If this is how that figure was reached, I would rate the 58% stat as deceptive.  To continue to spread it (say 4 years later) I would consider it a lie. 

From the article:
"That column also includes the White House’s response — that Obama reads his PDB every day, but he does not always require an in-person briefing every day. The White House argument is that this is how Obama structured his White House operation, so it is specious to say he has “skipped” a meeting that was not actually scheduled."

Using the same logic, this article claims one could accuse Reagan of "skipping" 99% of these same never scheduled meetings.  Also an unfair and deceptive assessment in my opinion.

The recent accusation that Trump is skipping security briefings might be just as unfair of an assessment. To me it would depend on whether Trump is receiving the information some other way. Does the president elect receive the PDB, or it that not yet for his eyes?  I am willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here. If it later comes out that Trump is forgoing receiving the information in any way, I would then begin to get more concerned.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wienerdog on December 03, 2016, 06:21:27 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/

I'm changing my vote. If China didn't start a war when the U.S. gave missiles to Taiwan, there is even less chance of war over a phone call than I thought.

Did you vote Hillary or Trump?  I heard she still needs some votes in Wisconsin as she gained 1 but then lost 3 the next day.  Maybe you can tip it over the edge.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 06:51:44 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/

I'm changing my vote. If China didn't start a war when the U.S. gave missiles to Taiwan, there is even less chance of war over a phone call than I thought.

Did you vote Hillary or Trump?  I heard she still needs some votes in Wisconsin as she gained 1 but then lost 3 the next day.  Maybe you can tip it over the edge.

Not that it's any of your business, but I did not vote for either of those candidates.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wienerdog on December 03, 2016, 07:16:48 PM
Well, this seems to be going well.
https://www.ft.com/content/fd19907e-b8d4-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

Spontaneously gives the leader of Taiwan a call to chat... which is also the first real diplomatic contact since (wait for it) 1979 because of an attempt to maintain good relations with the Chinese. FTW.

Trumps says she called him FYI.  Should not have diplomatic contact with Taiwan but selling of arms is okay to keep Chinese in good relations.  Check!  Oh I forgot most of them are defensive so China won't think they will get attacked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/16/politics/u-s-taiwan-arms-sales/

I'm changing my vote. If China didn't start a war when the U.S. gave missiles to Taiwan, there is even less chance of war over a phone call than I thought.

Did you vote Hillary or Trump?  I heard she still needs some votes in Wisconsin as she gained 1 but then lost 3 the next day.  Maybe you can tip it over the edge.

Not that it's any of your business, but I did not vote for either of those candidates.

Same.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 03, 2016, 07:19:14 PM
High five. There were much better choices available , overall.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 05, 2016, 11:55:37 AM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

This is classic Trump, btw.  You're on video saying "grab them by the pussy?"  Make the false claim that Bill Clinton is a rapist, even though he's not even running for office.  You've been charged with defrauding the American public?  Make the false claim that Hillary Clinton is being charged with mishandling classified information (she wasn't).  You're resume is full of repeated business failures?  Make the false claim that your opponent's record of service to her country is meaningless because [honestly I'm not sure why he claimed that].  For every one of Trump's weaknesses and failures as a candidate, his "defense" has always been a baseless attack on the opposition for the exact same thing.  Try to sow dissent, introduce confusion, muddle the issue.

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.

If you want to defend Trump's blatant disregard for diplomatic protocols, please do so on some grounds other than "I think the other guy sort of did that too."  For example, I know people who think Twitter is the CORRECT avenue to negotiate international treaties and that Trump is saving America by cutting out all that formal bullshit and just publicly announcing every step in his process in a 3am tweet.  If you believe that, or have some other defense of Trump's repeated diplomatic missteps, go ahead and make your case.  But you can stop making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people.

I expect your response to this post to be "sol is making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people!"

Music lover appears to be going back to a claim from around 2012:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.79e627fc657f

To summarize, every president changes how they receive and respond to intelligence. The "skipped meetings" in question appear to have never been scheduled meetings at all. If this is how that figure was reached, I would rate the 58% stat as deceptive.  To continue to spread it (say 4 years later) I would consider it a lie. 

From the article:
"That column also includes the White House’s response — that Obama reads his PDB every day, but he does not always require an in-person briefing every day. The White House argument is that this is how Obama structured his White House operation, so it is specious to say he has “skipped” a meeting that was not actually scheduled."

Using the same logic, this article claims one could accuse Reagan of "skipping" 99% of these same never scheduled meetings.  Also an unfair and deceptive assessment in my opinion.

The recent accusation that Trump is skipping security briefings might be just as unfair of an assessment. To me it would depend on whether Trump is receiving the information some other way. Does the president elect receive the PDB, or it that not yet for his eyes?  I am willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here. If it later comes out that Trump is forgoing receiving the information in any way, I would then begin to get more concerned.
I think the point is that reading a note, if you have the base to understand the note is one thing.  But reading a note without any backstory is a bad idea.  Many presidents (and VP elect Pence) have gotten the background that Trump is refusing to get.
This has a nice summary of the issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-since-election-win/2016/11/23/5cc643c4-b1ae-11e6-be1c-8cec35b1ad25_story.html?utm_term=.b929c1fa677d
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: radram on December 05, 2016, 01:28:34 PM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve...

In Obama's first 6 years in office, he skipped 58% of all security briefings

Where do you get this stuff from?  Did you just pull that number out of your butt?

This is classic Trump, btw.  You're on video saying "grab them by the pussy?"  Make the false claim that Bill Clinton is a rapist, even though he's not even running for office.  You've been charged with defrauding the American public?  Make the false claim that Hillary Clinton is being charged with mishandling classified information (she wasn't).  You're resume is full of repeated business failures?  Make the false claim that your opponent's record of service to her country is meaningless because [honestly I'm not sure why he claimed that].  For every one of Trump's weaknesses and failures as a candidate, his "defense" has always been a baseless attack on the opposition for the exact same thing.  Try to sow dissent, introduce confusion, muddle the issue.

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.

If you want to defend Trump's blatant disregard for diplomatic protocols, please do so on some grounds other than "I think the other guy sort of did that too."  For example, I know people who think Twitter is the CORRECT avenue to negotiate international treaties and that Trump is saving America by cutting out all that formal bullshit and just publicly announcing every step in his process in a 3am tweet.  If you believe that, or have some other defense of Trump's repeated diplomatic missteps, go ahead and make your case.  But you can stop making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people.

I expect your response to this post to be "sol is making up shit that isn't even relevant just to confuse people!"

Music lover appears to be going back to a claim from around 2012:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.79e627fc657f

To summarize, every president changes how they receive and respond to intelligence. The "skipped meetings" in question appear to have never been scheduled meetings at all. If this is how that figure was reached, I would rate the 58% stat as deceptive.  To continue to spread it (say 4 years later) I would consider it a lie. 

From the article:
"That column also includes the White House’s response — that Obama reads his PDB every day, but he does not always require an in-person briefing every day. The White House argument is that this is how Obama structured his White House operation, so it is specious to say he has “skipped” a meeting that was not actually scheduled."

Using the same logic, this article claims one could accuse Reagan of "skipping" 99% of these same never scheduled meetings.  Also an unfair and deceptive assessment in my opinion.

The recent accusation that Trump is skipping security briefings might be just as unfair of an assessment. To me it would depend on whether Trump is receiving the information some other way. Does the president elect receive the PDB, or it that not yet for his eyes?  I am willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here. If it later comes out that Trump is forgoing receiving the information in any way, I would then begin to get more concerned.
I think the point is that reading a note, if you have the base to understand the note is one thing.  But reading a note without any backstory is a bad idea.  Many presidents (and VP elect Pence) have gotten the background that Trump is refusing to get.
This has a nice summary of the issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-since-election-win/2016/11/23/5cc643c4-b1ae-11e6-be1c-8cec35b1ad25_story.html?utm_term=.b929c1fa677d

This article actually sets my mind more at ease, due to the following:

"A team of intelligence analysts has been prepared to deliver daily briefings on global developments and security threats to Trump in the two weeks since he won. Vice President-elect Mike Pence, by contrast, has set aside time for intelligence briefings almost every day since the election, officials said.
Officials involved in the Trump transition team cautioned against assigning any significance to the briefing schedule that the president-elect has set so far, noting that he has been immersed in the work of forming his administration, and has made filling key national security posts his top priority."

It is hinting that security briefings are happening, just in a way that might not have been considered "normal".  Just speculation here, but those 2 paragraphs imply that Pence will be poised to handle security issues more than vice-presidents in the past. This is consistent with reports that Trump will rely on others for more of the day-to-day actions of the presidency.

Believe me, the morning of November 9th you would never have convinced me I would ever pen a statement that in any way defended Trump.  While I still feel a little dirty, fair is fair.   



Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: radram on December 05, 2016, 01:45:21 PM
you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize.

Classic.

Donald Trump would be proud.  "I'm not saying you're a piece of shit.  I would never say that, because it wouldn't be proper.  But some people are saying you're a huge piece of shit.  I don't say that, but everyone knows that you're a huge piece of shit."

24 hours later...  "I never said he was a piece of shit, you're quoting me out of context.  Some other people have said that he's a piece of shit, but not me.  It's not me saying that, what a shitty thing for him to say, attacking me like that.  Only a real piece of shit would say that."

I'll be clearer. If you are convinced that x will happen, and x does not happen, and you sidestep, backpedal, deny, etc., you are a 'pick your disparaging descriptive word'. That is my only point. And, if x does happen, please, post and say 'damn it, I was right, this sucks'. Ditto for the opposite of those.

One small example is Chuck Todd. Last November or so he said on national tv, 'well, that will do it for trump, watch next week he will fade away'. I never heard him say 'wow, did I screw that up. You'd think someone who does this for a living would be better than that'. I never heard that. Others have, and I respect that. Have integrity, that is my desire. I am fine with no one caring about my desire, but you should be true to yourself.

Silverado,
This sounds like fun, so I will play.

Regarding ACA:
Full repeal of ACA with no replace gets discussed, debated, passed through the house and senate, and placed on Trumps desk. Just as discussed (in the 60 minutes article from a few weeks back), Trump Veto's the bill.

They start over with a repeal and replace plan that Trump signs. 

No mandate, 26 year-olds on parents plan, no denial of pre-existing conditions. There is now a catastrophic option, covering nothing until some large out of pocket max (lets say $25,000). This new option will cost about $2,000 less per year as the current bronze plans but will cover nothing unless you have a serious health event.  There will no longer be ACA credits for health insurance, but there will be some sort of off-set to help make the catastrophic plan affordable to the poor. Prevention services will be reduced to help contain costs.  Healthy people will love the new system. Sick people will not like it as much.

If you are unhealthy you will pay more or not get services, if you are well you will pay less. Many will think that is exactly the way it ought to be. Many will think we are abandoning our sick.

My family will pay more and utilize less services.

Regarding Medicare:
They go with the Ryan Plan voucher idea. Saves government money.  Costs people more. It might be a real problem, but not for 25 years. I hope my goggle reminder goes off in 2041 so I can come back here and gloat :)

Regarding Inheritance:
Full repeal of any taxes for inheritance. This will not effect 99.98% of current estates. The revenue difference will be offset by a combination of deficit increases and less services.

Regarding Taxes
Rates changes much like Trump has been discussing. Increased deficits and decreasing spending on services to offset the tax revenue decrease.

Regarding Military Spending
The largest percentage increase in modern history. All deficit driven.

Regarding infrastructure
Almost nothing changes.   No money. All improvements are deficit driven.

Overall, usual "don't tax and spend a little less" deficit increasing policies.  4 years from now, increased inflation, increased annual deficits, and a greater wealth gap. Trump falls short of his campaign promise to eliminate the debt(not deficit) in 10 years by $40 trillion, because congress does not go along with his idea to default on our debt.

If he runs in 2020, he wins again under the "give my ideas a chance" mantra.

Ryan was interviewed on 60 minutes. 

Question(regarding Obamacare being the first bill with Trump as president): You're going to repeal it (slight pause) ... first?
Ryan: Yes

It is way too early to say it, but I will begin anyway:
'damn it, I was right, this sucks'


Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on December 05, 2016, 04:38:36 PM
And the funny thing about this kind of deficit driven government bloat we see from Republicans is the tax load keeps growing for the middle class in the form of near static taxes and continue inflation from the Fed.

Even a great conservative economist like Milton Friedman hammers at the point that inflation is basically a tax. If you keep tax brackets near stagnant at the lower income range and keep up inflation you effectively slowly move people into higher tax brackets.

The effects of a voucher program could be as bad or worse than the ACA for people when it actually would take effect. But if they are able to undo the ACA it gives me hope that a new administration could equally undo a bad program from the right.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 05, 2016, 05:22:43 PM
Given that he has been declining intelligence briefings, I do not suspect that he has a genius master plan up his sleeve..

The recent accusation that Trump is skipping security briefings might be just as unfair of an assessment. To me it would depend on whether Trump is receiving the information some other way. Does the president elect receive the PDB, or it that not yet for his eyes?  I am willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here. If it later comes out that Trump is forgoing receiving the information in any way, I would then begin to get more concerned.
I think the point is that reading a note, if you have the base to understand the note is one thing.  But reading a note without any backstory is a bad idea.  Many presidents (and VP elect Pence) have gotten the background that Trump is refusing to get.
This has a nice summary of the issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-turning-away-intelligence-briefers-since-election-win/2016/11/23/5cc643c4-b1ae-11e6-be1c-8cec35b1ad25_story.html?utm_term=.b929c1fa677d

This article actually sets my mind more at ease, due to the following:

"A team of intelligence analysts has been prepared to deliver daily briefings on global developments and security threats to Trump in the two weeks since he won. Vice President-elect Mike Pence, by contrast, has set aside time for intelligence briefings almost every day since the election, officials said.
Officials involved in the Trump transition team cautioned against assigning any significance to the briefing schedule that the president-elect has set so far, noting that he has been immersed in the work of forming his administration, and has made filling key national security posts his top priority."

It is hinting that security briefings are happening, just in a way that might not have been considered "normal".  Just speculation here, but those 2 paragraphs imply that Pence will be poised to handle security issues more than vice-presidents in the past. This is consistent with reports that Trump will rely on others for more of the day-to-day actions of the presidency.

Believe me, the morning of November 9th you would never have convinced me I would ever pen a statement that in any way defended Trump.  While I still feel a little dirty, fair is fair.
Given that Trump and his team have been noted for being liars, I am not sure I buy your ease.  That said, I do agree with your last paragraph that Pence is basically acting President.  That should scare people as well because people will still expect the president to make decisions.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Silverado on December 05, 2016, 07:58:49 PM
you are a piece of shit and I will not apologize.

Classic.

Donald Trump would be proud.  "I'm not saying you're a piece of shit.  I would never say that, because it wouldn't be proper.  But some people are saying you're a huge piece of shit.  I don't say that, but everyone knows that you're a huge piece of shit."

24 hours later...  "I never said he was a piece of shit, you're quoting me out of context.  Some other people have said that he's a piece of shit, but not me.  It's not me saying that, what a shitty thing for him to say, attacking me like that.  Only a real piece of shit would say that."

I'll be clearer. If you are convinced that x will happen, and x does not happen, and you sidestep, backpedal, deny, etc., you are a 'pick your disparaging descriptive word'. That is my only point. And, if x does happen, please, post and say 'damn it, I was right, this sucks'. Ditto for the opposite of those.

One small example is Chuck Todd. Last November or so he said on national tv, 'well, that will do it for trump, watch next week he will fade away'. I never heard him say 'wow, did I screw that up. You'd think someone who does this for a living would be better than that'. I never heard that. Others have, and I respect that. Have integrity, that is my desire. I am fine with no one caring about my desire, but you should be true to yourself.

Silverado,
This sounds like fun, so I will play.

Regarding ACA:
Full repeal of ACA with no replace gets discussed, debated, passed through the house and senate, and placed on Trumps desk. Just as discussed (in the 60 minutes article from a few weeks back), Trump Veto's the bill.

They start over with a repeal and replace plan that Trump signs. 

No mandate, 26 year-olds on parents plan, no denial of pre-existing conditions. There is now a catastrophic option, covering nothing until some large out of pocket max (lets say $25,000). This new option will cost about $2,000 less per year as the current bronze plans but will cover nothing unless you have a serious health event.  There will no longer be ACA credits for health insurance, but there will be some sort of off-set to help make the catastrophic plan affordable to the poor. Prevention services will be reduced to help contain costs.  Healthy people will love the new system. Sick people will not like it as much.

If you are unhealthy you will pay more or not get services, if you are well you will pay less. Many will think that is exactly the way it ought to be. Many will think we are abandoning our sick.

My family will pay more and utilize less services.

Regarding Medicare:
They go with the Ryan Plan voucher idea. Saves government money.  Costs people more. It might be a real problem, but not for 25 years. I hope my goggle reminder goes off in 2041 so I can come back here and gloat :)

Regarding Inheritance:
Full repeal of any taxes for inheritance. This will not effect 99.98% of current estates. The revenue difference will be offset by a combination of deficit increases and less services.

Regarding Taxes
Rates changes much like Trump has been discussing. Increased deficits and decreasing spending on services to offset the tax revenue decrease.

Regarding Military Spending
The largest percentage increase in modern history. All deficit driven.

Regarding infrastructure
Almost nothing changes.   No money. All improvements are deficit driven.

Overall, usual "don't tax and spend a little less" deficit increasing policies.  4 years from now, increased inflation, increased annual deficits, and a greater wealth gap. Trump falls short of his campaign promise to eliminate the debt(not deficit) in 10 years by $40 trillion, because congress does not go along with his idea to default on our debt.

If he runs in 2020, he wins again under the "give my ideas a chance" mantra.

Ryan was interviewed on 60 minutes. 

Question(regarding Obamacare being the first bill with Trump as president): You're going to repeal it (slight pause) ... first?
Ryan: Yes

It is way too early to say it, but I will begin anyway:
'damn it, I was right, this sucks'

Yeah, haste here does not seem like a positive direction. This seems like an area where there should be some common ground, but alas, nothing but politics normally.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 05, 2016, 09:05:56 PM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: davisgang90 on December 06, 2016, 03:45:00 AM
But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.

I'm just going to repeat myself...

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.
Obama violated decades of US foreign policy when he normalized relations with Cuba.  Nixon violated decades of US foreign policy when he went to China.  Given China's adventures building a military base on a coral reef in the South China Sea, I think the phone call was a good idea.  Time to put the "One China" fiction to rest.  The media and US diplomats have reacted more shrilly than the Chinese.  That should be cause for introspection.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 06, 2016, 05:56:15 AM
But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.

I'm just going to repeat myself...

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.
Obama violated decades of US foreign policy when he normalized relations with Cuba.  Nixon violated decades of US foreign policy when he went to China.  Given China's adventures building a military base on a coral reef in the South China Sea, I think the phone call was a good idea.  Time to put the "One China" fiction to rest.  The media and US diplomats have reacted more shrilly than the Chinese.  That should be cause for introspection.

I don't necessarily disagree, BUT that could just be cultural differences manifesting in subtle ways. Americans are really loud.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 06:55:40 AM
I don't think that is a very accurate assesment. The chinese have reacted pretty damn loudly.  They just reacted more loudly at Tiwan than the USA.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bananarama on December 06, 2016, 07:00:48 AM
But, it seems that every single time Obama fails or does something wrong, that NO ONE on the left is aware.

I'm just going to repeat myself...

In this case, Trump is violating decades of US foreign policy, apparently on a whim, on Twitter, over the objection of our nation's diplomats.  Whatever wild claims you want to make about Obama are irrelevant to that criticism.  If anything, your attacks on Obama reinforce the idea that you agree with us that this is a horrible thing to do be doing, you hated it when Obama supposedly did it, and now you also hate it when Trump is doing it even more.
Obama violated decades of US foreign policy when he normalized relations with Cuba.  Nixon violated decades of US foreign policy when he went to China.  Given China's adventures building a military base on a coral reef in the South China Sea, I think the phone call was a good idea.  Time to put the "One China" fiction to rest.  The media and US diplomats have reacted more shrilly than the Chinese.  That should be cause for introspection.

I don't necessarily disagree, BUT that could just be cultural differences manifesting in subtle ways. Americans are really loud.

Sure, this could put us in a good position in some ways. Right now though, Trump is still a regular citizen so who cares what he says. As president? Might be different, especially if he doesn't leave room for China to come to agreements with us without losing face. They've given him room to let this get dismissed and instead he doubled down.

It's a delicate line to balance, and those examples of that  ”violated decades of US foreign policy" were all relatively mild. We didn't stand to lose anything normalizing relations with China or Cuba and a potential hell of a lot to gain. Destabilizing Pakistan/India or China/Taiwan? Lots more to lose, and a good number of other allies in that area who won't be keen on increasingly strong stances from countries trying to establish new hierarchies and relationships.

President wants to take a hard line? That's fine, we elected him to do the job and he's got the State Department to help him lay out a way forward. However, I'll always be (justifiably) nervous if that President decides twitter is an appropriate place to do diplomatic work (or that his children are acceptable unofficial ambassadors) and who's language is careless, especially when dealing with cultures very different from our own. At some point China (or others) won't be able to downplay things and then the situation will grow in ways we can't imagine now.Or not.

I think it boils down to trust. Looking at his history and considering everything I've read, I am incredibly doubtful that Trump has what it takes to be anything other than an embarrassment. I mean, saving a few jobs (which is good for sure) by giving a company millions (which is bad) can only lead to other companies trying the same tactic.

Interesting thought: I view the job thing as governance by bribe. But then, a lot of attempts to bring new business to an area are essentially bribes. When is the line where it becomes crony capitalism? Is it always crony capitalism?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KBecks on December 06, 2016, 07:06:35 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bananarama on December 06, 2016, 07:22:24 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

Pretty sure the 12th amendment doesn't say anything about how the electors are supposed to vote (just that they do) so it sounds like he knows exactly how to do his job. Seriously, even before the election I was for keeping the electoral college (and against the interstate agreement) because I like the idea that there is a built in safe guard for a bad national vote. Why does the prospect of someone voting for their nation over their party (against a candidate they judge is unfit for the presidency) make you so angry?

Pure democracy is a mob rule, either way. While it's unlikely that the electors will vote for anyone other than Trump and this is really just symbolic (electors aren't usually faithless), at some point in our future that tiny little distinction between popular vote and the electoral college might be all that stands between us and tyranny.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Daleth on December 06, 2016, 08:34:19 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

The 12th Amendment doesn't say electors have to or even should vote for their party's nominee. Heck, it doesn't even say that states should allocate their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis (here's what famed Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Lessig has to say about that: https://medium.com/@lessig/the-equal-protection-argument-against-winner-take-all-in-the-electoral-college-b09e8a49d777#.qm3mzajg4).

And Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote that one of the purposes of the electoral college was to prevent dangerous but popular demagogues from reaching the White House: the EC "affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.... there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."
- Hamilton, Federalist Papers 68 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 06, 2016, 08:45:10 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

The 12th Amendment doesn't say electors have to or even should vote for their party's nominee. Heck, it doesn't even say that states should allocate their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis (here's what famed Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Lessig has to say about that: https://medium.com/@lessig/the-equal-protection-argument-against-winner-take-all-in-the-electoral-college-b09e8a49d777#.qm3mzajg4).

And Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote that one of the purposes of the electoral college was to prevent dangerous but popular demagogues from reaching the White House: the EC "affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.... there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."
- Hamilton, Federalist Papers 68 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp).

Exactly. The elector's job is precisely to do what this person is doing.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 06, 2016, 08:46:39 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

The 12th Amendment doesn't say electors have to or even should vote for their party's nominee. Heck, it doesn't even say that states should allocate their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis (here's what famed Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Lessig has to say about that: https://medium.com/@lessig/the-equal-protection-argument-against-winner-take-all-in-the-electoral-college-b09e8a49d777#.qm3mzajg4).

And Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote that one of the purposes of the electoral college was to prevent dangerous but popular demagogues from reaching the White House: the EC "affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.... there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."
- Hamilton, Federalist Papers 68 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp).

Now I know that I am Canadian and looking at this as an outsider.  But Trump, even if you completely agree with his policy(what are they again?) and the fact that he is a republican(conservative in my world) Is he even qualified to hold office?  As mentioned he goes on twitter rampages when SNL does a skit on him, refuses to put his businesses into a blind trust, so that policy that he may affect does not benefit him unequally, discuses policy through twitter, does not seem interested in existing policy?  I truly wonder how the EC that was designed to protect the US from this, would not be almost obligated to vote elsewhere?

Please fill me in how he is qualified? 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 06, 2016, 08:47:39 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

The 12th Amendment doesn't say electors have to or even should vote for their party's nominee. Heck, it doesn't even say that states should allocate their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis (here's what famed Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Lessig has to say about that: https://medium.com/@lessig/the-equal-protection-argument-against-winner-take-all-in-the-electoral-college-b09e8a49d777#.qm3mzajg4).

And Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote that one of the purposes of the electoral college was to prevent dangerous but popular demagogues from reaching the White House: the EC "affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.... there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."
- Hamilton, Federalist Papers 68 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp).

Now I know that I am Canadian and looking at this as an outsider.  But Trump, even if you completely agree with his policy(what are they again?) and the fact that he is a republican(conservative in my world) Is he even qualified to hold office?  As mentioned he goes on twitter rampages when SNL does a skit on him, refuses to put his businesses into a blind trust, so that policy that he may affect does not benefit him unequally, discuses policy through twitter, does not seem interested in existing policy?  I truly wonder how the EC that was designed to protect the US from this, would not be almost obligated to vote elsewhere?

Please fill me in how he is qualified?

This is my feeling, too, Dycker, and I'm an American.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 06, 2016, 09:48:47 AM
Sure, this could put us in a good position in some ways. Right now though, Trump is still a regular citizen so who cares what he says. As president? Might be different, especially if he doesn't leave room for China to come to agreements with us without losing face. They've given him room to let this get dismissed and instead he doubled down.

It's a delicate line to balance, and those examples of that  ”violated decades of US foreign policy" were all relatively mild. We didn't stand to lose anything normalizing relations with China or Cuba and a potential hell of a lot to gain. Destabilizing Pakistan/India or China/Taiwan? Lots more to lose, and a good number of other allies in that area who won't be keen on increasingly strong stances from countries trying to establish new hierarchies and relationships.

President wants to take a hard line? That's fine, we elected him to do the job and he's got the State Department to help him lay out a way forward. However, I'll always be (justifiably) nervous if that President decides twitter is an appropriate place to do diplomatic work (or that his children are acceptable unofficial ambassadors) and who's language is careless, especially when dealing with cultures very different from our own. At some point China (or others) won't be able to downplay things and then the situation will grow in ways we can't imagine now.Or not.

I think it boils down to trust. Looking at his history and considering everything I've read, I am incredibly doubtful that Trump has what it takes to be anything other than an embarrassment. I mean, saving a few jobs (which is good for sure) by giving a company millions (which is bad) can only lead to other companies trying the same tactic.

Interesting thought: I view the job thing as governance by bribe. But then, a lot of attempts to bring new business to an area are essentially bribes. When is the line where it becomes crony capitalism? Is it always crony capitalism?

The only positive I can see from Trump pissing off China is that he and his family might actually have to--gasp!--manufacture their shit products in America.

dycker - yes.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on December 06, 2016, 10:21:53 AM
I thought that this was pretty shocking, a member of the electoral college is not only refusing to cast their vote in accordance with the electorate but they also published an op-ed as to their reasoning - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/why-i-will-not-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Quote
DALLAS — I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

If this @sshole, the elector, can't do his job properly he should give up his seat.

The 12th Amendment doesn't say electors have to or even should vote for their party's nominee. Heck, it doesn't even say that states should allocate their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis (here's what famed Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Lessig has to say about that: https://medium.com/@lessig/the-equal-protection-argument-against-winner-take-all-in-the-electoral-college-b09e8a49d777#.qm3mzajg4).

And Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote that one of the purposes of the electoral college was to prevent dangerous but popular demagogues from reaching the White House: the EC "affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.... there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue."
- Hamilton, Federalist Papers 68 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp).

Now I know that I am Canadian and looking at this as an outsider.  But Trump, even if you completely agree with his policy(what are they again?) and the fact that he is a republican(conservative in my world) Is he even qualified to hold office?  As mentioned he goes on twitter rampages when SNL does a skit on him, refuses to put his businesses into a blind trust, so that policy that he may affect does not benefit him unequally, discuses policy through twitter, does not seem interested in existing policy?  I truly wonder how the EC that was designed to protect the US from this, would not be almost obligated to vote elsewhere?

Please fill me in how he is qualified?

This is my feeling, too, Dycker, and I'm an American.
At the moment Trump is quite possibly disqualified by reason of his business holdings, because of the emoluments clause.  As soon as any foreign government books a representative into any of his hotels and pays for it, he is toast.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 06, 2016, 10:23:14 AM

At the moment Trump is quite possibly disqualified by reason of his business holdings, because of the emoluments clause.  As soon as any foreign government books a representative into any of his hotels and pays for it, he is toast.

Except I don't think the powers that be will do anything but look the other way. I think Trump is going to get away with a massive amount of illegal activity. Hell, he's arguably already getting away with it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 06, 2016, 11:07:41 AM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 11:35:20 AM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 11:37:41 AM
Sure, this could put us in a good position in some ways. Right now though, Trump is still a regular citizen so who cares what he says. As president? Might be different, especially if he doesn't leave room for China to come to agreements with us without losing face. They've given him room to let this get dismissed and instead he doubled down.

It's a delicate line to balance, and those examples of that  ”violated decades of US foreign policy" were all relatively mild. We didn't stand to lose anything normalizing relations with China or Cuba and a potential hell of a lot to gain. Destabilizing Pakistan/India or China/Taiwan? Lots more to lose, and a good number of other allies in that area who won't be keen on increasingly strong stances from countries trying to establish new hierarchies and relationships.

President wants to take a hard line? That's fine, we elected him to do the job and he's got the State Department to help him lay out a way forward. However, I'll always be (justifiably) nervous if that President decides twitter is an appropriate place to do diplomatic work (or that his children are acceptable unofficial ambassadors) and who's language is careless, especially when dealing with cultures very different from our own. At some point China (or others) won't be able to downplay things and then the situation will grow in ways we can't imagine now.Or not.

I think it boils down to trust. Looking at his history and considering everything I've read, I am incredibly doubtful that Trump has what it takes to be anything other than an embarrassment. I mean, saving a few jobs (which is good for sure) by giving a company millions (which is bad) can only lead to other companies trying the same tactic.

Interesting thought: I view the job thing as governance by bribe. But then, a lot of attempts to bring new business to an area are essentially bribes. When is the line where it becomes crony capitalism? Is it always crony capitalism?

The only positive I can see from Trump pissing off China is that he and his family might actually have to--gasp!--manufacture their shit products in America.

dycker - yes.

Several Chinese companies have already stated plans to open factories in the United States, beginning production next year.  Arkansas and North Carolina, i believe.

Soo... thanks, Trump?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 06, 2016, 11:40:41 AM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Apparently the humor was lost, so I'll explain more clearly:  being qualified clearly has nothing to do with being elected.  In fact, it turns out that you don't even need to be the country's preferred candidate in order to get elected.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 06, 2016, 12:33:28 PM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but was the EC not started so that if the people elected someone not qualified, they could stop it? 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 06, 2016, 12:35:00 PM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but was the EC not started so that if the people elected someone not qualified, they could stop it?
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not have much trust in the average person.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 06, 2016, 12:38:03 PM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but was the EC not started so that if the people elected someone not qualified, they could stop it?
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not have much trust in the average person.
OK, but would this scenario not apply.  How is trump qualified to be "the leader of the free world"?  He has no experience in politics, well with anything really besides Trump industries, or what ever he calls it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 06, 2016, 12:49:49 PM


In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but was the EC not started so that if the people elected someone not qualified, they could stop it?
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not have much trust in the average person.
OK, but would this scenario not apply.  How is trump qualified to be "the leader of the free world"?  He has no experience in politics, well with anything really besides Trump industries, or what ever he calls it.
[/quote]
Because the founding fathers did not define what is not qualified and allowed each state to determine for to elect their electorate.  None of those electorate are willing to say no, because they are GOP insiders (for the most part) or appointed by Trump and by not voting for him, they won't move up in the party (aka the founding fathers had too much trust in the elite). 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 06, 2016, 12:54:11 PM


In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but was the EC not started so that if the people elected someone not qualified, they could stop it?
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not have much trust in the average person.
OK, but would this scenario not apply.  How is trump qualified to be "the leader of the free world"?  He has no experience in politics, well with anything really besides Trump industries, or what ever he calls it.
Because the founding fathers did not define what is not qualified and allowed each state to determine for to elect their electorate.  None of those electorate are willing to say no, because they are GOP insiders (for the most part) or appointed by Trump and by not voting for him, they won't move up in the party (aka the founding fathers had too much trust in the elite).
[/quote]

Makes sense to me...kind of ironic that the founding fathers put this in place to protect the US from stuff like this,  and now everyone is not wanting to do the correct thing and will allow a person with no experience or qualification into office... At least you all have guns to over through a corrupt government.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 01:44:11 PM
Please fill me in how he is qualified?

In a representative democracy, he is qualified if people think he is qualified and thus vote for him.  Currently, it looks like 46.2% of American voters supported him.

Maybe that makes him 46.2% qualified?

And 48.2% of voters supported Clinton, but we'll just sort of ignore that for the moment.

But a majority of electors are assigned to him... which is what actually qualifies him. So, he's fully qualified according to the Constitution; arguing otherwise is off base and pointless.

Apparently the humor was lost, so I'll explain more clearly:  being qualified clearly has nothing to do with being elected.  In fact, it turns out that you don't even need to be the country's preferred candidate in order to get elected.

Is this supposed to be news? America has been electing leaders the same way as long as it's been a country. Perhaps tea leaves or owl bones or weather events or some other meaningless system preferred a different candidate: the electoral college clearly preferred one over the other.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 01:55:26 PM
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not
Because the founding fathers did not define what is not qualified and allowed each state to determine for to elect their electorate.  None of those electorate are willing to say no, because they are GOP insiders (for the most part) or appointed by Trump and by not voting for him, they won't move up in the party (aka the founding fathers had too much trust in the elite).

Article II, section I of the Constitution lays out pretty clearly the qualifications to be president. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 06, 2016, 02:08:41 PM
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not
Because the founding fathers did not define what is not qualified and allowed each state to determine for to elect their electorate.  None of those electorate are willing to say no, because they are GOP insiders (for the most part) or appointed by Trump and by not voting for him, they won't move up in the party (aka the founding fathers had too much trust in the elite).

Article II, section I of the Constitution lays out pretty clearly the qualifications to be president.

No, that article defines eligibility. Not qualifications.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 06, 2016, 02:14:02 PM
That was one of the reasons.  The founding fathers did not
Because the founding fathers did not define what is not qualified and allowed each state to determine for to elect their electorate.  None of those electorate are willing to say no, because they are GOP insiders (for the most part) or appointed by Trump and by not voting for him, they won't move up in the party (aka the founding fathers had too much trust in the elite).

Article II, section I of the Constitution lays out pretty clearly the qualifications to be president. 

I think you mean Presidential eligibility.  You'll have to point me to the the part of the Constitution that says a President that Twitters inflamatory nonsense, debases the office, and takes phone calls with no regard for history, culture, or consequence against the general wishes and better judgement of the rest of the US governement and country is qualified to be President.  The fact that he doesn't have the temperment to represent our fair and balanced nation is abundantly clear, and I have yet to see a strong arguement from anyone that Trump is in any way shape or form qualified to assume office.  For the most part, people expect him to assume office and be summarily impeached, which generally assumes that he is not qualified, but apparently there isn't anything anyone can do except wait until we actually can hold him accountable for f'ing something up.

And yes, the article I linked to explained that the EC was put in place to stop someone like Trump from actually being installed as President if the EC suspected that the popular vote was somehow gamed (like making illegitimate promises in swing states and calling your opponent 'someone who should be in jail' to win votes).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 02:30:06 PM
Well, i guess we can see how the Electors vote. Won't have to wait long. Interesting to see what happens, no doubt
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on December 06, 2016, 02:41:38 PM
The Electors are a slate of lackeys put up by each candidate.  No way are they going to break rank.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 06, 2016, 03:20:45 PM
The Electors are a slate of lackeys put up by each candidate.  No way are they going to break rank.

Being a realist, I agree.  But it is historic in the modern age to have two faithless electors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector) and says quite a lot about just how much more screwed up than usual this all is.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 06, 2016, 05:14:53 PM
I would take pretty much any other presidential pairing the EC wants. Paul Ryan? Fine. I think he's a tool, but at least he's an artful tool rather than our artless, inarticulate, flamboyantly ignorant President-Elect. Despite what conservatives seem to think, there would not be all this soul-searching and gnashing of teeth of the GOP had put forth a reasonable candidate. Hell, I'd take Ted Cruz, and I hate the guy's policies. It is Trump the rest of us hate/oppose. He, himself, is not fit to be our president. That's what reasonable and thinking people, including plenty of conservatives, are scared about.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 06, 2016, 05:19:00 PM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 06, 2016, 05:40:39 PM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W

Completely agree. Shit, I would have even contemplated voting for Kasich. He was such a whiny asshole during the primary season it made me sad. But he would jave been a fine president.

Trump?

I still can't believe there are actually people in the world who argue he will not take a massive dump all over our country, then walk away and wipe his ass with gold leaf TP.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 06, 2016, 05:48:40 PM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W

Completely agree. Shit, I would have even contemplated voting for Kasich. He was such a whiny asshole during the primary season it made me sad. But he would jave been a fine president.

Trump?

I still can't believe there are actually people in the world who argue he will not take a massive dump all over our country, then walk away and wipe his ass with gold leaf TP.

Right? I'm sure no matter what kind of President he is, he'll walk away wiping his ass with gold tp. Im still in shock that no other political party could field a candidate that could beat him. This is what makes me even sadder than the fact that he'll be terrible, that there were no other options that were significantly better to the point that people in enough states would turn out for them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Unique User on December 06, 2016, 06:47:33 PM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W

Completely agree. Shit, I would have even contemplated voting for Kasich. He was such a whiny asshole during the primary season it made me sad. But he would jave been a fine president.

Trump?

I still can't believe there are actually people in the world who argue he will not take a massive dump all over our country, then walk away and wipe his ass with gold leaf TP.

Agree!  No matter what happens, he and his family are going to end up extremely rich, like Bill Gates/Warren Buffett rich, at the expense of everyone else.  Everyone who tries to claim he was there already, I call BS - why would he whore himself on Trump U, The Apprentice and all the other stupid shit if he was already as rich as he claims.  I truly hope we are not headed for some scary times, but I think it is inevitable.  I'd be thrilled to say I was wrong. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 07, 2016, 06:02:25 AM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W

Completely agree. Shit, I would have even contemplated voting for Kasich. He was such a whiny asshole during the primary season it made me sad. But he would jave been a fine president.

Trump?

I still can't believe there are actually people in the world who argue he will not take a massive dump all over our country, then walk away and wipe his ass with gold leaf TP.

Having lived through Gov. Kasich "balancing" our state budget by simply not paying for shit, and leaving local government to figure out how to replace services with no money, I completely agree.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: golden1 on December 07, 2016, 06:35:38 AM
Yep, I keep trying to explain to people that this isn't just me being a "sore loser".  I have been on the losing side of elections before, and while I was grumpy, I didn't feel this level of near terror and sadness.  And the hits just seem to keep on coming.  I really would have been okay with any other of the primary candidates short of Cruz and Carson.  Rubio, Jeb, Kasich, all would have been okay. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 07, 2016, 06:50:05 AM
Trump is Time's "Person of the Year". Interesting.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Malaysia41 on December 07, 2016, 08:00:48 AM
Trump is Time's "Person of the Year". Interesting.

He certainly made an impact on 2016.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 07, 2016, 08:11:48 AM
Trump is Time's "Person of the Year". Interesting.

As was Hitler, shortly after he came to power.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 07, 2016, 08:13:52 AM
Trump is Time's "Person of the Year". Interesting.

As was Hitler, shortly after he came to power.

As was Ghandi.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 07, 2016, 08:48:03 AM
Trump is Time's "Person of the Year". Interesting.

As was Hitler, shortly after he came to power.

As was Ghandi.

As was Stalin. The person of the year is not meant to be an endorsement, good or bad, of the person. Just someone who has been a major influence. Famous or infamous.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 07, 2016, 09:41:28 AM
Yep, I keep trying to explain to people that this isn't just me being a "sore loser".  I have been on the losing side of elections before, and while I was grumpy, I didn't feel this level of near terror and sadness.  And the hits just seem to keep on coming.  I really would have been okay with any other of the primary candidates short of Cruz and Carson.  Rubio, Jeb, Kasich, all would have been okay.

I find myself really, really hoping that Romney is our Secretary of State. My biggest problem with him was simply that he'd been so rich for so long that he didn't seem to realize his normal was not everyone else's normal. But, I think he'd make a fantastic Sec of State.

Which is completely at odds with my disgust of him and all the other Repubs who mocked Trump during the election, openly stated that he'd be terrible for the country, and are now falling all over themselves to curry favor. Sniveling cowards. Putting party politics ahead of what you know to be bad for the country is just...I don't even have words for how much I hate them at this moment.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 07, 2016, 10:21:16 AM
Yep, I keep trying to explain to people that this isn't just me being a "sore loser".  I have been on the losing side of elections before, and while I was grumpy, I didn't feel this level of near terror and sadness.  And the hits just seem to keep on coming.  I really would have been okay with any other of the primary candidates short of Cruz and Carson.  Rubio, Jeb, Kasich, all would have been okay.

I find myself really, really hoping that Romney is our Secretary of State. My biggest problem with him was simply that he'd been so rich for so long that he didn't seem to realize his normal was not everyone else's normal. But, I think he'd make a fantastic Sec of State.

Which is completely at odds with my disgust of him and all the other Repubs who mocked Trump during the election, openly stated that he'd be terrible for the country, and are now falling all over themselves to curry favor. Sniveling cowards. Putting party politics ahead of what you know to be bad for the country is just...I don't even have words for how much I hate them at this moment.

Apparently they're looking at the CEO of XOM now for State. Which is just thrilling.

/sarcasm
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on December 07, 2016, 04:22:05 PM
Yep, I keep trying to explain to people that this isn't just me being a "sore loser".  I have been on the losing side of elections before, and while I was grumpy, I didn't feel this level of near terror and sadness.  And the hits just seem to keep on coming.  I really would have been okay with any other of the primary candidates short of Cruz and Carson.  Rubio, Jeb, Kasich, all would have been okay.

I find myself really, really hoping that Romney is our Secretary of State. My biggest problem with him was simply that he'd been so rich for so long that he didn't seem to realize his normal was not everyone else's normal. But, I think he'd make a fantastic Sec of State.

Which is completely at odds with my disgust of him and all the other Repubs who mocked Trump during the election, openly stated that he'd be terrible for the country, and are now falling all over themselves to curry favor. Sniveling cowards. Putting party politics ahead of what you know to be bad for the country is just...I don't even have words for how much I hate them at this moment.

I don't begrudge or feel sadness to see politicians who criticized Trump flocking to him. If he is going to be president I damn well want people in his cabinet who thought well enough of themselves and the country to condemn him during the election.

But now is not the time to stand only on principle. Now is the time to suck it up and play the politician and work to keep shit together that Trump doesn't understand.

If all the Repubs simply refuse to work with him then you are going to get a rogue executive branch listening to god knows who filled with Trump sycophants who are probably the only people I have less respect for than Trump.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 07, 2016, 05:04:15 PM
Yep, I keep trying to explain to people that this isn't just me being a "sore loser".  I have been on the losing side of elections before, and while I was grumpy, I didn't feel this level of near terror and sadness.  And the hits just seem to keep on coming.  I really would have been okay with any other of the primary candidates short of Cruz and Carson.  Rubio, Jeb, Kasich, all would have been okay.

I find myself really, really hoping that Romney is our Secretary of State. My biggest problem with him was simply that he'd been so rich for so long that he didn't seem to realize his normal was not everyone else's normal. But, I think he'd make a fantastic Sec of State.

Which is completely at odds with my disgust of him and all the other Repubs who mocked Trump during the election, openly stated that he'd be terrible for the country, and are now falling all over themselves to curry favor. Sniveling cowards. Putting party politics ahead of what you know to be bad for the country is just...I don't even have words for how much I hate them at this moment.

Apparently they're looking at the CEO of XOM now for State. Which is just thrilling.

/sarcasm

Oh goodie. And I thought about the worst candidate would be Petraeus. You know, the person who actually leaked classified information and is on probation for it.

Ready to wake up from this nightmare any minute....
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: RangerOne on December 07, 2016, 07:14:27 PM
Because that guy guarantees we wont get into any wars over oil.....
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bananarama on December 08, 2016, 12:57:40 PM
Sure, this could put us in a good position in some ways. Right now though, Trump is still a regular citizen so who cares what he says. As president? Might be different, especially if he doesn't leave room for China to come to agreements with us without losing face. They've given him room to let this get dismissed and instead he doubled down.

It's a delicate line to balance, and those examples of that  ”violated decades of US foreign policy" were all relatively mild. We didn't stand to lose anything normalizing relations with China or Cuba and a potential hell of a lot to gain. Destabilizing Pakistan/India or China/Taiwan? Lots more to lose, and a good number of other allies in that area who won't be keen on increasingly strong stances from countries trying to establish new hierarchies and relationships.

President wants to take a hard line? That's fine, we elected him to do the job and he's got the State Department to help him lay out a way forward. However, I'll always be (justifiably) nervous if that President decides twitter is an appropriate place to do diplomatic work (or that his children are acceptable unofficial ambassadors) and who's language is careless, especially when dealing with cultures very different from our own. At some point China (or others) won't be able to downplay things and then the situation will grow in ways we can't imagine now.Or not.

I think it boils down to trust. Looking at his history and considering everything I've read, I am incredibly doubtful that Trump has what it takes to be anything other than an embarrassment. I mean, saving a few jobs (which is good for sure) by giving a company millions (which is bad) can only lead to other companies trying the same tactic.

Interesting thought: I view the job thing as governance by bribe. But then, a lot of attempts to bring new business to an area are essentially bribes. When is the line where it becomes crony capitalism? Is it always crony capitalism?

The only positive I can see from Trump pissing off China is that he and his family might actually have to--gasp!--manufacture their shit products in America.

dycker - yes.

Several Chinese companies have already stated plans to open factories in the United States, beginning production next year.  Arkansas and North Carolina, i believe.

Soo... thanks, Trump?

I looked this up because I was hopeful for a second. Trump or no low skill jobs are important.

From Fortune: "According to Arkansas Business, over the past five years nearly 100,000 manufacturing jobs have been “reshored” to the U.S.—60% of them from China. And states are taking notice of the potential business opportunity." Fortune also reported a paper plant (which fucking stinks, paper plants are awful) is supposed to provide ~2000 jobs in Virginia around 2020.

From CNN: the Arkansas deal was finalized in October, so... not really a Trump victory there. For a 20 million dollar investment and the creation of ~400 jobs a company called Tianyaun "receives a $1 million infrastructure grant, $500,000 for training assistance and a 3.9% annual tax rebate, which comes to about $1.6 million annually."

Everything I've read seems to be part of a trend that was already happening because it's become cheaper to automate in the USA where a good chunk of the customer base is. So, I guess manufacturing might be coming back - but at significantly reduced rates of needed employees and with zero to do with Trump. I worry how easily China based companies might operate in the US if tensions increase.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/30/technology/chinese-manufacturers-come-to-america/
http://fortune.com/2016/12/01/this-chinese-manufacturer-is-creating-american-jobs-not-stealing-them/
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on December 08, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
Everything I've read seems to be part of a trend that was already happening because it's become cheaper to automate in the USA where a good chunk of the customer base is.

And guess who will be there taking credit for any case where this occurs?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 08, 2016, 06:13:15 PM
Everything I've read seems to be part of a trend that was already happening because it's become cheaper to automate in the USA where a good chunk of the customer base is.

And guess who will be there taking credit for any case where this occurs?

Our new robot overlords?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 09, 2016, 12:06:11 AM
I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 09, 2016, 12:09:02 AM
I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lcUHQYhPTE  ?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Daleth on December 09, 2016, 04:53:59 AM
I'll take Ryan, I'll take Cruz, I'll even take Ronald Reagan's reanimated corpse.

Those folks disagree with me on policies but are honorable people who I respect. They want what is best for America, even if I think the way they want to go about it won't work well.

Trump, who has no policies anyone can comprehend, is a different story.

-W

I think the only legitimate option the Electoral College would have, if it wanted to dump Trump and yet not elect Hillary despite the popular vote, is to elect Romney (or at least cast enough votes for Romney to take Trump below 270, throwing the election to the House, and then having the House elect Romney). He's legit because he actually ran for president and got SIXTY-ONE MILLION VOTES in the last election. My vote most emphatically was not among them--viva Obama!--but still, sixty-one million votes in a presidential election, plus the fact that he's sane, experienced, not a religious nut, and apparently reasonably honorable, makes him a legit choice in my book.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KBecks on December 09, 2016, 05:40:37 AM
There is no way they are going to put in Romney.  I would personally freak and I'm not the only one.  The person who won the election is the new President, period.  You can't undo it.  It's not going to happen. 

I mean, who picks Romney out of the blue?  Who would have the power to decide that?  No, we had an election and the people voted.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 09, 2016, 05:54:11 AM
There is no way they are going to put in Romney.  I would personally freak and I'm not the only one.  The person who won the election is the new President, period.  You can't undo it.  It's not going to happen. 

I mean, who picks Romney out of the blue?  Who would have the power to decide that?  No, we had an election and the people voted.

What you're arguing for is neither the will of the people, nor in line with the rules of US elections.

Clinton had more of the votes cast for her.  If you're going to argue that the will of the people should rule, you should be arguing that Clinton be given the presidency.

If, on the other hand, you're going to argue that the particular rules of American style democracy should be in effect then you are supporting the possibility of the electoral college overruling Trump's candidacy.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: KBecks on December 09, 2016, 05:57:45 AM
I understand the the Electoral College will vote and that decides the president.  I'm just saying that there is no freaking way that they're picking Romney.  They're going to vote in Trump. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 09, 2016, 08:25:12 AM
No, we had an election and the people voted.

That was an interesting choice of words, considering that "the people" voted for Clinton by approximately 2%.

I agree with you that Trump will be president.  But let's not pretend it's because that is what most Americans wanted.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on December 09, 2016, 12:19:15 PM
No, we had an election and the people voted.

That was an interesting choice of words, considering that "the people" voted for Clinton by approximately 2%.

I agree with you that Trump will be president.  But let's not pretend it's because that is what most Americans wanted.

She blew him away in one enclave (LA County) and it is suddenly the "whole country" wants clinton, and California should secede. It is just one messed up state with too many people that skews the whole country.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 09, 2016, 12:32:24 PM
It is just one messed up state with too many people that skews the whole country.

I wasn't talking about an enclave, I was talking about how most of the people in the United States voted.  If you ignored the artificially drawn lines and just asked American citizens what they wanted, Clinton would be our next president.

But that's not how we elect presidents in America, land of the free.  In fact, in 40% of the most recent presidential elections, we have elected the person who did NOT get the most votes.

Is everyone really okay with that?  Will we still be okay with it if it starts happening every single time?  Will we be okay with it if we start electing the person who loses the vote by 10%, or by 75%?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: TheOldestYoungMan on December 09, 2016, 12:34:03 PM
No, we had an election and the people voted.

That was an interesting choice of words, considering that "the people" voted for Clinton by approximately 2%.

I agree with you that Trump will be president.  But let's not pretend it's because that is what most Americans wanted.

Most Americans wanted neither Clinton nor Trump.  Most Americans voted for someone else.  Neither candidate won the popular vote.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 09, 2016, 12:37:28 PM
No, we had an election and the people voted.

That was an interesting choice of words, considering that "the people" voted for Clinton by approximately 2%.

I agree with you that Trump will be president.  But let's not pretend it's because that is what most Americans wanted.

She blew him away in one enclave (LA County) and it is suddenly the "whole country" wants clinton, and California should secede. It is just one messed up state with too many people that skews the whole country.
Actually she won all over California as well as percentage wise in most populous areas. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Daleth on December 09, 2016, 12:44:11 PM
Most Americans wanted neither Clinton nor Trump.  Most Americans voted for someone else.  Neither candidate won the popular vote.

At last count, over 137 million Americans voted and only 7.6 million of them (5.5% of them) voted for anyone other than Clinton or Trump.

Out of the 129 million who voted for Clinton or Trump, more than 65.5 million voted for Clinton while 62.8 million voted for Trump.

http://cookpolitical.com/story/10174
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on December 09, 2016, 12:50:32 PM
It is just one messed up state with too many people that skews the whole country.

I wasn't talking about an enclave, I was talking about how most of the people in the United States voted.  If you ignored the artificially drawn lines and just asked American citizens what they wanted, Clinton would be our next president.

But that's not how we elect presidents in America, land of the free.  In fact, in 40% of the most recent presidential elections, we have elected the person who did NOT get the most votes.

Is everyone really okay with that?  Will we still be okay with it if it starts happening every single time?  Will we be okay with it if we start electing the person who loses the vote by 10%, or by 75%?

Sometimes people who are 2k miles away from one another do not see things the same way, even if presented with the same information. Those lines can allow greater freedom, except of course when we try to make it just one 300mil person blob.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 09, 2016, 01:06:57 PM
Neither candidate won the popular vote.

You keep repeating this lie, and I'm not sure why.  Who are trying to delegitimize?

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 09, 2016, 01:18:40 PM
Neither candidate won the popular vote.

You keep repeating this lie, and I'm not sure why.  Who are trying to delegitimize?

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

Long, but worth reading: https://medium.com/@michaelarnovitz/faking-a-mandate-a379c802e540#.wqhy2r83f
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: TheOldestYoungMan on December 09, 2016, 01:24:14 PM

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

You keep saying this because you are trying to delegitimize Trump.  I'm not trying to delegitimize anyone.  Getting more votes than anyone else does not constitute winning the popular vote.  Getting a majority of the popular vote is winning.  More people voted for someone else than voted for HRC.  More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump.

There's a thousand different ways to slice the election aside from the actual rules, and only one shows HRC on top.  This erroneous "she won the popular vote" mantra.  By the only metric that matters, the actual rules of the game they were playing, Trump won the election.  If you go by popular vote, nobody won.  If you go by number of states, counties, cities, senators, representatives, state and local governments, republicans won.  None of that matters though, because that's not the game that was being played.  The electoral college could still do its actual fucking job and send it to the House, in which case the Republicans will select a non-trump President, 85% of the population will breathe a huge sigh of relief, 15% will never shut up about it until they die.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 09, 2016, 02:20:28 PM

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

You keep saying this because you are trying to delegitimize Trump.  I'm not trying to delegitimize anyone.  Getting more votes than anyone else does not constitute winning the popular vote.  Getting a majority of the popular vote is winning.  More people voted for someone else than voted for HRC.  More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump.

There's a thousand different ways to slice the election aside from the actual rules, and only one shows HRC on top.  This erroneous "she won the popular vote" mantra.  By the only metric that matters, the actual rules of the game they were playing, Trump won the election.  If you go by popular vote, nobody won.  If you go by number of states, counties, cities, senators, representatives, state and local governments, republicans won.  None of that matters though, because that's not the game that was being played.  The electoral college could still do its actual fucking job and send it to the House, in which case the Republicans will select a non-trump President, 85% of the population will breathe a huge sigh of relief, 15% will never shut up about it until they die.

Popular vote - the percentage of votes cast by the electorate.

You can argue that too many people couldn't be bothered to vote, so Clinton wasn't voted for by the majority of Americans.  That's perfectly true.  She did win the popular vote though.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 09, 2016, 02:38:08 PM

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

You keep saying this because you are trying to delegitimize Trump.  I'm not trying to delegitimize anyone.  Getting more votes than anyone else does not constitute winning the popular vote.  Getting a majority of the popular vote is winning.  More people voted for someone else than voted for HRC.  More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump.

There's a thousand different ways to slice the election aside from the actual rules, and only one shows HRC on top.  This erroneous "she won the popular vote" mantra.  By the only metric that matters, the actual rules of the game they were playing, Trump won the election.  If you go by popular vote, nobody won.  If you go by number of states, counties, cities, senators, representatives, state and local governments, republicans won.  None of that matters though, because that's not the game that was being played.  The electoral college could still do its actual fucking job and send it to the House, in which case the Republicans will select a non-trump President, 85% of the population will breathe a huge sigh of relief, 15% will never shut up about it until they die.

Are you honestly trying to argue that winning a majority of votes cast means that she didn't win the popular vote? What the ever living fuck? It was kind of fun to read the mental squirming through that bit of illogic, however.

Also, it wasn't just California that voted mostly for HRC. Even better, if you do the statistics by age my generation overwhelmingly supported Clinton. You know, the young people who will be most affected in the long-term because of Trump's inevitable (at this point) fuckup.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 09, 2016, 02:46:07 PM
Clinton didn't win a majority of votes.  Only a plurality.  That's still "winning" in my mind
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 09, 2016, 08:28:24 PM
Clinton didn't win a majority of votes.  Only a plurality.  That's still "winning" in my mind

Yeah, also in parliamentary democracies, when a party has a plurality of the seats, it's called winning and they get the first shot at forming the government. So, both are winning, one is just winning by more.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 12, 2016, 04:49:29 AM

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

You keep saying this because you are trying to delegitimize Trump.  I'm not trying to delegitimize anyone.  Getting more votes than anyone else does not constitute winning the popular vote.  Getting a majority of the popular vote is winning.  More people voted for someone else than voted for HRC.  More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump.

There's a thousand different ways to slice the election aside from the actual rules, and only one shows HRC on top.  This erroneous "she won the popular vote" mantra.  By the only metric that matters, the actual rules of the game they were playing, Trump won the election.  If you go by popular vote, nobody won.  If you go by number of states, counties, cities, senators, representatives, state and local governments, republicans won.  None of that matters though, because that's not the game that was being played.  The electoral college could still do its actual fucking job and send it to the House, in which case the Republicans will select a non-trump President, 85% of the population will breathe a huge sigh of relief, 15% will never shut up about it until they die.

You're forgetting we're in the post-fact era. Now being very, very slightly less unpopular than your rival is something to be proud of - getting a majority or people to vote for you is apparently no longer the point; simply use whatever slant one can to delegitimize one's opponent, especially if they won fairly.


ETA; still no fuckin' idea why people are still on about the popular vote. It doesn't matter, it never has, and the electoral college is working as designed. Thankfully Hillary Clinton will never be president; sadly Trump will. Write your party, tell them to find better candidates next time.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 12, 2016, 04:56:55 AM
Sometimes people who are 2k miles away from one another do not see things the same way, even if presented with the same information. Those lines can allow greater freedom, except of course when we try to make it just one 300mil person blob.

Great point. I like the argument that those lines allow greater freedom.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 12, 2016, 07:00:50 AM

Clinton won the popular vote, because she got more votes than anyone else.  That's what winning means.

You keep saying this because you are trying to delegitimize Trump.  I'm not trying to delegitimize anyone.  Getting more votes than anyone else does not constitute winning the popular vote.  Getting a majority of the popular vote is winning.  More people voted for someone else than voted for HRC.  More people voted for someone else than voted for Trump.

There's a thousand different ways to slice the election aside from the actual rules, and only one shows HRC on top.  This erroneous "she won the popular vote" mantra.  By the only metric that matters, the actual rules of the game they were playing, Trump won the election.  If you go by popular vote, nobody won.  If you go by number of states, counties, cities, senators, representatives, state and local governments, republicans won.  None of that matters though, because that's not the game that was being played.  The electoral college could still do its actual fucking job and send it to the House, in which case the Republicans will select a non-trump President, 85% of the population will breathe a huge sigh of relief, 15% will never shut up about it until they die.

You're forgetting we're in the post-fact era. Now being very, very slightly less unpopular than your rival is something to be proud of - getting a majority or people to vote for you is apparently no longer the point; simply use whatever slant one can to delegitimize one's opponent, especially if they won fairly.


ETA; still no fuckin' idea why people are still on about the popular vote. It doesn't matter, it never has, and the electoral college is working as designed. Thankfully Hillary Clinton will never be president; sadly Trump will. Write your party, tell them to find better candidates next time.

While you're correct that the winner of the popular vote doesn't matter and never has, Sol was responding specifically to this comment:

Neither candidate won the popular vote.

That comment is factually incorrect, which Sol pointed out.  Sol brought it up to correct the statement made by TheOldestYoungMan.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 12, 2016, 07:06:34 AM
Clinton didn't win a majority of votes.  Only a plurality.  That's still "winning" in my mind

Yeah, also in parliamentary democracies, when a party has a plurality of the seats, it's called winning and they get the first shot at forming the government. So, both are winning, one is just winning by more.

Plurality of seats doesn't necessitate a majority of votes, much like the United State's system - Donald Trump won a majority of electoral seats, and a party can control the senate without winning a plurality of actual votes.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 12, 2016, 07:41:23 AM
Well, that didn't take long - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/12/12/china-trumps-taiwan-comments-spark-serious-concern/95323960/

Quote
“We urge the new U.S. leader and government to fully understand the seriousness of the Taiwan issue, and to continue to stick to the one-China policy,” Geng said, according to the AP.

The Global Times, a state-run Chinese newspaper, said in an editorial Monday that Trump was “as ignorant as a child."
 

If we though fighting in the Middle East was a tremendous waste, it's just an appetizer to fighting the Far East.  Yay Future!
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on December 12, 2016, 08:05:25 AM
Well, that didn't take long - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/12/12/china-trumps-taiwan-comments-spark-serious-concern/95323960/

Quote
“We urge the new U.S. leader and government to fully understand the seriousness of the Taiwan issue, and to continue to stick to the one-China policy,” Geng said, according to the AP.

The Global Times, a state-run Chinese newspaper, said in an editorial Monday that Trump was “as ignorant as a child."
 

If we though fighting in the Middle East was a tremendous waste, it's just an appetizer to fighting the Far East.  Yay Future!


It's negotiation.....once China agrees to give Trump Hotels and Casinos a 70 year monopoly on gambling in shanghai and preferential treatment on future development products and to promise to only serve Trump water at future conferences...then we will be back to the one China policy.   See all ok, not conflicts of interest.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 12, 2016, 01:33:52 PM


ETA; still no fuckin' idea why people are still on about the popular vote. It doesn't matter, it never has, and the electoral college is working as designed. Thankfully Hillary Clinton will never be president; sadly Trump will. Write your party, tell them to find better candidates next time.

It doesn't decide the election, but it certainly matters in that it indicates the amount of support each candidate received.  46-48 is much different from 20-80, for example
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 12, 2016, 02:31:25 PM


ETA; still no fuckin' idea why people are still on about the popular vote. It doesn't matter, it never has, and the electoral college is working as designed. Thankfully Hillary Clinton will never be president; sadly Trump will. Write your party, tell them to find better candidates next time.

It doesn't decide the election, but it certainly matters in that it indicates the amount of support each candidate received.  46-48 is much different from 20-80, for example

I only bring up the popular vote when people here claim that Trump has some sort of mandate, that his election is reflective of the mood of the country, or that the people support him.

He won the election, but not because he convinced more people to vote for him.  More people voted for someone else.  He didn't motivate the electorate, because he got basically the same number of votes as Romney and McCain.  He only won the election because he effectively suppressed democratic voter turnout.

He still won the election, but let's be honest about the details of how he did it.  It wasn't by being more popular than his opponent.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 12, 2016, 02:40:13 PM
I'm hardly certain Trump suppressed democratic voter turnout. Hillary and the DNC own that.

Trump won the election because a majority of areas of the USA supported him over the other candidates.  I mean, he flipped Florida, and Michigan etc. I just can't get behind any popular vote discussion because it's completely unhelpful and unproductive - either work within the Trump system to make things better, or get a party that can put up candidates that have broader appeal than Trump and win a damn election. Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 12, 2016, 02:41:31 PM
I'm hardly certain Trump suppressed democratic voter turnout. Hillary and the DNC own that.

Trump won the election because a majority of areas of the USA supported him over the other candidates.  I mean, he flipped Florida, and Michigan etc. I just can't get behind any popular vote discussion because it's completely unhelpful and unproductive - either work within the Trump system to make things better, or get a party that can put up candidates that have broader appeal than Trump and win a damn election. Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.
Actually the GOP owns that.  They are been in the business of voter suppression for years now.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 12, 2016, 02:42:45 PM
I'm hardly certain Trump suppressed democratic voter turnout. Hillary and the DNC own that.

Trump won the election because a majority of areas of the USA supported him over the other candidates.  I mean, he flipped Florida, and Michigan etc. I just can't get behind any popular vote discussion because it's completely unhelpful and unproductive - either work within the Trump system to make things better, or get a party that can put up candidates that have broader appeal than Trump and win a damn election. Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

The only reason it merits any kind of discussion is that people in this thread (and the president elect) are disputing an objective fact. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 12, 2016, 02:48:18 PM
I'm hardly certain Trump suppressed democratic voter turnout. Hillary and the DNC own that.

Trump won the election because a majority of areas of the USA supported him over the other candidates.  I mean, he flipped Florida, and Michigan etc. I just can't get behind any popular vote discussion because it's completely unhelpful and unproductive - either work within the Trump system to make things better, or get a party that can put up candidates that have broader appeal than Trump and win a damn election. Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

This is a slightly different directly, but voter turnout suppression is systematic in some states:
https://www.brennancenter.org/voting-restrictions-first-time-2016

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/inside-the-republican-creation-of-the-north-carolina-voting-bill-dubbed-the-monster-law/2016/09/01/79162398-6adf-11e6-8225-fbb8a6fc65bc_story.html?utm_term=.419779dfb253
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 12, 2016, 11:33:55 PM
I'm hardly certain Trump suppressed democratic voter turnout. Hillary and the DNC own that.

Trump won the election because a majority of areas of the USA supported him over the other candidates.  I mean, he flipped Florida, and Michigan etc. I just can't get behind any popular vote discussion because it's completely unhelpful and unproductive - either work within the Trump system to make things better, or get a party that can put up candidates that have broader appeal than Trump and win a damn election. Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

This is a slightly different directly, but voter turnout suppression is systematic in some states:
https://www.brennancenter.org/voting-restrictions-first-time-2016

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/inside-the-republican-creation-of-the-north-carolina-voting-bill-dubbed-the-monster-law/2016/09/01/79162398-6adf-11e6-8225-fbb8a6fc65bc_story.html?utm_term=.419779dfb253

It should also be noted that these laws are important because they affect almost exclusively the poor and POC. You know, people who tend to vote Dem. They're so good at it that one law was struck down because of its "surgical precision" in marginalizing only those groups. And if you don't think Republicans know about this when they enact these laws, then I've heard of this Nigerian prince that needs your help. All you have to do is send me some money and....
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 12, 2016, 11:53:27 PM
Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

This is SUCH an interesting point I just can't stop thinking about it.

So you're totally fine with the country electing a President who loses the election by 2%, as long as he wins the electoral college.  Would you also be fine with electing someone who lost by 90%?  At what point do you think the country's changing population distribution will warrant changing the electoral college?

If a 2% loss is fine, how about a 5% loss or a 10% loss or a 25% loss?  Surely there comes a point when we would all recognize that an electoral system that habitually elected the minority candidate must be fundamentally flawed, right?  In theory, it's people who are voting and the electoral college is supposed to just be a convenient way of counting up the people.

So as of today 40% of the most recent presidential elections have elected the candidate who did NOT get the most votes.  What if it was the next five in a row?  Would we, as a nation, complain if the minority candidate won in more than half of elections?  How about more than 80% of elections?  When do we decide it's broken?  Shouldn't something as important as American democracy work more than 60% of the time?

Because I don't see this problem going away anytime soon.  It appears to be fundamentally broken, and I'm just trying to identify some ground rules for what it would take to convince people that America's best interests are not being served here. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 12:54:00 AM
Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

This is SUCH an interesting point I just can't stop thinking about it.

So you're totally fine with the country electing a President who loses the election by 2%, as long as he wins the electoral college.  Would you also be fine with electing someone who lost by 90%?  At what point do you think the country's changing population distribution will warrant changing the electoral college?

If a 2% loss is fine, how about a 5% loss or a 10% loss or a 25% loss?  Surely there comes a point when we would all recognize that an electoral system that habitually elected the minority candidate must be fundamentally flawed, right?  In theory, it's people who are voting and the electoral college is supposed to just be a convenient way of counting up the people.

So as of today 40% of the most recent presidential elections have elected the candidate who did NOT get the most votes.  What if it was the next five in a row?  Would we, as a nation, complain if the minority candidate won in more than half of elections?  How about more than 80% of elections?  When do we decide it's broken?  Shouldn't something as important as American democracy work more than 60% of the time?

Because I don't see this problem going away anytime soon.  It appears to be fundamentally broken, and I'm just trying to identify some ground rules for what it would take to convince people that America's best interests are not being served here.

Don't forget to disband the senate while you're at it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 03:53:53 AM
Arguing over 1-2% of actual voters is such a waste of time.

This is SUCH an interesting point I just can't stop thinking about it.

So you're totally fine with the country electing a President who loses the election by 2%, as long as he wins the electoral college.  Would you also be fine with electing someone who lost by 90%?  At what point do you think the country's changing population distribution will warrant changing the electoral college?

If a 2% loss is fine, how about a 5% loss or a 10% loss or a 25% loss?  Surely there comes a point when we would all recognize that an electoral system that habitually elected the minority candidate must be fundamentally flawed, right?  In theory, it's people who are voting and the electoral college is supposed to just be a convenient way of counting up the people.

So as of today 40% of the most recent presidential elections have elected the candidate who did NOT get the most votes.  What if it was the next five in a row?  Would we, as a nation, complain if the minority candidate won in more than half of elections?  How about more than 80% of elections?  When do we decide it's broken?  Shouldn't something as important as American democracy work more than 60% of the time?

Because I don't see this problem going away anytime soon.  It appears to be fundamentally broken, and I'm just trying to identify some ground rules for what it would take to convince people that America's best interests are not being served here.

America is not a democracy. So I don't hold its elections to the same standards I might hold a democracy. Personally, I'd be fine with up to approximately 8% leeway with popular vote. I don't feel that the candidate that gets 1 single more vote than the other should automatically take all, nor do I feel that a 2% majority is a reason to run roughshod over minority views.   

I would absolutely support moving towards a more 'representative republic' to increase the power minority views have in the United States' government. It wouldn't have changed this election results, but would be my preferred route for improvement.

As far as convincing people that it is not in America's best interest to protect minority views while providing a stop-gap against mob rule or a completely dangerous populist candidate; I'm not sure you've presented enough evidence that a simple majority vote would provide these protections while greatly increasing the 'will of the people'.  I'm also of the opinion that in America, people often get the government they deserve, as unfortunate as that is, though it doesn't particularly address the point of improvements.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: former player on December 13, 2016, 04:22:50 AM
The US might be more of a representative democracy if it did away with gerrymandering, which looks utterly corrupt.   I guess the College of Electors is another form of gerrymandering - unless it does its job and saves the US from a corrupt, ill-informed, anti-intellectual idiot who is in hock to the two biggest totalitarian regimes in the world.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on December 13, 2016, 05:49:07 AM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 06:01:37 AM
The US might be more of a representative democracy if it did away with gerrymandering, which looks utterly corrupt.   I guess the College of Electors is another form of gerrymandering - unless it does its job and saves the US from a corrupt, ill-informed, anti-intellectual idiot who is in hock to the two biggest totalitarian regimes in the world.

I think it could be argued that the electoral college is not gerrymandered, unless you think that state borders were purposely drawn to group as few people into them as possible for the purpose of winning presidential elections.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 13, 2016, 07:16:34 AM
Well the impacts are becoming real:

Foreign government involvement into the election:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/us/politics/mcconnell-supports-inquiry-of-russian-hacking-during-election.html?_r=0
http://www.wsj.com/articles/republican-leaders-join-call-for-probe-of-russian-hacking-of-u-s-election-1481589660

Twitter concerns:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/12/donald-trump-questions-us-commitment-to-one-china-policy
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-twitter-national-security-232518
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/04/politics/trump-china-tweets/index.html

Cabinet concerns:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/09/donald-trump-cabinet-republican-appointments-campaign
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-12-06/concerns-in-congress-rise-over-donald-trumps-militarizing-his-cabinet

Secretary of state ties to Russia:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/tillerson-trump-1.3893830
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-rex-tillerson-secretary-of-state-20161212-story.html

Avoiding security briefing because he is "smart":
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5087686291001/#sp=show-clips

And now compromising US Interests:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkey-threatening-trumps-business-to-sway-policy-report/
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/donald-trump-foreign-business-deals-jeopardize-us-531140.html

There is a lot of smoke here, (any many more Google show me) where there is this much smoke, there has to be fire.   


Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Roland of Gilead on December 13, 2016, 07:21:41 AM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Malaysia41 on December 13, 2016, 07:26:00 AM
where there is this much smoke, there has to be fire.   

If this election cycle has taught me anything it's that this adage is no longer true.

That said - I see lots of FIRE in this here smoke. So in the case of our president elect, the adage holds up.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 07:34:33 AM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

I find this argument fascinating. "Land" is apparently people now?  And certain people's votes (because they have the unpatriotic audacity to live in a city) should matter less than others.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 13, 2016, 08:00:01 AM
On conflicts of interest:
(Long but interesting)
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/donald-trump-foreign-business-deals-jeopardize-us-531140.html
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Roland of Gilead on December 13, 2016, 08:09:14 AM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

I find this argument fascinating. "Land" is apparently people now?  And certain people's votes (because they have the unpatriotic audacity to live in a city) should matter more than others.

Actually, it is reasonable.   A place like North Dakota can be very harsh but produces quite a bit of resources for the USA (we drove through there and the giant farms were everywhere).   Giving them a small say in who is president seems to be fair compared to the winters they must endure to live there.

There is a reason everyone crowds to the coasts...it is a very desirable area with decent climate.   So should we reward those who already have the best place to live with the sole power to choose who is president?

If you are so upset about it, you could move from the city to a place like North Dakota and vote there.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Scandium on December 13, 2016, 08:23:52 AM
It is just one messed up state with too many people that skews the whole country.

I wasn't talking about an enclave, I was talking about how most of the people in the United States voted.  If you ignored the artificially drawn lines and just asked American citizens what they wanted, Clinton would be our next president.

But that's not how we elect presidents in America, land of the free.  In fact, in 40% of the most recent presidential elections, we have elected the person who did NOT get the most votes.

Is everyone really okay with that?  Will we still be okay with it if it starts happening every single time?  Will we be okay with it if we start electing the person who loses the vote by 10%, or by 75%?

Can we please stop whining about the popular vote? It's silly and clearly pointless. It means nothing. That's not how the election works so we have no idea who most Americans wanted to be president. Until we have an election were the popular vote matters we just don't know. Having the election by one set of rules, then declaring that the looser won according to these other rules that nobody played by is just stupid, and frankly looks pathetic.

If it was a simple popular vote election Trump would have campaigned in CA and NY. Would that have gotten more votes for him there? Maybe. Clinton could have campaigned in.. states other than FL, OH and PA? Maybe her ignoring WI and Michigan wouldn't have been so bad.. Millions of people don't vote, for the simple reason that their vote don't matter. If you're a republican in a deep blue state, or vise versa why would you bother? What would the balance of non-voting republicans vs democrats be? No idea. Trump is a horrible scumbag, but he won according to how the rules are set up. Deal with it.

PS: I almost hate Clinton as much right now for managing to somehow loose to this pathetic Berlusconi-Stalin hybrid with a spray tan. Seriously, if you can't beat that you're insanely incompetent and clearly don't deserve to be president! So in that regard I'm glad she's not.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 08:31:53 AM
PS: I almost hate Clinton as much right now for managing to somehow loose to this pathetic Berlusconi-Stalin hybrid with a spray tan. Seriously, if you can't beat that you're insanely incompetent and clearly don't deserve to be president! So in that regard I'm glad she's not.

I don't hate Clinton for running. I certainly don't hate her for losing. I don't think she would have been a good president, and I don't support most of her policies.  I do hate the people who thought she could beat Trump for not nominating or voting for someone who could.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Scandium on December 13, 2016, 08:43:42 AM
Actually, it is reasonable.   A place like North Dakota can be very harsh but produces quite a bit of resources for the USA (we drove through there and the giant farms were everywhere).   Giving them a small say in who is president seems to be fair compared to the winters they must endure to live there.

There is a reason everyone crowds to the coasts...it is a very desirable area with decent climate.   So should we reward those who already have the best place to live with the sole power to choose who is president?

If you are so upset about it, you could move from the city to a place like North Dakota and vote there.

Fascinating! Can you tell me some other criteria we should use to decide how much more on person's vote should count over another? So far we have:
- Relative harshness of climate (how do we measure this? Average temperatures? Minimum? Rainfall?)
- Economic output. Per person per sq-mi? GDP/person/sq-mi? In this regard I think cities would still crush rural areas though. And isn't extractive industries just taking advantage of what belongs to everyone? Google create value "out of thin air"...
- Geographic area is more important than number of citizens

Let's think of some more:
- Tax payments? I pay more, shouldn't I have a larger say??
- More miles driven should have more say in transportation policy?
- Hawaii is so nice those people get zero votes.
- Old people will die soon so they get no votes, and:
- Babies have a long life ahead, they get double.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 08:44:36 AM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

I find this argument fascinating. "Land" is apparently people now?  And certain people's votes (because they have the unpatriotic audacity to live in a city) should matter more than others.

Actually, it is reasonable.   A place like North Dakota can be very harsh but produces quite a bit of resources for the USA (we drove through there and the giant farms were everywhere).   Giving them a small say in who is president seems to be fair compared to the winters they must endure to live there.

There is a reason everyone crowds to the coasts...it is a very desirable area with decent climate.   So should we reward those who already have the best place to live with the sole power to choose who is president?

If you are so upset about it, you could move from the city to a place like North Dakota and vote there.

I used to live in a place like that. In fact, I was born and grew up in a place like that. The opportunities for me were so few, and people's disdain for my beliefs and values was so oppressive that I moved away.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on December 13, 2016, 08:53:19 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 09:20:11 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.

It is not logical to protect the rights of minority voters. It is still important, however.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on December 13, 2016, 09:22:32 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.

It is not logical to protect the rights of minority voters. It is still important, however.
I wasn't thinking of minority voters, I was thinking of voters in some states have less voting power than others due to the EC set up.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 09:30:27 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.

It is not logical to protect the rights of minority voters. It is still important, however.
I wasn't thinking of minority voters, I was thinking of voters in some states have less voting power than others due to the EC set up.

Quite. Especially because the voters who have more power due to the EC set up are almost all white.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 09:34:37 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.

It is not logical to protect the rights of minority voters. It is still important, however.
I wasn't thinking of minority voters, I was thinking of voters in some states have less voting power than others due to the EC set up.

Quite. Especially because the voters who have more power due to the EC set up are almost all white.

O Jesus, its always the race card with you isn't it Kris.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 09:36:50 AM
They have no logical argument for unequal voting rights so they most deflect with the most absurd excuses. 
Bottom line is a pure power play and that is the real reason, but they can't just say that.

It is not logical to protect the rights of minority voters. It is still important, however.
I wasn't thinking of minority voters, I was thinking of voters in some states have less voting power than others due to the EC set up.

Quite. Especially because the voters who have more power due to the EC set up are almost all white.

O Jesus, its always the race card with you isn't it Kris.

No. It is not. But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 13, 2016, 09:45:09 AM
+1

So sorry people are offended when injustice is pointed out. Be offended by the unjustice instead.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 13, 2016, 09:45:56 AM
But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.

I think it does, as long as by "minority" you mean rural whites.

What could possibly be a better argument for protecting the minority's interest than electing the minority's candidate for president?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 13, 2016, 09:49:30 AM
The senate also provides a lot more power to low-population states.

But all of this was deliberate, you have to remember. The rural/urban divide existed (and was, in fact, personified) in Jefferson and Hamilton.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 09:50:14 AM
But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.

I think it does, as long as by "minority" you mean rural whites.

What could possibly be a better argument for protecting the minority's interest than electing the minority's candidate for president?

Sure. But it strikes me that the same people who would argue for the rectitude of protecting that "minority" would probably also protest strongly against any reform that would end up privileging any other "minority" that didn't happen to be white.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 09:55:04 AM
Define minority voter. Are you basing it on race, gender, geographic location, sexual orientation, etc. I feel like you are starting to play lose with the term minority voter.

While I agree that it is wrong that certain votes count less than others in the current system. I don't understand how it does anyone any good to try and draw conclusions about voluntary geographic location and skin color.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 13, 2016, 10:11:26 AM
Define minority voter. Are you basing it on race, gender, geographic location, sexual orientation, etc. I feel like you are starting to play lose with the term minority voter.

While I agree that it is wrong that certain votes count less than others in the current system. I don't understand how it does anyone any good to try and draw conclusions about voluntary geographic location and skin color.

So your contention is that (in your words) voluntary "minorities" (by way of geographic location) are rightfully offered better protections by way of a more influential vote than minorities by birth, who have no way of changing that status? Or should all of the inner city black people just move to North Dakota?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 10:11:50 AM
Metric Mouse brought up the term "minority" in this instance, by which I assume he is referring to rural white voters.

However, voluntary geographic location, as you point out, doesn't seem enough to qualify someone as a "minority." Especially when that person is white.

Given that, saying that the EC protects "minority" voters seems specious at best.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 10:14:38 AM
Define minority voter. Are you basing it on race, gender, geographic location, sexual orientation, etc. I feel like you are starting to play lose with the term minority voter.

While I agree that it is wrong that certain votes count less than others in the current system. I don't understand how it does anyone any good to try and draw conclusions about voluntary geographic location and skin color.

So your contention is that (in your words) voluntary "minorities" (by way of geographic location) are rightfully offered better protections by way of a more influential vote than minorities by birth, who have no way of changing that status? Or should all of the inner city black people just move to North Dakota?

I never said "rightfully". I actually agreed that the current system isn't right. I am objecting to Kris's statement that it's because they are white. That's all.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:15:41 AM
No. It is not. But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.

The minority of people who live in rural areas. While their racial demographics are similar, they have very different concerns, and very different interests than the majority of urban persons. The EC is one way to insure against their concerns being over-run by simple majority mob rule.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 10:15:58 AM
Metric Mouse brought up the term "minority" in this instance, by which I assume he is referring to rural white voters.

However, voluntary geographic location, as you point out, doesn't seem enough to qualify someone as a "minority." Especially when that person is white.

Given that, saying that the EC protects "minority" voters seems specious at best.

I agree with everythign you said with a slight mod.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 10:16:50 AM
Define minority voter. Are you basing it on race, gender, geographic location, sexual orientation, etc. I feel like you are starting to play lose with the term minority voter.

While I agree that it is wrong that certain votes count less than others in the current system. I don't understand how it does anyone any good to try and draw conclusions about voluntary geographic location and skin color.

So your contention is that (in your words) voluntary "minorities" (by way of geographic location) are rightfully offered better protections by way of a more influential vote than minorities by birth, who have no way of changing that status? Or should all of the inner city black people just move to North Dakota?

I never said "rightfully". I actually agreed that the current system isn't right. I am objecting to Kris's statement that it's because they are white. That's all.

When did I say it's "because" they are white? I said they are mostly white.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 10:17:46 AM
Metric Mouse brought up the term "minority" in this instance, by which I assume he is referring to rural white voters.

However, voluntary geographic location, as you point out, doesn't seem enough to qualify someone as a "minority." Especially when that person is white.

Given that, saying that the EC protects "minority" voters seems specious at best.

I agree with everythign you said with a slight mod.

White people are not yet a racial minority in this country. So you might not agree, but that does not change it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 10:20:19 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 13, 2016, 10:20:58 AM
Define minority voter. Are you basing it on race, gender, geographic location, sexual orientation, etc. I feel like you are starting to play lose with the term minority voter.

While I agree that it is wrong that certain votes count less than others in the current system. I don't understand how it does anyone any good to try and draw conclusions about voluntary geographic location and skin color.

So your contention is that (in your words) voluntary "minorities" (by way of geographic location) are rightfully offered better protections by way of a more influential vote than minorities by birth, who have no way of changing that status? Or should all of the inner city black people just move to North Dakota?

I never said "rightfully". I actually agreed that the current system isn't right. I am objecting to Kris's statement that it's because they are white. That's all.

Got it, thanks for clarifying. I will add that bringing up race in this context is still meaningful, not because of some "all Trump voters are racist" narrative, but because Trump played with racial identity politics far more blatantly than any recent candidate. Also and more importantly, I think it's fair to point out that the "minorities" many in this and other threads have been defending as needing to be protected from "mob rule" are only minorities in one narrowly defined way. Pointing out their race (by and large) is one way to highlight this fact. If you are all for the EC giving preferential advantages to one particular minority group, you should logically support things like affirmative action, oppose any and all voter suppression efforts, etc.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:22:14 AM
However, voluntary geographic location, as you point out, doesn't seem enough to qualify someone as a "minority."

Voluntarily choosing to live in an area that has very slightly less (percentage wise, though still massively greater, in absolute terms) voting power should not be a reason to remove voting power from others.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dycker1978 on December 13, 2016, 10:23:14 AM
No. It is not. But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.

The minority of people who live in rural areas. While their racial demographics are similar, they have very different concerns, and very different interests than the majority of urban persons. The EC is one way to insure against their concerns being over-run by simple majority mob rule.

I get a kick out of this. 

democracy - control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
"the intended extension of industrial democracy"

So we don't want majority rules then?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:23:47 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:26:08 AM


I get a kick out of this. 

democracy - control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.

What's you point?

As far as American elections and politics is concerned, this is a more important term: Republic
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 13, 2016, 10:28:21 AM
No. It is not. But it is worth pointing out a contradiction when it appears: that is, the EC does not protect the rights of minority voters.

The minority of people who live in rural areas. While their racial demographics are similar, they have very different concerns, and very different interests than the majority of urban persons. The EC is one way to insure against their concerns being over-run by simple majority mob rule.

I get a kick out of this. 

democracy - control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.
"the intended extension of industrial democracy"

So we don't want majority rules then?

No. I want checks and balances like with the House and Senate. One is majority rule the other allows the "minority states" and equal say.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 13, 2016, 10:29:15 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

It does have a play in that white voters, on average, have a more influential vote than nonwhite voters. This may be largely for geographic reasons but it remains a fact, and if someone is going to wax poetic about the importance of the EC to "protect the 'minority,'" I hope they have given serious additional thought to the many other minority groups in this country beyond those who voluntarily live in middle America.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:31:29 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

It does have a play in that white voters, on average, have a more influential vote than nonwhite voters. This may be largely for geographic reasons but it remains a fact, and if someone is going to wax poetic about the importance of the EC to "protect the 'minority,'" I hope they have given serious additional thought to the many other minority groups in this country beyond those who voluntarily live in middle America.

So if (insert problem) is based on voluntary conditions, then persons who are affected should move, yes?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 13, 2016, 10:32:49 AM
Somewhat on topic quote from Dan Rather today:
Quote
I think we should erect a monument built from materials impervious to the elements and list the names of all the elected officials and others in positions of power today in the United States who refuse to stand with the science on climate change.

We can put this monument on the coast - say off Miami - and have its base equal to the lapping waves of high tide. As sea levels rise, the monument will begin to be submerged, at increasingly greater depths. It will become a symbol of the cynicism, stupidity, and folly of our age. And it will be important for future generations to know who was responsible for this failure of action and imagination as this global crisis crescendoed. When I see Donald Trump cast doubt on climate change, I am deeply disappointed. When I see him appoint climate change deniers to key posts in his cabinet, I am deeply worried. When I see those in the scientific community and elsewhere pushing back, I am determined to bring these voices of reason to light.

Science is not a conclusion. It's a process. It's also about the real world. Not a post-truth world. If you're wrong as a scientist, it's hard to keep that hidden for very long because others will do an experiment and show the limitations of your earlier conclusions.

All these climate change deniers are denigrating the very nature of scientific discovery. It's the same enterprise that, in biological research, leads to the cures these climate deniers plead from their doctors, or the geological research that finds and extracts the raw materials that power these climate deniers' lives, or the physics that makes these climate deniers' modern technology work.

To cherry pick the science you like is to show you really don't understand much of anything. That is your right. But when it affects my life, that of my family, the future direction of my country, and the health of our planet, than the ignorance is far from harmless. The world must remember what is happening here and perhaps the judgement of history might induce some to the action we so desperately need.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 10:32:55 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

Not as far as I'm concerned. I'm a "one person, one vote" kind of gal.

But I'm working with the word "minority", which was brought up as a reason why people in NoDak, for example, should have their votes count more than people in California.

There are many ways to define "minority." I didn't bring the term up. But calling people from NoDak "minorities" as a reason their votes should count more seems pretty crazy, since they are not racial minorities, and their choice to live in a particular geographic location is just that: a choice.

My point being, "minority" seems like an argument that crumbles pretty quickly when one brings up the EC and tries to justify it that way.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Lagom on December 13, 2016, 10:35:21 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

It does have a play in that white voters, on average, have a more influential vote than nonwhite voters. This may be largely for geographic reasons but it remains a fact, and if someone is going to wax poetic about the importance of the EC to "protect the 'minority,'" I hope they have given serious additional thought to the many other minority groups in this country beyond those who voluntarily live in middle America.

So if (insert problem) is based on voluntary conditions, then persons who are affected should move, yes?

You're missing the point. I personally think the "if you don't like it, move" argument is asinine, no matter who is making it. But you and others are on record expressing concern that we not have "mob rule" in this country. The problem with that statement is that the EC only protects against that from a geographic standpoint. There are way more minority groups than rural middle Americans. Why should they be the only ones who benefit from this "protection?"
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 13, 2016, 10:41:35 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

Not as far as I'm concerned. I'm a "one person, one vote" kind of gal.

But I'm working with the word "minority", which was brought up as a reason why people in NoDak, for example, should have their votes count more than people in California.

There are many ways to define "minority." I didn't bring the term up. But calling people from NoDak "minorities" as a reason their votes should count more seems pretty crazy, since they are not racial minorities, and their choice to live in a particular geographic location is just that: a choice.

My point being, "minority" seems like an argument that crumbles pretty quickly when one brings up the EC and tries to justify it that way.

Before we get too far into semantics, can we just recognize that the term minority usually has to be interpreted within context? As a white male I am in a majority group (for now0, but I am still within a religious minority in this nation. As a person with a PhD, I am in an educational minority, etc... The use of the term minority does not automatically and equivocally invoke the race card.

The electoral college (as Sol discussed above) was set up as a way for states to select the president and to maintain a political balance of power between regions of the fledgling country. Different portions of the country had pretty different cultures. Slaves were also allotted 3/5 representation (but still not allowed to vote) to help balance that power too. Mathematically, more people in this country live in urban areas now. Rural voters are a mathematical minority. Rural votes have disproportionate power in the EC (and the senate).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 10:47:37 AM

You're missing the point. I personally think the "if you don't like it, move" argument is asinine, no matter who is making it. But you and others are on record expressing concern that we not have "mob rule" in this country. The problem with that statement is that the EC only protects against that from a geographic standpoint. There are way more minority groups than rural middle Americans. Why should they be the only ones who benefit from this "protection?"

I would never argue they are the only ones who should benefit from being protected from mob rule. I'm would just argue that EC protects this group, and its protections should not be removed lightly.  Just as I wouldn't argue that handicapped parking spaces should be moved further away, even though they benefit a minority of people (who don't get the same parking spaces; even other minorities); all minorities need protection from mob rule, even though not all laws can help all people at all times, sadly.

Edit: I've always found the 'if you don't like it, move' argument asinine as well, but it is popular among the 'bootstraps' crowd.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jrhampt on December 13, 2016, 10:48:52 AM
Somewhat on topic quote from Dan Rather today:
Quote
I think we should erect a monument built from materials impervious to the elements and list the names of all the elected officials and others in positions of power today in the United States who refuse to stand with the science on climate change.

We can put this monument on the coast - say off Miami - and have its base equal to the lapping waves of high tide. As sea levels rise, the monument will begin to be submerged, at increasingly greater depths. It will become a symbol of the cynicism, stupidity, and folly of our age. And it will be important for future generations to know who was responsible for this failure of action and imagination as this global crisis crescendoed. When I see Donald Trump cast doubt on climate change, I am deeply disappointed. When I see him appoint climate change deniers to key posts in his cabinet, I am deeply worried. When I see those in the scientific community and elsewhere pushing back, I am determined to bring these voices of reason to light.

Science is not a conclusion. It's a process. It's also about the real world. Not a post-truth world. If you're wrong as a scientist, it's hard to keep that hidden for very long because others will do an experiment and show the limitations of your earlier conclusions.

All these climate change deniers are denigrating the very nature of scientific discovery. It's the same enterprise that, in biological research, leads to the cures these climate deniers plead from their doctors, or the geological research that finds and extracts the raw materials that power these climate deniers' lives, or the physics that makes these climate deniers' modern technology work.

To cherry pick the science you like is to show you really don't understand much of anything. That is your right. But when it affects my life, that of my family, the future direction of my country, and the health of our planet, than the ignorance is far from harmless. The world must remember what is happening here and perhaps the judgement of history might induce some to the action we so desperately need.

Yes.  I've been enjoying dan rather's posts.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 10:51:01 AM
So when you say minority voter you are specifically talking about racial minorities?
Apparently race could have a play in voting power, but other factors should not.

Not as far as I'm concerned. I'm a "one person, one vote" kind of gal.

But I'm working with the word "minority", which was brought up as a reason why people in NoDak, for example, should have their votes count more than people in California.

There are many ways to define "minority." I didn't bring the term up. But calling people from NoDak "minorities" as a reason their votes should count more seems pretty crazy, since they are not racial minorities, and their choice to live in a particular geographic location is just that: a choice.

My point being, "minority" seems like an argument that crumbles pretty quickly when one brings up the EC and tries to justify it that way.

Before we get too far into semantics, can we just recognize that the term minority usually has to be interpreted within context? As a white male I am in a majority group (for now0, but I am still within a religious minority in this nation. As a person with a PhD, I am in an educational minority, etc... The use of the term minority does not automatically and equivocally invoke the race card.

The electoral college (as Sol discussed above) was set up as a way for states to select the president and to maintain a political balance of power between regions of the fledgling country. Different portions of the country had pretty different cultures. Slaves were also allotted 3/5 representation (but still not allowed to vote) to help balance that power too. Mathematically, more people in this country live in urban areas now. Rural voters are a mathematical minority. Rural votes have disproportionate power in the EC (and the senate).

Yes, of course.

The word "fledging" seems operative here.

In the twenty-first century, arguing the rectitude of the EC based on "minority" status seems less justifiable, however, and even arbitrary.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 11:01:14 AM
Before we get too far into semantics, can we just recognize that the term minority usually has to be interpreted within context? As a white male I am in a majority group (for now0, but I am still within a religious minority in this nation. As a person with a PhD, I am in an educational minority, etc... The use of the term minority does not automatically and equivocally invoke the race card.

The electoral college (as Sol discussed above) was set up as a way for states to select the president and to maintain a political balance of power between regions of the fledgling country. Different portions of the country had pretty different cultures. Slaves were also allotted 3/5 representation (but still not allowed to vote) to help balance that power too. Mathematically, more people in this country live in urban areas now. Rural voters are a mathematical minority. Rural votes have disproportionate power in the EC (and the senate).

Yes, of course.

The word "fledging" seems operative here.

In the twenty-first century, arguing the rectitude of the EC based on "minority" status seems less justifiable, however, and even arbitrary.

I think the operative word is Republic. The United States is a Republic of states - those with smaller populations have their power balanced with states with larger population. This would be a problem in a democracy; thankfully the United States is no a pure democracy and thus governmental checks and balances are provided.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 11:34:15 AM
Republic is really not the issue.
Germany is a republic of states but does not have these problems.
The issue is purely the election system of First Past the Post.

Great point. They also have an electoral college. So perhaps we are indeed focusing on the wrong issue.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 13, 2016, 11:47:22 AM
Republic is really not the issue.
Germany is a republic of states but does not have these problems.
The issue is purely the election system of First Past the Post.

Great point. They also have an electoral college. So perhaps we are indeed focusing on the wrong issue.
Yes, but winner-take-all is so inherently intuitive and satisfying to capitalists! (take with humor)
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 12:03:26 PM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 13, 2016, 12:04:49 PM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?

according to many of the founding fathers, the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes."
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 13, 2016, 12:08:51 PM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?

according to many of the founding fathers, the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes."

And that is exactly the problem with system they created, and the reason I think it should be changed.  We're not the same country we were back then.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 13, 2016, 12:11:36 PM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?

according to many of the founding fathers, the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes."

And that is exactly the problem with system they created, and the reason I think it should be changed.  We're not the same country we were back then.

Agreed. And a lot of that change has to do with things like widespread public education.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 12:13:25 PM
How is it fair that my vote counts less than someone else’s?  The EC needs to go away.

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?

according to many of the founding fathers, the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes."

And that is exactly the problem with system they created, and the reason I think it should be changed.  We're not the same country we were back then.

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Metric Mouse on December 13, 2016, 12:17:34 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 13, 2016, 12:18:09 PM

Damn straight!  The country should just be run by the coasts and the districts in the middle should stfu.

Of course not, the country should be run by its people, each person receiving one vote.  Should we also give rich people extra votes just so the poor and middle class  don't run the country?

according to many of the founding fathers, the answer would be an emphatic, "Yes."

And that is exactly the problem with system they created, and the reason I think it should be changed.  We're not the same country we were back then.

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.
[/quote]
They tried that with the EC, and that seems to be failing us.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 13, 2016, 12:29:53 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

Vox just published the transcript of an interview with a Trump voter. Her family had gone without health insurance for two years before ACA. After ACA, they got insurance, and her husband was diagnosed with non-alcoholic cirrhosis (because he didn't get regular LFTs as recommended for the meds he was on). Now he needs a transplant.

She voted for Trump, and is surprised that they're making a serious run at repealing ACA, and don't appear to have a plan.

It was equal parts sad and infuriating. I don't think she should lose her voting rights, but good god people.

edit: found it http://www.vox.com/2016/12/13/13901874/obamacare-trump-voter-health-insurance-repeal
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on December 13, 2016, 12:34:03 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

Whoa! never thought HRC losing would get the libs to think we need to bring back Jim Crow.

I guess if we are being honest they would want it more of an oligarchy. something like only those with graduate level education and answering a few questions 'correctly.'

"Do you agree with the following statements..."



edit; not just picking on you DC, people have been alluding to this for a while now in the this thread, and others.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 12:35:23 PM
There are no such requirements to become an elector, are there?

And metric, yes it's ridiculous but that's my point.  If you are going to make arbitrary weights, at least make the ones that will prevent the inherent problems of mob rule
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2016, 12:35:50 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

Whoa! never thought HRC losing would get the libs to think we need to bring back Jim Crow.

I guess if we are being honest they would want it more of an oligarchy. something like only those with graduate level education and answering a few questions 'correctly.'

"Do you agree with the following statements..."

I'm pretty sure Dragoncar was not actually advocating this...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 12:36:37 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

Whoa! never thought HRC losing would get the libs to think we need to bring back Jim Crow.

I guess if we are being honest they would want it more of an oligarchy. something like only those with graduate level education and answering a few questions 'correctly.'

"Do you agree with the following statements..."

This characterization is as preposterous as saying conservatives want only billionaires to run the country... oh wait
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: hoping2retire35 on December 13, 2016, 12:58:42 PM
Well, you are not going to get enough states to agree to break up the EC, so the next best option is to break up california.

HRC won it by a margin almost twice her national lead, in absolute numbers. Nationally;1.3, Cali; 3.4.

every additional state would automatically get two additional senators and EC votes. It would be a new blue wall.

thrice
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 01:03:57 PM
Well, you are not going to get enough states to agree to break up the EC, so the next best option is to break up california.

HRC won it by a margin almost twice her national lead, in absolute numbers. Nationally;1.3, Cali; 3.4.

every additional state would automatically get two additional senators and EC votes. It would be a new blue wall.

only if divided in horizontal slices (with each slide including coast).  Vertical slices would create a red wall
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 13, 2016, 01:06:48 PM
Well, you are not going to get enough states to agree to break up the EC, so the next best option is to break up california.

HRC won it by a margin almost twice her national lead, in absolute numbers. Nationally;1.3, Cali; 3.4.

every additional state would automatically get two additional senators and EC votes. It would be a new blue wall.

Speaking of new states ... in reading through the 2016 Republican platform, I noticed support for Puerto Rican statehood, which I thought was odd. The only explanation I could come up (and supported by no actual knowledge or facts) was that maybe there's a large population of Catholics who would vote Republican based on abortion?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: BuffaloStache on December 13, 2016, 01:18:41 PM
only if divided in horizontal slices (with each slide including coast).  Vertical slices would create a red wall

This. I spent almost a year in Eastern California  (the desert), and never encountered so many angry conservatives in my life.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 13, 2016, 01:28:19 PM

I don't know if direct democracy is good for the country, but it's certainly fair.

And if we are really going to weight votes "for the good of the country," we should probably do it by education and intelligence, not by geography.

Ah yes - diplomas and intelligence quotients instead of voter id's.  Certainly that will not disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

If it makes you feel better we could just get a couple celebrities telling the public that voting gave their kid autism . . . the net effect would be the same.  Millions of stupid people stop voting.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bacchi on December 13, 2016, 01:32:31 PM
Vox just published the transcript of an interview with a Trump voter. Her family had gone without health insurance for two years before ACA. After ACA, they got insurance, and her husband was diagnosed with non-alcoholic cirrhosis (because he didn't get regular LFTs as recommended for the meds he was on). Now he needs a transplant.

She voted for Trump, and is surprised that they're making a serious run at repealing ACA, and don't appear to have a plan.

It was equal parts sad and infuriating. I don't think she should lose her voting rights, but good god people.

edit: found it http://www.vox.com/2016/12/13/13901874/obamacare-trump-voter-health-insurance-repeal

She thought it was one of those "He didn't really mean it when he said..." statements that wasn't supposed to be literal.

You reap what you sow.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: jim555 on December 13, 2016, 01:50:08 PM
Vox just published the transcript of an interview with a Trump voter. Her family had gone without health insurance for two years before ACA. After ACA, they got insurance, and her husband was diagnosed with non-alcoholic cirrhosis (because he didn't get regular LFTs as recommended for the meds he was on). Now he needs a transplant.

She voted for Trump, and is surprised that they're making a serious run at repealing ACA, and don't appear to have a plan.

It was equal parts sad and infuriating. I don't think she should lose her voting rights, but good god people.

edit: found it http://www.vox.com/2016/12/13/13901874/obamacare-trump-voter-health-insurance-repeal

She thought it was one of those "He didn't really mean it when he said..." statements that wasn't supposed to be literal.

You reap what you sow.

Reminds me of a story I read last year.  Man losing sight blames Obamacare.  He didn't sign up in open enrollment and his state didn't expand Medicaid.  Yet he is still a Republican.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/health-care/article20696283.html
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: asiljoy on December 13, 2016, 03:57:44 PM
Well, you are not going to get enough states to agree to break up the EC, so the next best option is to break up california.

HRC won it by a margin almost twice her national lead, in absolute numbers. Nationally;1.3, Cali; 3.4.

every additional state would automatically get two additional senators and EC votes. It would be a new blue wall.

thrice

Would letting the House grow proportionally a la something like the Wyoming Rule also work, since it would also increase the number of electors and even out the ratio so Californians are back to having similar power per vote as the smaller states?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dividendman on December 13, 2016, 04:39:48 PM
These are all wonderful ideas.

Of course the problem with electoral reform is that you first have to win (usually some kind of super-majority) in the current way. If you win in the current way.... why do you want to change it again? And so it goes...
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ender on December 13, 2016, 05:47:26 PM
Reminds me of a story I read last year.  Man losing sight blames Obamacare.  He didn't sign up in open enrollment and his state didn't expand Medicaid.  Yet he is still a Republican.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/health-care/article20696283.html

There are plenty of people who are rather vocal about feeling they should pay more in taxes than they do -- but who don't voluntarily do so.

Plenty of people have incompatible beliefs on both the R and D side of the aisle.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: ender on December 13, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
Wait wait wait, there is a massive difference between thinking one (and others in one's situation) should pay more taxes and 'voluntarily' doing so.

I strongly believe I could easily afford higher taxes and would gladly do so if this would lead to a fairer and better society overall. But voluntarily paying more tax (as if that were even possible) wouldn't change a thing and not lead to a more just tax code.

You believe A but voluntarily choose to act contrary to A for <justifications>.

I get that it's different than another person choosing to act differently than his beliefs. Or something.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 13, 2016, 06:48:29 PM
Reminds me of a story I read last year.  Man losing sight blames Obamacare.  He didn't sign up in open enrollment and his state didn't expand Medicaid.  Yet he is still a Republican.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/health-care/article20696283.html

There are plenty of people who are rather vocal about feeling they should pay more in taxes than they do -- but who don't voluntarily do so.

Plenty of people have incompatible beliefs on both the R and D side of the aisle.

First, people rarely feel that they personally should pay more in taxes, but fail to do so.  They feel that the tax framework should be different, despite the fact that they would end up having to pay more in taxes.  This is a well studied issue called collective action.

Second, blaming Obamacare for health problems while not taking advantage of Obamacare is equivalent to me complaining my taxes are too high while declining tax deductions passed by republicans and blaming the republicans to boot.  Nobody does that and your parallel is not apt.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 13, 2016, 07:27:41 PM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 08:15:37 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 14, 2016, 08:21:42 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
Many religions make donations part of being a good person/going into heaven so I would consider that come authority making them. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 08:34:16 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
Many religions make donations part of being a good person/going into heaven so I would consider that come authority making them.

Non-religious people (or people who are religious but are not required to give charity) give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it. /Correction
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bananarama on December 14, 2016, 08:34:57 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
I think you did interpret it wrong. It's not that Americans don’t give to charity, because we do. It's that no charity is large enough or has enough money to tackle nationwide problems. Also, the freeloader problem is still a problem. Also, plenty of people are threatened with eternal damnation and torture their entire childhoods and still manage to give zero fucks, so I don't think that's really an effective way to get people to part with their money.

Also, it's kind of a silly argument. Sure, people donate to charities all the time. Charities, however, aren't going to run school districts, inspect buildings for code (safety) violations, pave roads, run libraries, clean and maintain parks, enforce laws, care for orphans, create and inforce regulation protecting our health, etc. Taxes force everyone to pay their fair share of resources they either use directly themselves or that others currently use and they might someday use themselves.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 08:46:29 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
I think you did interpret it wrong. It's not that Americans don’t give to charity, because we do. It's that no charity is large enough or has enough money to tackle nationwide problems. Also, the freeloader problem is still a problem. Also, plenty of people are threatened with eternal damnation and torture their entire childhoods and still manage to give zero fucks, so I don't think that's really an effective way to get people to part with their money.

Also, it's kind of a silly argument. Sure, people donate to charities all the time. Charities, however, aren't going to run school districts, inspect buildings for code (safety) violations, pave roads, run libraries, clean and maintain parks, enforce laws, care for orphans, create and inforce regulation protecting our health, etc. Taxes force everyone to pay their fair share of resources they either use directly themselves or that others currently use and they might someday use themselves.

I understand waht you are saying. Charities have run schools, libraries, hospitals and taken care of orphans in the past. Actually, other than "enforce laws" the free market could handle everything else.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 14, 2016, 08:54:45 AM
Interesting that the "enforce laws only" societies have failed to outcompete the "solve the freerider problem by taxing people and building infrastructure/ensuring the common good" ones.

I mean, just weird, right?

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 08:58:50 AM
Interesting that the "enforce laws only" societies have failed to outcompete the "solve the freerider problem by taxing people and building infrastructure/ensuring the common good" ones.

I mean, just weird, right?

-W

What societies are you speaking of? The early stages of US society could be considered a "enforce laws only" society. The railroad industry and infrastructure was built without government tax money.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 14, 2016, 08:59:24 AM
Haha. All of them right now.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 14, 2016, 09:14:57 AM
Interesting that the "enforce laws only" societies have failed to outcompete the "solve the freerider problem by taxing people and building infrastructure/ensuring the common good" ones.

I mean, just weird, right?

-W

What societies are you speaking of? The early stages of US society could be considered a "enforce laws only" society. The railroad industry and infrastructure was built without government tax money.

The early railroad industry in the US is a great example of what happens when you allow free markets to determine things.

A whole bunch of railways were built.  Then the people who had built them became very wealthy, developed a monopoly, fixed prices, and raised prices to the point that they were strangling US development.  The problem became so bad that the American people forced the government to respond to the regular abuses of power.  That's why anti-trust legislation the ICC and Sherman Antitrust Act first came about.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: bananarama on December 14, 2016, 09:16:01 AM
Interesting that the "enforce laws only" societies have failed to outcompete the "solve the freerider problem by taxing people and building infrastructure/ensuring the common good" ones.

I mean, just weird, right?

-W

lol. Yes.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'd really not like to back to the Industrial Revolution and the quagmire of shit that was. No environmental protects, being unable to pay your debts (for whatever reason) was a criminal offense, orphanages were horrific, workers had no rights (and becoming dead due to working conditions was not terribly unusual), and slums were a reality. The church didn't help then, why would it make any real difference now?

Sometimes I feel like that's what the small government people really want - because the America of the 1800s certainly had fewer regulations and much more power in the hands of industry. It didn't work out so well for anybody not already a part of the industrial elite, but who knows. Maybe next time it'll be different?  Seriously, go look a some photos of London in the 19th century or New York slums or conditions in church run orphanages. Or even church run prisons (some of which were even intended to be /more/ humane than other options).

Interesting that the "enforce laws only" societies have failed to outcompete the "solve the freerider problem by taxing people and building infrastructure/ensuring the common good" ones.

I mean, just weird, right?

-W

What societies are you speaking of? The early stages of US society could be considered a "enforce laws only" society. The railroad industry and infrastructure was built without government tax money.

The early years of the US is not a golden era to harken back to, in any manner for any reason. It was a period of time that happened and was improved upon by subsequent generations. Your nostalgia glasses should be replaced by a thorough investigation of the actual realities of those years - and as a poor worker, not as a member of the class of elites whose names fill our history books. 

As for currently existing societies I can't name any - I honestly don't think any exist.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: deadlymonkey on December 14, 2016, 09:21:35 AM
Early railroads were privately owned, but don't fool yourself into thinking they weren't government financed. 
In reference to the intercontinental railroad:
Their efforts led to the Pacific Railroad Acts of 1862 and 1864, which provided several forms of assistance. Each railroad received its right-of-way along with a land grant of ten alternating sections on both sides of every mile of track (about 12,800 acres per mile); the government retained the sections in between. In addition, the companies received government bonds totaling $16,000 a mile for each twenty-mile section of track completed on the plains. For the plateau between the Rocky and Sierra Nevada Mountains the amount per mile went up to $32,000 per mile and for the mountain regions, $48,000. Each company could also issue its own first mortgage bonds for the same amount as the government bonds, relegating the latter to a second mortgage.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 09:41:07 AM
I'm not saying I want to go back to an 1800's society. What I am saying is our rate of growth and our ability to outcompete other contries was better due to the lack of goverment intervention.

The pacific railroad acts could very well have aided in the monopolies that were created. Once railroads started spanning the US, the government began deciding where railroads should be built to reduce redundancy and used financing to accomplish those goals. This led to other players in the market not being able to compete with government funded projects. With one rail servicing a few areas the rail company could charge whatever they wanted. That lead to ICC.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 14, 2016, 09:42:56 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
Many religions make donations part of being a good person/going into heaven so I would consider that come authority making them.

Non-religious people (or people who are religious but are not required to give charity) give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it. /Correction
Except that our culture is one built around this ideal.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 09:44:23 AM
Health and environmental issues are different all together. Many of the things we now know are bad for us weren't even discovered then. Modern med and environmental understand has exploded in the last 50 years.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Poundwise on December 14, 2016, 10:01:31 AM
Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

Maybe I am interpreting this wrong but people give to charity all the time without some authority making them do it.
I think you did interpret it wrong. It's not that Americans don’t give to charity, because we do. It's that no charity is large enough or has enough money to tackle nationwide problems. Also, the freeloader problem is still a problem. Also, plenty of people are threatened with eternal damnation and torture their entire childhoods and still manage to give zero fucks, so I don't think that's really an effective way to get people to part with their money.

Also, it's kind of a silly argument. Sure, people donate to charities all the time. Charities, however, aren't going to run school districts, inspect buildings for code (safety) violations, pave roads, run libraries, clean and maintain parks, enforce laws, care for orphans, create and inforce regulation protecting our health, etc. Taxes force everyone to pay their fair share of resources they either use directly themselves or that others currently use and they might someday use themselves.

I understand waht you are saying. Charities have run schools, libraries, hospitals and taken care of orphans in the past. Actually, other than "enforce laws" the free market could handle everything else.

I've read that Americans are one of the most charitable peoples in the world (in terms of percentage of people self-reporting as having donated to charity, volunteered, or helped a stranger.)

That said, one issue with charities vs. government agencies is coverage.  Sure, it's great if you have a NGO food pantry or church hospital in a community. But what if you don't?  Government services may not be great but at least they are available to everyone in the state. Whereas although private charities may be served with passion and care, coverage will be patchy. 

Anyway, there is room for both government and privately administered groups to work... there is certainly no lack of problems to solve, and Americans definitely have enough spare money to help all, or would if people weren't greedy (it was estimated that in 2006 alone, Americans owed $450 billion more in taxes than they actually paid, possibly due to black market activity and tax havens.)

Let government establish a decent baseline of nutrition, shelter, health, safety, and education for all, and then there is plenty of opportunity for private/free market initiatives to raise quality of life beyond that.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 14, 2016, 11:00:33 AM
I'm not saying I want to go back to an 1800's society. What I am saying is our rate of growth and our ability to outcompete other contries was better due to the lack of goverment intervention.

The pacific railroad acts could very well have aided in the monopolies that were created. Once railroads started spanning the US, the government began deciding where railroads should be built to reduce redundancy and used financing to accomplish those goals. This led to other players in the market not being able to compete with government funded projects. With one rail servicing a few areas the rail company could charge whatever they wanted. That lead to ICC.

So, the example that you picked as a triumph of private industry was railroads.  Now you're saying these same railroads weren't actually an example of private industry.  It turns out that the government was necessary to get the railways working as quickly as they did.

What exactly is your preferred solution to the problem?  There are three possible ways for things to go:
- No government intervention (so no railways are built, or they're built too slowly for the needs of the US).
- More government intervention (additional government hand-outs would probably allow for greater competition).
- No change to the policy of limited government intervention where needed and then regulation when businessmen become too greedy and start hurting the country.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 11:47:07 AM
I'm not saying I want to go back to an 1800's society. What I am saying is our rate of growth and our ability to outcompete other contries was better due to the lack of goverment intervention.

The pacific railroad acts could very well have aided in the monopolies that were created. Once railroads started spanning the US, the government began deciding where railroads should be built to reduce redundancy and used financing to accomplish those goals. This led to other players in the market not being able to compete with government funded projects. With one rail servicing a few areas the rail company could charge whatever they wanted. That lead to ICC.

So, the example that you picked as a triumph of private industry was railroads.  Now you're saying these same railroads weren't actually an example of private industry.  It turns out that the government was necessary to get the railways working as quickly as they did.

What exactly is your preferred solution to the problem?  There are three possible ways for things to go:
- No government intervention (so no railways are built, or they're built too slowly for the needs of the US).
- More government intervention (additional government hand-outs would probably allow for greater competition).
- No change to the policy of limited government intervention where needed and then regulation when businessmen become too greedy and start hurting the country.

No, I'm saying the railroads the government chose to fund weren't an example of private industry. Those railroads weren't being built because they were most likely not profitable, hence why the goverment had to assist in funding the projects. If they were going to be profitable, someone would have built them.

Why do you assume that if there was no government intervention they would have been built too slowly for the needs of the US?

What is interesting is that in the mid 20th century the railroad industry was deregulated for its survival which led to a massive shift in the amount of rail being maintained, led to huge reductions in passenger cars and an increase in freight cars because of the automobile. In my opinion, based on the information I have gathered, the pricing model acts much quicker and is much more effiecient that the central planning model.

Edit: In what way were buisness men too greedy and hurt the country?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 14, 2016, 12:15:28 PM
You're quibbling now, but it's nice to see that you recognize that there are some situations in which a group of self-interested individuals left to their own devices don't produce an optimal outcome.

Look, everyone understands (even super hardcore libertarians) that things like law enforcement, national defense, courts, and basic infrastructure are best handled by the government (at one level or another, doesn't have to be the feds). Everyone probably (even the most hardcore collectivist) also agrees that there are a bunch of things that the government sucks at (business/profit driven enterprise, picking winners and losers, etc) and we have lots of historical examples of failed communist/very collectivist (Venezuela!) economies.

Then there are problems like pollution where the market doesn't price in the cost to society very well, and things like healthcare where you can debate on and on whether a free market can function well.

But the basic idea that you need some central authority to deal with some things is really not controversial. It's the middle-ground stuff that is interesting (climate change would be a great example - are businesses capable of pricing in the potential consequences? One would thing rationally that the possibility of the entire economy crashing would be a deterrent to business as usual...), not the idea that you need a robust government to make basic things run well.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 14, 2016, 12:34:56 PM
I agree with you.

Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

It's interesting how our conversation evolved from what you posted above to your last statement. I actually like how you broke out services to be perfomed by government vs private industy.

I agree that it is the middle of the road things that are most interesting. Climate change, to use your example, is anyone capable of pricing in the potential consequences? Even if the US can, its futile if we can't get china, india, russia, etc. to agree to the same. If we do get them to agree what about third world contries that are trying to develope? And at what cost to the average american? Difficult stuff
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 14, 2016, 01:33:22 PM
I agree with you.

Look up "collective action problem".

It makes no sense to voluntarily pay more for some social services unless you know that others will. In fact, that's how *all of society* works! Since it's in your self-interest to free-ride, we have something called a government that makes rules to ensure that public goods are paid for by... the public.

The whole "why don't you pay more taxes then" argument is stupid, because all of human civilization is built on the idea that, in fact, you can't trust people to contribute their fair share without some sort of authority to make them do it.

-W

It's interesting how our conversation evolved from what you posted above to your last statement. I actually like how you broke out services to be perfomed by government vs private industy.

I agree that it is the middle of the road things that are most interesting. Climate change, to use your example, is anyone capable of pricing in the potential consequences? Even if the US can, its futile if we can't get china, india, russia, etc. to agree to the same. If we do get them to agree what about third world contries that are trying to develope? And at what cost to the average american? Difficult stuff
Not exactly: "The United States, with less than 5 % of the global population, uses about a quarter of the world's fossil fuel resources—burning up nearly 25 % of the coal, 26 % of the oil, and 27 % of the world's natural gas."
In addition we are working internationally, see the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the agreement between China and the US.  Oh, I forgot, Trump wants to cancel that.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 14, 2016, 01:38:43 PM
I don't care about CO2 emissions, the cow left the barn a long time ago on that.

But...

It's time to spend a f*ckton of money on basic research on mitigation and adaptation. I'd probably increase NIH and NSF budgets by an order of magnitude, with a heavy focus on cell biology/making stuff with CRISPR, plant science, geoengineering, and of course solar power in various forms. Throw some more money at fusion too. Go heavy on the grad student and postdoc level funding, encourage lots of industry/academic collaboration, bring the ag departments into the 21st century and give them the respect they deserve.

Best of all, even if the tinfoil hat skeptics are all right and climate change is a nothingburger, we get a shit ton of great science and new tech and better/cheaper food and energy out of it. Win/win.

Etc, etc. Nobody is going to do that, though. We'll just have to dump stuff in the atmosphere to try to cool things down in a couple of decades and deal with it ad hoc.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 05:30:10 AM
I don't care about CO2 emissions, the cow left the barn a long time ago on that.

But...

It's time to spend a f*ckton of money on basic research on mitigation and adaptation. I'd probably increase NIH and NSF budgets by an order of magnitude, with a heavy focus on cell biology/making stuff with CRISPR, plant science, geoengineering, and of course solar power in various forms. Throw some more money at fusion too. Go heavy on the grad student and postdoc level funding, encourage lots of industry/academic collaboration, bring the ag departments into the 21st century and give them the respect they deserve.

Best of all, even if the tinfoil hat skeptics are all right and climate change is a nothingburger, we get a shit ton of great science and new tech and better/cheaper food and energy out of it. Win/win.

Etc, etc. Nobody is going to do that, though. We'll just have to dump stuff in the atmosphere to try to cool things down in a couple of decades and deal with it ad hoc.

-W

If we are going to do something big I would like to see it be incentivized the other way. Make fossel fuels so expensive via taxes on emission that whatever technology developes will solve the problem. I don't like to idea of hand picking technology and maybe with huge taxes on emissions fossil fuel companies with come up with technology to solve their own problem.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 15, 2016, 06:45:34 AM
I don't care about CO2 emissions, the cow left the barn a long time ago on that.

But...

It's time to spend a f*ckton of money on basic research on mitigation and adaptation. I'd probably increase NIH and NSF budgets by an order of magnitude, with a heavy focus on cell biology/making stuff with CRISPR, plant science, geoengineering, and of course solar power in various forms. Throw some more money at fusion too. Go heavy on the grad student and postdoc level funding, encourage lots of industry/academic collaboration, bring the ag departments into the 21st century and give them the respect they deserve.

Best of all, even if the tinfoil hat skeptics are all right and climate change is a nothingburger, we get a shit ton of great science and new tech and better/cheaper food and energy out of it. Win/win.

Etc, etc. Nobody is going to do that, though. We'll just have to dump stuff in the atmosphere to try to cool things down in a couple of decades and deal with it ad hoc.

-W

If we are going to do something big I would like to see it be incentivized the other way. Make fossel fuels so expensive via taxes on emission that whatever technology developes will solve the problem. I don't like to idea of hand picking technology and maybe with huge taxes on emissions fossil fuel companies with come up with technology to solve their own problem.

That seems like a reasonable approach to fossil fuels on the surface.

The main issue I see with doing it, is that so much infrastructure has already been built around cheap fossil fuels that the transition period (of undetermined length . . . 10, 15, 20, 25 years?) will be very tough on people.  The people that it will be hardest on are those who can barely make ends meet right now.  Triple the price of gas, and the middle class can absorb it.  The rich don't care but all of a sudden a large number of poor people can't afford to drive to work . . . and until alternative means of transportation are available you're preventing that large portion of the population from being productive.  The free market would likely find a solution in the end, but there's going to be a waiting period and at least a generation of people badly hurt by this decision.

Those people will get angry . . . which means one of several things will happen:
- they'll vote out the party who suggested the policy
- they'll riot, cause civil unrest, increase crime (if you leave 'em to starve this is what tends to happen)
- they'll give up on being productive members of society (drawback of large scale welfare system when no jobs can reasonably be found)

We need a change that eases people off of cheap gas while simultaneously building infrastructure and developing alternative transportation solutions.  A purely capitalist solution isn't going to provide a great answer to this problem for the reasons just mentioned.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 06:59:40 AM
Any increase would need to be implimented over time and I think you underestimate the speed at which the free market can adjust.

Looking at your idea through the same lens, where is the f*ckton of money going to come from? We are already running huge deficits in the federal budget and most states dont look much better, so debt whoudl be out of the question. Higher taxes? Those taxes will eventually be passed on to consumers through higher prices. When prices rise the things you mention above will happen or companies with automate and manuver to try and keep prices low.

And all the while we are wondering if the money we are throwing at research will pan out at all. lose/lose
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: GuitarStv on December 15, 2016, 07:16:10 AM
Phasing in a predictable increase on gas prices via a tax being increased over a longer period of time is probably the best solution that could be applied to the problem.  It provides the government with a steady revenue stream to work with for building infrastructure and gives industry leaders incentive since they know that development in the field will become increasingly more lucrative over time.

Sadly, I suspect that it's a doomed idea.  People have great incentives to pretend that the reality of climate change is a hoax . . . addressing the problem will cost money and effort.  Any politician proposing such a strategy would be very unpopular.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 15, 2016, 08:48:01 AM
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the pittance we spend on basic research. It's a drop in the bucket, and doing more of it wouldn't cause anyone any distress.

Just for reference, discretionary spending is about 1/3 of the total 3.8 trillion budget, and science/research is about 3% of that - so roughly 1% of the total budget. 54% of the discretionary budget is military spending, on the other hand.


But sure, tax the crap out of fossil fuels if that's your preferred solution. Or do both!

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Poundwise on December 15, 2016, 08:51:40 AM
Looking at your idea through the same lens, where is the f*ckton of money going to come from? We are already running huge deficits in the federal budget and most states dont look much better, so debt whoudl be out of the question. Higher taxes?

What would happen if we invested in the IRS so that we could investigate the $100 billion in tax revenues lost every year because of the use of accounting tricks and tax havens?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 08:52:27 AM
I was unfamiliar with those numbers. The Federal Budget has its own issues that we could talk about for centuries (and probably will). Haha
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 15, 2016, 09:08:05 AM
I'm not even interested in taxing fossil fuels, I just want is to start reducing the tax incentives we pay to encourage fossil fuel use.  It doesn't make sense to start taxing something when you're already subsidizing it.

If we just reduced government intervention in the fossil fuel market to zero, alternative energy source would already be more cost efficient.  Stop offering tax breaks to drillers.  Stop leasing federal land.  Stop congressional funding for pipelines.  Stop military protection of tanker routes.  Let the free market determine the actual cost of gas, and we'd all be driving electrics inside of five years.  We only continue to use gasoline because the US government wants us to, and so spends your tax dollars to make it look affordable.

Then, if you want to get all technical about fairness, we should subsidize alternative energy for the next forty years at the same level we have subsidized oil for the past 40.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 09:24:34 AM
I agree 100%. Removal all tax incentives so that the government is not picking winners and losers.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: sol on December 15, 2016, 09:36:56 AM
I agree 100%. Removal all tax incentives so that the government is not picking winners and losers.
.

Unfortunately, our shared vision will never come to pass.  There are too many ancillary concerns, like international security, that require Uncle Sam to continue subsidizing fossil fuels. 

As a counterweight, we could just increase alternative energy subsidies to the same level as fossil fuel subsidies, going forward.  About a 15x increase should do it.  Obama's tiny little 35% increase was entirely laughable by comparison.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 15, 2016, 09:40:22 AM
I'm going to ask this as respectfully as possible - why would you comment on the federal budget when you don't know anything about it? It takes (at most) 5 minutes to get a general idea of where the money goes (TL;DR - the government is an insurance company with a big army, basically).

And FWIW, I think we could do a lot to make things work better by BOTH stopping the subsidies of various things (picking winners/losers) AND investing in basic research (which the market does very poorly due to the long payback period). No matter what your ideology, you get to win!

-W

I was unfamiliar with those numbers. The Federal Budget has its own issues that we could talk about for centuries (and probably will). Haha
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 10:09:09 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 15, 2016, 10:21:21 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
And how would you like us to have research done in this country and advance medical/scientific knowledge?  Keeping in mind that ALL first world countries fund research to some degree.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 15, 2016, 10:37:35 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.

Ever use the (DARPA) internet? GPS? Cell phone? Accelerometers (in everything)? Google (yes, Sergey Brin was funded by the NSF when he wrote the search algorithms that made them what they are now)? Bar codes? Microchips of any kind (or really, computers of any kind)? Most vaccines? Jet airplanes (ok, that was the German government, really, but still)?

CRISPR is going to blow your freaking mind, too. To be fair HHMI contributed to that along with NIH/NSF/etc. Give it a decade.

I could go on and on. Might be time for you to do some more reading up on how science has worked in the 20th century (and arguably well before that with prominent scientists funded by monarchies). The era of Bell Labs was over a long time ago, for better or for worse.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 10:50:22 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
And how would you like us to have research done in this country and advance medical/scientific knowledge?  Keeping in mind that ALL first world countries fund research to some degree.

Great research comes from Medical Colleges, Hospitals, Foundations, Charities and Parma Companies all the time. Now, you may say, some of that research is funded by the government. True. I cant argue that, but, the question is would that research have happened had the government not given them money? I think it would but who's going to not take free money when it is offered. There are R&D departments in almost every industry that do not recieve government money.

The question for me is at what cost? Are there instances where gov funded some research that turned out great? Sure. Would that research have not been done without the government? Maybe. The government selecting who gets funded and who doesn't always leads to cronyism which defeats the purpose of funding research in the first place.

Again, this is probably another one of those unanswerable questions because everyone has opinion on what the appropriate amount of government funded reseach is.

Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 11:07:36 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.

Ever use the (DARPA) internet? GPS? Cell phone? Accelerometers (in everything)? Google (yes, Sergey Brin was funded by the NSF when he wrote the search algorithms that made them what they are now)? Bar codes? Microchips of any kind (or really, computers of any kind)? Most vaccines? Jet airplanes (ok, that was the German government, really, but still)?

CRISPR is going to blow your freaking mind, too. To be fair HHMI contributed to that along with NIH/NSF/etc. Give it a decade.

I could go on and on. Might be time for you to do some more reading up on how science has worked in the 20th century (and arguably well before that with prominent scientists funded by monarchies). The era of Bell Labs was over a long time ago, for better or for worse.

-W

I don't disagree with your examples but why only list sucesses? What I find interesting is some of your examples were originally military research advancments picked up by private industry and made usefull for the general public. So was government or private industry the creator of the internet? Because for there to be DARPA there needed to be electricity (which Im not 100% sure, but I think was privatly funded).

Like I said there is most likely a balance, and that balance will forever be argued over.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Poundwise on December 15, 2016, 11:18:02 AM
Great research comes from Medical Colleges, Hospitals, Foundations, Charities and Parma Companies all the time. Now, you may say, some of that research is funded by the government. True. I cant argue that, but, the question is would that research have happened had the government not given them money? I think it would but who's going to not take free money when it is offered. There are R&D departments in almost every industry that do not recieve government money.

So in other words,  you think that the availability of government money actually suppresses private money from being invested in research? I would guess that more money invested in R&D will usually lead to more R&D being done.


Quote
The question for me is at what cost? Are there instances where gov funded some research that turned out great? Sure. Would that research have not been done without the government? Maybe. The government selecting who gets funded and who doesn't always leads to cronyism which defeats the purpose of funding research in the first place.

Give us some examples of how government selection always leads to cronyism.   Government grants serve a complementary purpose to corporate R&D, in that they are disbursed with an eye to the long-term benefit of the country, rather than short term profits.  People complain about "Big Pharma" and I don't think they would like the results if the ability to make money were the only reason why a research project could get funding.

I was formerly a scientist and have friends and family working as scientists for both government grants and industry. I haven't seen or heard of any examples of "cronyism" when it came to government grants... in fact, usually friends of grant applicants recuse themselves from study sections. 

Does private funding create better quality research? That's debatable. My friends who went to work for pharmaceutical companies sometimes have complained that they had to get used to projects being abandoned (wastefully) because they were deemed unprofitable, or because of a corporate change of focus.  On the other hand, they are paid much better than academic scientists so their complaints are not too loud.

[edited because I accidentally submitted in midsentence]
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Gin1984 on December 15, 2016, 11:27:50 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
And how would you like us to have research done in this country and advance medical/scientific knowledge?  Keeping in mind that ALL first world countries fund research to some degree.

Great research comes from Medical Colleges, Hospitals, Foundations, Charities and Parma Companies all the time. Now, you may say, some of that research is funded by the government. True. I cant argue that, but, the question is would that research have happened had the government not given them money? I think it would but who's going to not take free money when it is offered. There are R&D departments in almost every industry that do not recieve government money.

The question for me is at what cost? Are there instances where gov funded some research that turned out great? Sure. Would that research have not been done without the government? Maybe. The government selecting who gets funded and who doesn't always leads to cronyism which defeats the purpose of funding research in the first place.

Again, this is probably another one of those unanswerable questions because everyone has opinion on what the appropriate amount of government funded reseach is.
I work for a research university attached to a hospital (which also does research) and got my Master's at another research university.  The research that is done, is done because of the governmental grants.  The universities don't fund that, in fact, the grants even pay for the buildings etc.  And we do know what happens when governments don't fund this, the researchers leave to other countries that do and they lose what little scientific community they have.  You lose undergrad students, graduate students, post docs and faculty.  You don't have the base for industry to grow and develop. That is why all first world countries fund research, it is a net gain to the country.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: NoStacheOhio on December 15, 2016, 11:44:38 AM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
And how would you like us to have research done in this country and advance medical/scientific knowledge?  Keeping in mind that ALL first world countries fund research to some degree.

Great research comes from Medical Colleges, Hospitals, Foundations, Charities and Parma Companies all the time. Now, you may say, some of that research is funded by the government. True. I cant argue that, but, the question is would that research have happened had the government not given them money? I think it would but who's going to not take free money when it is offered. There are R&D departments in almost every industry that do not recieve government money.

The question for me is at what cost? Are there instances where gov funded some research that turned out great? Sure. Would that research have not been done without the government? Maybe. The government selecting who gets funded and who doesn't always leads to cronyism which defeats the purpose of funding research in the first place.

Again, this is probably another one of those unanswerable questions because everyone has opinion on what the appropriate amount of government funded reseach is.
I work for a research university attached to a hospital (which also does research) and got my Master's at another research university.  The research that is done, is done because of the governmental grants.  The universities don't fund that, in fact, the grants even pay for the buildings etc.  And we do know what happens when governments don't fund this, the researchers leave to other countries that do and they lose what little scientific community they have.  You lose undergrad students, graduate students, post docs and faculty.  You don't have the base for industry to grow and develop. That is why all first world countries fund research, it is a net gain to the country.

I work for an academic medical institution closely affiliated with an R1 university, and yes, this ^

I've seen labs full of idle equipment because grant money went away. The space isn't being repurposed because nobody is showing up with replacement money, or even money for something completely different. It's literally a room full of equipment just taking up space.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 15, 2016, 11:47:34 AM
I have a bunch of degrees that I no longer use (I was a statistician at one point) and my wife has a biochemistry PhD. So I have actual relevant experience with doing and being around basic research - and I can say definitively that without NIH/NSF/NIST/DOE/etc funding, there would be VERY little basic research happening in the US.

Google is doing quite a bit now, and I am hopeful that they will imitate the Bell Labs model and really do some neat stuff.

I also have to disagree with the "failure is the worst result" perspective. Failure is AWESOME. Failure tells you what you don't need to try next time, it spins off new tech and ideas from all the attempts to work your way around the problem, and it generally is awesome. Lots of research leads to nothing - but as long as some aspect of that work is published/disseminated, it help future research succeed.

I mean, really, what kind of fool doesn't understand that success almost always is the product of many failures?

So when you spend a bunch of money on a research project and it doesn't work, you shrug and you move on to another line of attack or another thing. Just LIKE IN YOUR LIFE. Bold experimentation and lots of trial (meaning failure) and error/hard work is how you kick ass.

Jeez.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: dragoncar on December 15, 2016, 12:01:20 PM
I'm sorry, its not that I am unfamiliar with the Federal Budget. I simply have never looked into what specically the government spends on research because I don't really care. I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.
And how would you like us to have research done in this country and advance medical/scientific knowledge?  Keeping in mind that ALL first world countries fund research to some degree.

Great research comes from Medical Colleges, Hospitals, Foundations, Charities and Parma Companies all the time. Now, you may say, some of that research is funded by the government. True. I cant argue that, but, the question is would that research have happened had the government not given them money? I think it would but who's going to not take free money when it is offered. There are R&D departments in almost every industry that do not recieve government money.

The question for me is at what cost? Are there instances where gov funded some research that turned out great? Sure. Would that research have not been done without the government? Maybe. The government selecting who gets funded and who doesn't always leads to cronyism which defeats the purpose of funding research in the first place.

Again, this is probably another one of those unanswerable questions because everyone has opinion on what the appropriate amount of government funded reseach is.
I work for a research university attached to a hospital (which also does research) and got my Master's at another research university.  The research that is done, is done because of the governmental grants.  The universities don't fund that, in fact, the grants even pay for the buildings etc.  And we do know what happens when governments don't fund this, the researchers leave to other countries that do and they lose what little scientific community they have.  You lose undergrad students, graduate students, post docs and faculty.  You don't have the base for industry to grow and develop. That is why all first world countries fund research, it is a net gain to the country.

Good, get those intellectual elites and immigrants out of here.  Why can't the coal miners just do the research?
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Glenstache on December 15, 2016, 12:04:31 PM
Some actual data on research spending (part 1 of 3):
http://ssti.org/blog/changing-nature-us-basic-research-trends-federal-spending

And yes, what Walt says. Coming from a research scientist background and having done stuff that was pushing into new territory, failure was an integral part of progress. I now work in industry doing applied science where the emphasis is on investigating and figuring things out, and in that context failure is a bug, not a feature. Context matters.

Steady federal-level research dollars should be considered infrastructure investment in a technology-centric economy (and that includes manufacturing, construction, widgets, tech ... all of it).
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: Pooplips on December 15, 2016, 12:39:21 PM
I feel like everyone with a science degree just got offended. I did not mean to do that and I apologize.

I didn't mean for my question to be interpretated as a "failure is the worst result" perspective. Failure breeds success in everything.

As far as cronyism, Sol and I were just discussing tax incentives/hand-outs for the fossil fuel industry vs the renewable industry. We now have the CEO of Exxon as the Secretary of State.

Now that I know I am discussing this with a bunch of scientists, I am interesting in what you think federal spending should be on research. 2x, 5x or 10x what it is now?

Glenstache, thanks for the link. I will be reading shortly.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: waltworks on December 15, 2016, 12:46:15 PM
I'd say about 10x. There are a huge number of very talented postdocs/grad students leaving to work in industry (or leaving science entirely) and we are going to miss out on big stuff because those people weren't in a place where their creativity and talent had a (relatively unconstrained by immediate profit considerations) place to flourish.

Many of them will get picked up (this is already happening, go browse through the recruiting ads in a copy of Nature or Science) by Chinese universities and research facilities.

I should add: scientists get offended when you start expressing opinions and clearly haven't done any basic research on the topic - NOT when you just disagree with them. You don't need to be an expert on science funding to comment on it, but if you can't even be bothered to look into how the federal budget works (not a large investment of time, really) before doing so, then you will lose the respect of most scientifically minded people.

-W
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: golden1 on December 15, 2016, 01:08:39 PM
Quote
I don't think the government should be in the research buisness in the first place.

This being typed on an internet forum is the modern day equivalent of "keep your government hands off my medicare!".  Priceless.

I personally am not a big fan of just flat government research spending.  I prefer moonshot projects, great big ridiculously ambitious goals that get the public on board and excited about science.  Even if these ultimately fail to reach their end goal, or the goal itself (like the moon landing) may not have any direct practical value, these types of projects spur all kinds of side innovations that recoup the spending by vast margins.  They also have the side benefit of getting a whole generation of kids excited about science and engineering. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wenchsenior on December 15, 2016, 01:25:40 PM
I'd say about 10x. There are a huge number of very talented postdocs/grad students leaving to work in industry (or leaving science entirely) and we are going to miss out on big stuff because those people weren't in a place where their creativity and talent had a (relatively unconstrained by immediate profit considerations) place to flourish.

Many of them will get picked up (this is already happening, go browse through the recruiting ads in a copy of Nature or Science) by Chinese universities and research facilities.

-W

Just agreeing with all of the above on the absolute necessity of gov't funding of research. A sadly miniscule amount of gov't funding is devoted to this.  Most research questions are not like medical research, where medical services and potential drug development can usually be projected to make the funding entitity a lot of money.

As someone with a background in biological/ecological research, and with a husband who is an active researcher, I can tell you that a lot of our knowledge about even basic ecological processes would have been difficult to impossible to learn via any private funding source. The reason is that most questions pertaining to fundamental ecology, as well as most subcategories of research (such as, for example, forest ecology, wildlife ecology, limnology and oceanography, climatology, volcanology, etc etc ) do not have short term, tangible, profit motives sufficient tor drive private research funding. They also require research that often must take place over LONG time periods and often at large spatial scales that cross state and country boundaries.

The country as a whole obtains huge benefits from our understanding of these topics, but individuals are unable and unwilling to fund research at the scale or detail required to obtain that knowledge because most of the time there is no individual monetary profit to be found.

Also, repetition of research many times and regular rejection of research hypotheses is a FEATURE of scientific process of all sorts, NOT a bug. Scientific endeavors must fail more or less constantly, so that incorrect hypotheses can be weeded out. Otherwise there can be no progress toward any objective 'truth'.  ETA: I added this last, presumably obvious, paragraph because pooplips seems to not understand the most fundamental things about how science functions or what the process is. 
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: wenchsenior on December 15, 2016, 01:37:55 PM
I'd say about 10x. There are a huge number of very talented postdocs/grad students leaving to work in industry (or leaving science entirely) and we are going to miss out on big stuff because those people weren't in a place where their creativity and talent had a (relatively unconstrained by immediate profit considerations) place to flourish.

Many of them will get picked up (this is already happening, go browse through the recruiting ads in a copy of Nature or Science) by Chinese universities and research facilities.

I should add: scientists get offended when you start expressing opinions and clearly haven't done any basic research on the topic - NOT when you just disagree with them. You don't need to be an expert on science funding to comment on it, but if you can't even be bothered to look into how the federal budget works (not a large investment of time, really) before doing so, then you will lose the respect of most scientifically minded people.

-W

Specifics of how much more funding should be devoted to which scientific disciplines is always going to be a matter of what we prioritize as a country. Obviously, Americans don't prioritize much except military tech anymore, which is damn depressing. For sure I know that in the biological sciences, there are many more people interested in doing research than there is funding to support them.
Title: Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
Post by: SisterX on December 15, 2016, 10:53:38 PM
HusbandX left a career in biology (n part) because there was no way to make a living in it, for him. It wasn't consistent, and the "fun" (as in, research) jobs just didn't pay enough. We have plenty of friends who've stuck it out, but most of them are constantly fighting for what little funding they have. A few have "non-traditional" jobs, such as living on an atoll out in the Pacific doing bird research for six months at a time. Or going to Antarctica and working at McMurdo for six months. Then having to find something new when they're done. Or working in fisheries stuff, and then working as a fisherman/woman during the summers to make ends meet.

And I worked for a research university which was constantly