So, Trump gets elected...

[jeager106]

My take on it, too.

I see four years with lots of obstructionism, very little accomplished, many missed opportunities, and even worse factionalism and divisiveness.

Yeah. Sadly that is a real problem when party politics can't get along.
Do they ever?

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

So, it is beginning to set in. A large percentage of the US population is stupid enough to vote this manipulative lunatic into office. If this is the case what, realistically, is going to happen? Would the Democrats in the Senate/House pull the classic Repub tactic of voting no to everything? Would "the Wall" get built? What about the social/ethnic/religious minorities that Trump continues to demean to the cheers of the extremists at his rallies?

Hard to tell what Trump would have in store for us, but I have a feeling that the new Congress may be just as obstructive as the current one. Perhaps even more so if the new Congress has a Democratic majority.

The possibility of a Trump presidency is a lot more real than many liberals want to believe. Hillary Clinton has been running on ghost energy from the very beginning, and her campaign has been slowly dissolving ever since. I wouldn't overestimate the population's willingness to accept a third term Democrat. Bernie has pretty good odds of defeating Trump in a general election, but Hillary's chances of winning against Trump are quite suspect.

 

[metis]

Hard to tell what Trump would have in store for us, but I have a feeling that the new Congress may be just as obstructive as the current one. Perhaps even more so if the new Congress has a Democratic majority.

The possibility of a Trump presidency is a lot more real than many liberals want to believe. Hillary Clinton has been running on ghost energy from the very beginning, and her campaign has been slowly dissolving ever since. I wouldn't overestimate the population's willingness to accept a third term Democrat. Bernie has pretty good odds of defeating Trump in a general election, but Hillary's chances of winning against Trump are quite suspect.

Not to disagree with you, especially since you well may be spot-on, but did you catch Trump's news conference today? Can you imagine four years of hearing on-going rants like this one?

 

[Palehorse]

Methodists are smarter than Prysebeterians......Bush~Ryan...case closed.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Not to disagree with you, especially since you well may be spot-on, but did you catch Trump's news conference today? Can you imagine four years of hearing on-going rants like this one?

Whether or not we can imagine it plays no part in the scenario's plausibility. Having said that, yes, I can imagine it. And so can many Trump supporters. Trump IS the Republican nominee, so Clinton supporters better have a good imagination, because if they can't wrap their heads around the possibility of a Trump administration and continue to support a dead water candidate, they won't have to imagine it because reality will show it to them. My suggestion? If you're freaked out about a Trump presidency, you better support the Bern.

Personally, I find Hillary just as unpalatable as Trump...maybe even moreso. If Hillary gets the nomination, I will have to get extremely drunk before filling out my general election ballot.

 

[metis]

Whether or not we can imagine it plays no part in the scenario's plausibility. Having said that, yes, I can imagine it. And so can many Trump supporters. Trump IS the Republican nominee, so Clinton supporters better have a good imagination, because if they can't wrap their heads around the possibility of a Trump administration and continue to support a dead water candidate, they won't have to imagine it because reality will show it to them. My suggestion? If you're freaked out about a Trump presidency, you better support the Bern.

Personally, I find Hillary just as unpalatable as Trump...maybe even moreso. If Hillary gets the nomination, I will have to get extremely drunk before filling out my general election ballot.

First of all, I voted for the Bern in the primary here. Secondly, it's not just I who is"freaked out" over a possible Trump presidency, so are most of the leaders of our allies. The House of Commons in GB was considering taking a vote several months ago that, if passed, would disallow him to be admitted into the country. They tabled the vote.

Finally, better to get drunk and vote for Hillary versus a guy who's a loose canon who may say or do anything. When he said on the Today show a couple of weeks ago that he wouldn't take using nukes off the table when dealing with ISIS, doesn't this send any chills up and down your spine?

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

First of all, I voted for the Bern in the primary here. Secondly, it's not just I who is"freaked out" over a possible Trump presidency, so are most of the leaders of our allies. The House of Commons in GB was considering taking a vote several months ago that, if passed, would disallow him to be admitted into the country. They tabled the vote.

Just to be clear, by "you," I meant the generalized "you," as in "to whom it refers." Sorry, not you personally!

Finally, better to get drunk and vote for Hillary versus a guy who's a loose canon who may say or do anything. When he said on the Today show a couple of weeks ago that he wouldn't take using nukes off the table when dealing with ISIS, doesn't this send any chills up and down your spine?

No, he's only taking such a position out of strategic value. He's a hawk, and as such, he doesn't take anything "off the table." People portray him as some crazy guy with his "finger on the button," which is a little bit hysterical to me. Direct quote below.

"Just so you understand, I was against [the Iraq war]. I'd be the last one to use nuclear weapons, because that's sort of like the end of the ball game...I'm not gonna use nukes, but I'm not taking any cards off the table."

 

[metis]

Just to be clear, by "you," I meant the generalized "you," as in "to whom it refers." Sorry, not you personally!



No, he's only taking such a position out of strategic value. He's a hawk, and as such, he doesn't take anything "off the table." People portray him as some crazy guy with his "finger on the button," which is a little bit hysterical to me. Direct quote below.

"Just so you understand, I was against [the Iraq war]. I'd be the last one to use nuclear weapons, because that's sort of like the end of the ball game...I'm not gonna use nukes, but I'm not taking any cards off the table."

Thanks for the clarification with your first two lines.

As far as the latter, to even suggest using nukes under almost any circumstance is a horrific thought to me, but I grew up during the time of the Cuban Missile Crises and having to play indoors as a kid on some days because the radiation level was too high from the nuclear testing. This left quite an impact on me and many others, which I do believe you can appreciate. But Trump's statement on this s only one of many problems I have with what he's been saying.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

As far as the latter, to even suggest using nukes under almost any circumstance is a horrific thought to me, but I grew up during the time of the Cuban Missile Crises and having to play indoors as a kid on some days because the radiation level was too high from the nuclear testing. This left quite an impact on me and many others, which I do believe you can appreciate. But Trump's statement on this s only one of many problems I have with what he's been saying.

I can definitely appreciate that. And you're right; there are numerous problems with what Trump has been saying. To make another clarification: I don't like Trump or the vast majority of his policies. But I don't like Clinton either. She's a huge fraud and will do nothing for America except widen the current inequality and send young men into the middle east to die. The idea of voting for another establishment candidate is virtually unthinkable for me because I know exactly what to expect from them. Lots of contempt for both of them.

 

[Acim]

So, it is beginning to set in. A large percentage of the US population is stupid enough to vote this manipulative lunatic into office. If this is the case what, realistically, is going to happen? Would the Democrats in the Senate/House pull the classic Repub tactic of voting no to everything? Would "the Wall" get built? What about the social/ethnic/religious minorities that Trump continues to demean to the cheers of the extremists at his rallies?

Same thing that happens with every president. Leverage will be sought, political capital will be desired. As Trump isn't really steadfast toward party loyalty, he could be one of the more effective POTUS's in recent memory. But if he continues in vein of attacking / seeking to destroy anyone that dare criticize him, then it could get ugly for a whole lot of people - with the majority of ugliness appearing on Trump. Like all things though, it'll be a matter of perspective. Like, I see Obama as having a bit of political ugliness, but if I go talk about it with a liberal friend, there is zero agreement on that and all ugliness is to be filtered only through how national Pubs are behaving toward his holiness, Obama. With Trump, I fully expect MSM to behave how they are now, seeking to undermine him whenever they can while also realizing he provides so much political entertainment that he stands to make the business side of the press do very well.

Oh, and yeah the wall would get built, in his first year. It'll take lots of political capital and in the end be about as popular as Obamacare. IOW, Trump defenders will constantly cite it as a huge success while all others are scratching their heads wondering how such an abomination can be called a success.

 

[metis]

Oh, and yeah the wall would get built, in his first year. .

I can very much guarantee you that this would be virtually impossible because the expanse is so great.

 

[Acim]

I can very much guarantee you that this would be virtually impossible because the expanse is so great.

What kind of betting odds would you put on it? 10,000 to 1? If so, would you care to wager on it? I'll put up a $1.

 

[fantome profane]

What kind of betting odds would you put on it? 10,000 to 1? If so, would you care to wager on it? I'll put up a $1.

I'll take that action. There will be no wall built. And Mexico will not pay for it.

 

[metis]

What kind of betting odds would you put on it? 10,000 to 1? If so, would you care to wager on it? I'll put up a $1.

I don't want your money.

Have you ever traveled along any of that border and seen how loooooooooooooooong it is? Wanna take a guess how many miles are involved?

 

[Acim]

I'll take that action. There will be no wall built. And Mexico will not pay for it.

Will you take it at those odds?

There would possibly have to be a few stipulations. I would be willing to go with "completed wall" but not that it will cover the entire expanse. I don't think it will be planned/designed to, nor is Trump specifying that right now. But I don't think Mexico will pay for it entirely. Not even sure if that needs to be included as stipulation as a completed wall would be the feat that I think is the main wager. Though I recognize Trump is on record (many times) with saying Mexico will pay for it. If I were to actually wager on such a thing, a) I would want odds and b) I wouldn't want who pays for it to be part of the bet. My earlier post said, "yeah the wall would get built, in his first year." Though, I don't think it will be completed in year 1 of his term.

All of this would be predicated on Trump winning the national election. Without that, I would say such a wager would result in a push.

 

[Acim]

I don't want your money.

Have you ever traveled along any of that border and seen how loooooooooooooooong it is? Wanna take a guess how many miles are involved?

Around 2000.

 

[fantome profane]

Will you take it at those odds?

There would possibly have to be a few stipulations. I would be willing to go with "completed wall" but not that it will cover the entire expanse. I don't think it will be planned/designed to, nor is Trump specifying that right now. But I don't think Mexico will pay for it entirely. Not even sure if that needs to be included as stipulation as a completed wall would be the feat that I think is the main wager. Though I recognize Trump is on record (many times) with saying Mexico will pay for it. If I were to actually wager on such a thing, a) I would want odds and b) I wouldn't want who pays for it to be part of the bet. My earlier post said, "yeah the wall would get built, in his first year." Though, I don't think it will be completed in year 1 of his term.

All of this would be predicated on Trump winning the national election. Without that, I would say such a wager would result in a push.

My stipulations would be that the wall has to be a wall, not a fence, not a rope line, not a pile of sand bags or any other kind of nonsense. A wall.

And it has to cover a significant portion of the boarder, 75% or more.

If these two conditions are met, ever just PM me and I will send you 1000 US dollars. If these conditions are not met in the next 5 years I expect you send me one Canadian Dollar (a looney).

And I don't care who pays for it. I am just telling you that Mexico will not pay 1 peso.

Deal?

 

[Draka]

I think it's time to start the "Thanks Trump" train. I mean, we hear all kinds of ridiculous "Thanks Obama" stuff, but we can really be honest with some Trump stuff. Like, earlier today Turk was at the laundromat and had to deal with some redneck jerk thinking it was okay to pick on a couple Spanish speaking ladies for daring to speak Spanish to each other. Yelled at them to speak English. See, it's Trump that has somehow let these ignorant bigots think it is just fine and dandy to voice their stupidity and hatred. For that I say "Thanks Trump". Someone gets really racist? Thanks Trump. Hates on women? Thanks Trump. And so on.

 

[metis]

Around 2000.

Yep, and now you should see what just one part of the problem would be to somehow miraculously build it in one year.

 

[Sunstone]

I doubt Clinton will place justices on the Supreme Court who'll overturn Roe v Wade.