The Political Thread

[Professor Bear]

Sanders did bring in a lot of indy voters to the Democrats, so in theory he would have got a bigger vote share than Clinton for that alone - but in practice, Clinton supporters in particular were so absolutely dreadful during the primaries that I couldn't see people that shallow and arrogant ever voting for someone they viewed as not being a "real" Democrat.

[IndigoPrime]

It's easy to underestimate just how tainted Clinton is a candidate, to a great extent unfairly but you can see where and why these opinions are formed. She is the wife of a president who was disgraced in office. And due to sexual indiscretion, which plays badly amongst a huge section of Americans.

Although not enough to stop many millions voting for a man who was caught on camera boasting about sexual assault, who is accused of several counts of assault and rape, and who denigrates women on a very regular basis (when he's not busy having a go at minorities and the disabled).

But then people have plenty of cognitive dissonance to go round. When I mentioned about sexism on Facebook, I got an angry retort about Bill Clinton's shenanigans. I noted he wasn't on the ticket. But his wife was! So you'd rather have a man who's done this shit than a woman married to a man who's done so? Subject then swiftly changed.

I'm sick of it all. I don't think I've ever felt so low about politics and the future. I love mini-IP dearly, but what fucking world is being created for our kids, by rich arseholes? (And, well done, poor Americans for sticking it to the man. It looks like Trump's entirely unsurprisingly surrounding himself with rich arseholes to run the USA for their own ends.)

[Hawkmumbler]

Didn't realise Brendan McCarthy was pro-Trump. Calling him out on it has put me in his personal bad books for a very long time.

[Radbacker]

so what will AMerica do with all those Tanks, APC's, Planes, Jets and general weapons of war that keep the country afloat (well the Billionairs in the country with Scroge Mcduck like Money vaults) now, they build em, they stock pile em sometimes they sell em (I know Australia just bought several $B worth of these M1s recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAQQ7kdqmlU ) probably from this very stock pile, pitty Tanks are all but useless in modern warfare.  Thats what it 's all about, I dont like Trump I think he is a buffon and obviously hates alot but honestly he may actually help his own country with his isolationist stance and put a dent in the whole military idustrial complex that runs and has run america since WW2.  Unfortunatly what this will mean for Oz I dont know, Australia realise on America to keep us safe we talk about our own boarder security but if push ever came to shove down this part if the world (I am of course thinking about the massive Chinese Military build up in the South China sea all those lovely man made islands full of Chinese hardware they've been building the last 10-15 years) without American intervention I think Australia would be a nice easy target for some warmongering country to just take, we have lot of resources still in the ground here and while we happily sell it to anyone with a $ to give but wouldn't it just be easier to come in and take it?  That was the Japanese plan in WW2 after all.
So i dunno I kinda like the idea of America not being the world police anymore and just think what they could possibly achieve if they ewent back to making toasters and ovenslike before WW2 but Im piss scared what it'll mean for countries like Australia that really do rely on the big bad US of A to keep us safe.
As you see from that babble above i am very confused by the whole situation and really have no idea what is going to happen I just hope for the best and hope the media have been winding us up over the possible Chinese threat to the whole South East Asian area, we all no what happened last time shit went down in that reagion and it wasn't good for anyone. 

CU Radbacker

[The Legendary Shark]

Whatever difference Trump makes, or Hillary might have made, will be, I expect, purely superficial. The important decisions will continue to be made behind closed doors.

Remember the wave of excitement and optimism that swept Obama to office? What a great president he promised to be. Two terms later and things are no better. Guantanamo's still open for business and corporate interests are still paramount.

Now Trump is swept to office on a wave of dissatisfaction and disillusionment. Almost an Anti-Obama. I'd expect Trump to have no more power to change things than Obama did. His role, like that of most presidents back to at least Nixon, is to sell corporate government to the people. He'll bluster about this and rail against that and offend the other, cause mischief and headlines and arguments. And while everybody's watching the prime-time Trump Show, the business of corporate government will continue on one of those dull public service channels nobody watches at 2 a.m. on a Wednesday.

Trump, I suspect, will prove to be largely irrelevant in and of himself. The idea of Trump, though, might prove a threat to social harmony if so manipulated - but that's true of all ideas. Trump, the man, is a sideshow.

[Hawkmumbler]

"Purely superficial" as only a straight, white, cis male could ever say in such circumstances.

[The Legendary Shark]

"Purely superficial" from the perspective of
his effect on the plans of the deep
government. His effect on living society might
not be so insignificant.

[Hawkmumbler]

Right now, Shark, stuff the deep government can shove it. Right now i'm concerned for civil rights, all else is irrelevant.

[SuperSurfer]

Some would argue the increase in tensions with China have been created by the US.

By all means call out Trump for the nasty things he has said. And do so for Hillary.

Why not look up online what Hillary has said about black men in the past, about "obliterating Iran", her position in the past on gay marriage (and if some reports on Wikileaks emails are to be believed her current non-public position), about her in the not too distant past calling for a wall between the US and Mexico, about her being prepared to hit the nuclear button first (Trump says he would not), about Native Americans, about Ghandi. And the 'accusation' that Obama is of the Muslim faith. Her campaign team is accused of instigating that in her previous Democrat election campaign.

There are videos online on some of the above. 

Might make for uncomfortable reading and viewing.

[von Boom]

This is how far to left Hillary Clinton's politics is:

                                                    Neutral                               Hillary Trump
Far Left |-------------------------------|----------------------------^--^--| Far Right

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Speaking as someone from Norn Iron I think it is hugely progressive for the Americans to have voted in someone who is both orange and republican

[Theblazeuk]

Aye but at the same time Hillary was attacked on many occasions for not being strong enough. Which is obviously just sexism but vicious circle of trying to prove it wrong and ending up as a bit of a warmonger.

Although not enough to stop many millions voting for a man who was caught on camera boasting about sexual assault, who is accused of several counts of assault and rape, and who denigrates women on a very regular basis (when he's not busy having a go at minorities and the disabled).

All I can say is that to the Yanks, there's a difference between what you do before the Office and what you do in there. Or even outside of it.

Between Bill Clinton and Anthony Wiener*, the Democrat party keeps sticking its Lyndon B Johnsons in everything. Dicks really did ruin it for the Lady candidate, just as much (if not more) as her own flaws did IMO.

[Modern Panther]

I think Sharky is right (My God.  Typing that...actually...hurt), in that the role of president is largely superficial.  The president's job is essentially to be the final check on the powers of congress and Senate, but also, and possibly more importantly, to act as a figurehead, to ,lead the people.

Trump is different.  Hillary may well be an awful human being, but if the president's main role is to inspire, then what she inspires is generally positive, if maybe naive.  Trump is also an awful person, but he actively revels in that awfulness.  He rose to power on the back of the alt-right, encouraging white supremacists and homophobes, deliberately inspiring hate and fear. 

The brexit vote saw a spike in hatecrimes because bigots (rightly or wrongly) saw the vague and noncommittal policies of Ukip and the public support they gained  as a public acceptance of racism.  Trump deliberately encouraged hate.  That's going to have a massive fallout.

He's also has a republican Senate behind him.  A Senate who have been shown that the best, easiest and cheapest way to get the support of the American electorate is fear.  They'll push discriminatory laws, ensure that an extremist is in the supreme court, and they'll do it all with the support of a media happy help because the new leaders of the free world provide ratings.

[M.I.K.]

What he said.

[von Boom]

Paraphrasing and uncomfortably apt:

The President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.

An orange tan is what the President traditionally wears.

On those criteria Zaphod Beeblebrox Donald Trump is one of the most successful Presidents America will ever had. He will spend two of his eight Presidential years in prison for fraud. Very very few people realize that the President and the Government have virtually no power at all, and of these very few people only six know whence ultimate political power is wielded. Most of the others secretly believe that the ultimate decision-making process is handled by a computer. They couldn't be more wrong.