America has expressed its 'right'.

there4eyeM

unlicensed metaphysician
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
16,247
Reaction score
2,834
Points
280
Despite one's color in the political spectrum, it can be agreed that the part of America that embraces the label 'liberal' lost largely this election.

The nation has clearly (but not really severely) moved to the right. Say what one will, the will of the people has been expressed.

We are silly to be surprised. Nothing profound has changed. America has always been a work in progress (as is the interpretation of its mission), so if 'experts' were so out of touch in this instance, it only re-enforces the 'other than liberal' population's sense that it is because of 'liberal' bias on the "experts'" part.

The point has arrived when, partly from political correctness itself, we should stop identifying so strongly with that term. We have been mal-served by the 'liberal wing' when they were unable to raise a candidate of the stature to win against this time's winner.

America has always been this right, this is merely a historical reminder.

It has always been this 'left', as well, and even much more at times. That may be necessary, too, some day.

To every thing there is a season...
 

Timmy

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
22,432
Reaction score
2,823
Points
290
trump won as an outsider . That was his strength. Being part of the GOP was more of a convenience
 

Some Guy

Deregulated User
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
426
Points
130
I think it's a mistake to think that the country moved right here. Trump is the left-most republican candidate possible. Rather, you had a choice between 4 more years of making America weaker or taking a shot on a political outsider, for all his warts, to change the direction of the nation.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,814
Reaction score
1,149
Points
195
I think it's a mistake to think that the country moved right here. Trump is the left-most republican candidate possible. Rather, you had a choice between 4 more years of making America weaker or taking a shot on a political outsider, for all his warts, to change the direction of the nation.
You may be right. My fear is that those warts include impulse control, pettiness, and a tendency to disregard his advisors.It took them most of a year to convince him that twittering everything that popped in his head was hurting his chances. The electorate taking a shot means you put the most powerful military under the control of someone who neither you nor me can say with any certainty how he will use the power that has been put at his disposal. And if the election is any indication the signs aren't good.
 

S.J.

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2012
Messages
37,666
Reaction score
7,602
Points
1,140
Location
So. Cal.
This was a peaceful revolution against government corruption and the Trump was willing to lead it. His baggage was not that big of a factor, he could have been anybody.
 

Some Guy

Deregulated User
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
426
Points
130
You may be right. My fear is that those warts include impulse control, pettiness, and a tendency to disregard his advisors.It took them most of a year to convince him that twittering everything that popped in his head was hurting his chances. The electorate taking a shot means you put the most powerful military under the control of someone who neither you nor me can say with any certainty how he will use the power that has been put at his disposal. And if the election is any indication the signs aren't good.
The president alone can't declare war on someone and he can't just go launching nukes like crazy. These ideas are just scare tactics used by the left and they worked on their loyal followers.

The talking heads on the news are all crediting KellyAnne Conway for saving Trump's candidacy. There's lots of people out there saying she was a god-send to him cause she wasn't afraid to tell Trump not to say certain things, and take his twitter account away from him and everything. At the end of the day he calls the shots so he didn't have to listen to her but he appears to have entrusted her to do her job and help him, and help him she did.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,814
Reaction score
1,149
Points
195
You may be right. My fear is that those warts include impulse control, pettiness, and a tendency to disregard his advisors.It took them most of a year to convince him that twittering everything that popped in his head was hurting his chances. The electorate taking a shot means you put the most powerful military under the control of someone who neither you nor me can say with any certainty how he will use the power that has been put at his disposal. And if the election is any indication the signs aren't good.
The president alone can't declare war on someone and he can't just go launching nukes like crazy. These ideas are just scare tactics used by the left and they worked on their loyal followers.

The talking heads on the news are all crediting KellyAnne Conway for saving Trump's candidacy. There's lots of people out there saying she was a god-send to him cause she wasn't afraid to tell Trump not to say certain things, and take his twitter account away from him and everything. At the end of the day he calls the shots so he didn't have to listen to her but he appears to have entrusted her to do her job and help him, and help him she did.
Actually, The president can launch nukes independently. The reason being obvious. In case of a sneak attack the president won't have time to go through channels. And I won't even have to go this far. For instance a few years ago, the story broke that the US had hacked Merkels private cell phone. Germany launched a protest and moved on immediately. I saw Trump during this election campaign go into a week long war with A gold star family, a beauty queen and SNL because they where critical of him. Knowing that, I'm sorry to tell you that a scenario like what happened to Merkel but then vice versa can easily get out of control. And I can give you another scenario. Trump and Putin are close. Trump has questioned NATO. Putin has annexed the Crimea and invaded Eastern Ukraine. Putin also has an eye on the Baltic States, I don't think it's even remotely farfetched, that Putin will go for those Baltic States if he feels, or Trump guarantees that US won't honor it's commitments to NATO in protecting those Baltic States. This would possibly create another major European War, or at the very least start another arms race where Europe because they would now feels the US can't be trusted become a military camp. My point is, the reason the world hasn't seen a major war in over 60 years is that the US was a strong, trustworthy and predictable partner. Something that is now being questioned, by electing as a president, somebody with the character traits I have described in my first reply. There is a reason so many people involved in national security have spoken up so adamantly against Trump, this is it. If you don't believe me just check for the reactions in Europe to Trump getting elected. Besides disbelieve and yes ridicule it's a lot of fear.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,814
Reaction score
1,149
Points
195
You may be right. My fear is that those warts include impulse control, pettiness, and a tendency to disregard his advisors.It took them most of a year to convince him that twittering everything that popped in his head was hurting his chances. The electorate taking a shot means you put the most powerful military under the control of someone who neither you nor me can say with any certainty how he will use the power that has been put at his disposal. And if the election is any indication the signs aren't good.
The president alone can't declare war on someone and he can't just go launching nukes like crazy. These ideas are just scare tactics used by the left and they worked on their loyal followers.

The talking heads on the news are all crediting KellyAnne Conway for saving Trump's candidacy. There's lots of people out there saying she was a god-send to him cause she wasn't afraid to tell Trump not to say certain things, and take his twitter account away from him and everything. At the end of the day he calls the shots so he didn't have to listen to her but he appears to have entrusted her to do her job and help him, and help him she did.
Actually, The president can launch nukes independently. The reason being obvious. In case of a sneak attack the president won't have time to go through channels. And I won't even have to go this far. For instance a few years ago, the story broke that the US had hacked Merkels private cell phone. Germany launched a protest and moved on immediately. I saw Trump during this election campaign go into a week long war with A gold star family, a beauty queen and SNL because they where critical of him. Knowing that, I'm sorry to tell you that a scenario like what happened to Merkel but then vice versa can easily get out of control. And I can give you another scenario. Trump and Putin are close. Trump has questioned NATO. Putin has annexed the Crimea and invaded Eastern Ukraine. Putin also has an eye on the Baltic States, I don't think it's even remotely farfetched, that Putin will go for those Baltic States if he feels, or Trump guarantees that US won't honor it's commitments to NATO in protecting those Baltic States. This would possibly create another major European War, or at the very least start another arms race where Europe because they would now feels the US can't be trusted become a military camp. My point is, the reason the world hasn't seen a major war in over 60 years is that the US was a strong, trustworthy and predictable partner. Something that is now being questioned, by electing as a president, somebody with the character traits I have described in my first reply. There is a reason so many people involved in national security have spoken up so adamantly against Trump, this is it. If you don't believe me just check for the reactions in Europe to Trump getting elected. Besides disbelieve and yes ridicule it's a lot of fear.
Just saw this pretty relevant to this post.300,000 NATO troops are on high alert to face Russia
 

Some Guy

Deregulated User
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
426
Points
130
Actually, The president can launch nukes independently. The reason being obvious. In case of a sneak attack the president won't have time to go through channels. And I won't even have to go this far. For instance a few years ago, the story broke that the US had hacked Merkels private cell phone. Germany launched a protest and moved on immediately. I saw Trump during this election campaign go into a week long war with A gold star family, a beauty queen and SNL because they where critical of him. Knowing that, I'm sorry to tell you that a scenario like what happened to Merkel but then vice versa can easily get out of control. And I can give you another scenario. Trump and Putin are close. Trump has questioned NATO. Putin has annexed the Crimea and invaded Eastern Ukraine. Putin also has an eye on the Baltic States, I don't think it's even remotely farfetched, that Putin will go for those Baltic States if he feels, or Trump guarantees that US won't honor it's commitments to NATO in protecting those Baltic States. This would possibly create another major European War, or at the very least start another arms race where Europe because they would now feels the US can't be trusted become a military camp. My point is, the reason the world hasn't seen a major war in over 60 years is that the US was a strong, trustworthy and predictable partner. Something that is now being questioned, by electing as a president, somebody with the character traits I have described in my first reply. There is a reason so many people involved in national security have spoken up so adamantly against Trump, this is it. If you don't believe me just check for the reactions in Europe to Trump getting elected. Besides disbelieve and yes ridicule it's a lot of fear.
How are Trump and Putin close? I'm curious cause Trump has said he's never talked to the guy before. Kind of hard to be close when you've never talked.

I get the uncertainty. It comes by being a political outsider who's not well versed in these things. But there's plenty of people out there that think taking less interventionist policies overseas is a good idea. They could be wrong but it's still a respectable opinion. I'm not a big fan of Trump's temperament through the campaign, but to a degree, it resonated with voters where the distrust of the media is at an all-time high and he didn't just sit back and take all the insults and slander being applied to him.

Bottom line is that the Trump everyone is up and arms about didn't come out in his victory speech and spout the same stuff about locking Hillary up and such. He was gracious, cordial and hopeful. Being a businessman like he is he knows he has to put good people around him to help him out. I just think the fears of him being some out of control lunatic as president are campaign smears that have gone too far.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,814
Reaction score
1,149
Points
195
Actually, The president can launch nukes independently. The reason being obvious. In case of a sneak attack the president won't have time to go through channels. And I won't even have to go this far. For instance a few years ago, the story broke that the US had hacked Merkels private cell phone. Germany launched a protest and moved on immediately. I saw Trump during this election campaign go into a week long war with A gold star family, a beauty queen and SNL because they where critical of him. Knowing that, I'm sorry to tell you that a scenario like what happened to Merkel but then vice versa can easily get out of control. And I can give you another scenario. Trump and Putin are close. Trump has questioned NATO. Putin has annexed the Crimea and invaded Eastern Ukraine. Putin also has an eye on the Baltic States, I don't think it's even remotely farfetched, that Putin will go for those Baltic States if he feels, or Trump guarantees that US won't honor it's commitments to NATO in protecting those Baltic States. This would possibly create another major European War, or at the very least start another arms race where Europe because they would now feels the US can't be trusted become a military camp. My point is, the reason the world hasn't seen a major war in over 60 years is that the US was a strong, trustworthy and predictable partner. Something that is now being questioned, by electing as a president, somebody with the character traits I have described in my first reply. There is a reason so many people involved in national security have spoken up so adamantly against Trump, this is it. If you don't believe me just check for the reactions in Europe to Trump getting elected. Besides disbelieve and yes ridicule it's a lot of fear.
How are Trump and Putin close? I'm curious cause Trump has said he's never talked to the guy before. Kind of hard to be close when you've never talked.

I get the uncertainty. It comes by being a political outsider who's not well versed in these things. But there's plenty of people out there that think taking less interventionist policies overseas is a good idea. They could be wrong but it's still a respectable opinion. I'm not a big fan of Trump's temperament through the campaign, but to a degree, it resonated with voters where the distrust of the media is at an all-time high and he didn't just sit back and take all the insults and slander being applied to him.

Bottom line is that the Trump everyone is up and arms about didn't come out in his victory speech and spout the same stuff about locking Hillary up and such. He was gracious, cordial and hopeful. Being a businessman like he is he knows he has to put good people around him to help him out. I just think the fears of him being some out of control lunatic as president are campaign smears that have gone too far.
I consider Putin and Trump close for the following reasons.- It is generally accepted by the intelligence community that Russia hacked the DNC and leaked those Emails to wikileaks. This is why Here’s What We Know About Russia and the DNC Hack . Notice the most compelling piece of evidence was found by a British professor.
- You are right about him saying he never talked to the guy, unfortunately this flies in the face of a previous statement.- And then of course there is the fact that the Russian deputy foreign minister admits to it. Russia says it had 'contacts' with the Trump campaign during the election

As to him being a political outsider. As my original reply said. He doesn't take any insults period. The problem is that as a president he will have to. Sorry to say this but international politics is complex and dirty and not taking stuff personally is a very important aspect of the job. You say you are not a big fan of his temperament but to you it is not disqualifying. I'm trying to point out that being thin skinned is incredibly dangerous if you sit on the power which was handed to him. And it's not the media that has created this impression but Trumps own actions and rhetoric. Read Merkels congratulatory note to Trump and you'll see that Trump becoming president has truly scared her. You also state that America taking a less interventionist stance is a valid opinion. I agree with you. There is a problem with that tough. You don't do that by publicly saying NATO is obsolete.

Trump indeed came out more conciliatory in his victory speech. Only, it isn't hard to be gracious when you win. How will he react when he doesn't get what he wants is what worries me. He was conciliatory when he won the nomination too, it didn't stop him from going after Cruz when he criticised him.

The bottom line is for me. That although I don't believe he will blow up the world on a temper tantrum, the fact of the matter is, is that for the first time since I'm alive I can't say that with a 100 percent certainty. And the stakes are so high that that genuinely worries me.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top