THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Smitty-48]

Hence Trump is just making things worse for himself by utter denial of the Russian involvement. The denial just put more focus on the subject.

Why would Trump mind if the losers keep chasing their tails trying to fabricate phony justifications as to why they lost? This is the ultimate sign of weakness, because what it actually says, is that Trump's opponents have no answer for MAGA, they are still locked into the same mantra which led to them to defeat, and if they don't actually come up with some alternative to MAGA, which I bet they don't, they are simply going to ensure Trump's reelection in four years.

In the end, this whole liberal attempt to gin up a Red Scare, is just going to backfire on them, they are actually playing right into MAGA's hands.

Nobody is going to buy these liberal panty waist pussies, as being the "bulwarks against Russian agression", and its far too late for that now even if anybody was inclined to, they had eight years to stand up to the Russians, and they did jack shit about Mr. Ivan, all they are doing, is calling attention to that, Trump is the Alpha here, it's too late for the Democrats & Co to try to be the Alpha's now, get real.

All of a sudden, with a week to go, Barry Obama wants to front like he's Ronnie Ray-Gun? Negro please...

[ssu]

Alpha my ass, Smitty.

If the incoming President keeps is in denial what his services say, remarking that they have no evidence, suggesting it may be the Chinese or a 400 pound guy on a bed with a computer, that's the fucking problem, not what the Democrats say.

Nevermind the Democrats here. Everyone understand that the opposition spins thing in their way. Besides, there would be a multitude of ways for Trump to deflect the Democrat accusations: just comment that Russians have indeed been active in Western elections and referendums (which they have and which the US intel services have said too). Is someone saying the British are puppets? No. Or comment on Putin's vendetta on Clinton. Or simply to go on the attack on the Democrats: Are they now saying that the election was rigged? No.

What he shouldn't do is to diss the goddam services he ought to lead as the chief executive in a few weeks!

The president-elect has refused to concede the assessment of all 17 federal intelligence agencies that Russia was behind the attack and he has taken particular exception to the reported assessment of the CIA that those Russian efforts were specifically intended to benefit his candidacy and help install him as the next president.

It is the fourth time this week that Trump has posted to his Twitter account about the hacking incident, the president-elect’s preferred means of conveying a message directly to his followers. In a two tweet outburst on Monday, Trump wrote “can you imagine if the election results were the opposite and WE tried to play the Russia/CIA card. It would be called conspiracy theory!” and added “unless you catch ‘hackers’ in the act, it is very hard to determine who was doing the hacking. Why wasn't this brought up before election?”

Well, it was brought up. CIA didn't come with it's conclusions before the election, as it didn't want to influence the elections like uh, Comey.

Or perhaps he ought to ask the Russians themselves for intel briefings. They surely are honest and truthful, if he so much doesn't trust his own people. It seems that Trump and the Trumpists prefer the Russians over the American government. If so, sad, as Trump says.
.

[BjornP]

I think the theory, that a billionaire who got elected POTUS with no experience as a politician, is somehow a complete moron who has no idea what he's doing because he says outrageous things, has an awful lot of holes in it. I think the people who buy that theory need to rethink their thought process.

So, you're saying success = Must know what he's talking about no matter the subject.

Well, in that case.... Tom Cruise, Ben Affleck, Will Smith: Super succesful, rich and popular. If they ran for office, and got elected... you would trust Will Smith with fixing the economy, Tom Cruise with public health, or Ben Affleck with dealing effectively with Islamic terrorism?

Or are you saying, he got most electoral votes and that's why he must know what he's talking about? Does that mean that if I tweeted some atheist BS like "Religion is the cause of most wars. Ban religion. *pearl-clutching*" and got two million retweets or likes or whatever they work with in response, that those two million people agreeing with me means I was factually correct, as opposed to a clueless moron bullshitting about religion? Wether something is knowledge or bullshit doesn't depend on feelz or how many people are clapping at you. Popularity is important, indeed neccesary, when determining the goal of a country. Makes no rational to sense vote on what facts are, only what to do with them.

[StCapps]

So, you're saying success = Must know what he's talking about no matter the subject.

No but it is a damn good indication that they are good at the things they are successful at.

Well, in that case.... Tom Cruise, Ben Affleck, Will Smith: Super succesful, rich and popular. If they ran for office, and got elected... you would trust Will Smith with fixing the economy, Tom Cruise with public health, or Ben Affleck with dealing effectively with Islamic terrorism?

Ben Affleck, Tom Cruise and Will Smith didn't run for office and get elected POTUS. If they did it would be fair to say they are superior politicians to the chumps they beat, and that they knew what they were doing as a politician trying to get elected. If they said outrageous things to get elected this would not be proof that they don't know what they were doing they are just lucky idiots.

Or are you saying, he got most electoral votes and that's why he must know what he's talking about? Does that mean that if I tweeted some atheist BS like "Religion is the cause of most wars. Ban religion. *pearl-clutching*" and got two million retweets or likes or whatever they work with in response, that those two million people agreeing with me means I was factually correct, as opposed to a clueless moron bullshitting about religion? Wether something is knowledge or bullshit doesn't depend on feelz or how many people are clapping at you. Popularity is important, indeed neccesary, when determining the goal of a country. Makes no rational to sense vote on what facts are, only what to do with them.

Just because he convinced people using feelz instead of facts doesn't make him someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Being factually correct isn't important when it comes to getting elected, so he ignored it. Trump knew that policies didn't matter, how he made people feel did, that makes him smart, not dumb. Just because you think facts matter for some strange reason doesn't mean Trump is a dummy, it means that you think too highly of the average voter. Sorry but Trump knew exactly what he was doing, this he lucky moron theory doesn't hold up because you are saying that Trump is dumb for focusing on what matters and stupid for not focusing on what doesn't matter. That makes no sense.

Maybe y'all should stop to consider that your ability to tell what is and isn't smart politically was way off this year, and your assessment of Trump was clearly off if you still think he's just some lucky idiot, those are a lot of coincidences for only a lucky idiot to exploit in a systematic way and not even realize it. Maybe you should stop to consider that he actually knew what he was doing and was doing it intentionally to gain an advantage.

[K@th]

C'mon Bjorn - He knows more then the generals, believe me. That makes him very smart. He's so smart he doesn't need to attend the daily security briefings. That's SUPER smart. [/sarcasm]

(Great post, BTW.)

[StCapps]

C'mon Bjorn - He knows more then the generals, believe me. That makes him very smart. He's so smart he doesn't need to attend the daily security briefings. That's SUPER smart. [/sarcasm]

(Great post, BTW.)

Saying that was smart too. The media and Kath pretend to take him literally, and he gets the media spotlight focused on himself. But no he must not have had any idea what he was doing and really believes that preposterous statement. Trump haters are so gullible that you've become Trump's puppets, sometime you haters are even more helpful to his cause than his supporters.

@ssu - I still don't see any evidence that lead the intelligence agencies to their conclusion that Russia did it. You can take their word for it if you want, until they have something aside from "just trust us" I will remain skeptical, you should too.

[Montegriffo]

C'mon Bjorn - He knows more then the generals, believe me. That makes him very smart. He's so smart he doesn't need to attend the daily security briefings. That's SUPER smart. [/sarcasm]

(Great post, BTW.)

Saying that was smart too. The media and Kath pretend to take him literally, and he gets the media spotlight focused on himself. But no he must not have had any idea what he was doing and really believes that preposterous statement. Trump haters are so gullible that you've become Trump's puppets, sometime you haters are even more helpful to his cause than his supporters.

@ssu - I still don't see any evidence that lead the intelligence agencies to their conclusions. You can take their word for it if you want, until they have something aside from "just trust us" I will remain skeptical, you should too.

Good to know you still won't endorse him Capps. Means you don't look dumb when he does stupid things.

[StCapps]

Good to know you still won't endorse him Capps. Means you don't look dumb when he does stupid things.

He does say some stupid shit, just nowhere near as often as his haters seem to think and their crying wolf gets him off the hook for saying that stupid shit. They lie about him and distort his words so often that no one believes them anymore and all because they had to throw their credibility out the window in a partisan temper tantrum. Sad.

[Penner]

Someone answer me this....wtf would Russia want a President Trump? They've been making fools of Barak and the DNC for years now.....even if Putin and the Donald "get along"....the Donald is way more likely to stand his ground than Billary.....she caves to her donors who would suck Putin's kolbasa to make some $$$.

The left blamming the Russians looks terrible....especially since prior to the election results they were decrying that anyone who claimed election fraud was a tinfoil hat......they've become so two faced with what they say now...they need reform badly....

They influenced an American election which is a major sign that we were manipulated, exposed, and humiliated by Russia (a foreign government) for their own gain. As with why they may want Trump, well let's look at a few known facts:

1. Trump has business ties to Putin and to Russia.
2. Trump was seen as the president candidate that would be more friendly to Russia and to Russia's interests than Clinton.
3. Clinton was a Dem and so is Obama. Just going on the theory that Russia wanted to humiliate Obama one more time by going after his own party.
4. Trump is a train wreck, as a political candidate. He has no experience nor understanding of multinational politics- so much so that he took a 10-minute phone call from Taiwan, like it was just an old friend saying, "congrats man on becoming president!" without realizing that this will piss off China and could've undone 40+ of US/China relations (that started with Nixon's trip to China). He also doesn't care what Russia does (or at least what Russia wants to do) and he also appeals to the isolationists as well.

[BjornP]

No but it is a damn good indication that they are good at the things they are successful at.

That they are succesful in their field is a good indicator that they're succesful in their field? Uh-huh. Good observation that.

Ben Affleck, Tom Cruise and Will Smith didn't run for office and get elected POTUS. If they did it would be fair to say they are superior politicians to the chumps they beat, and that they knew what they were doing as a politician trying to get elected. If they said outrageous things to get elected this would not be proof that they don't know what they were doing they are just lucky idiots.

A "superior politician"? I'd rate a politician superior based on track record after election, but hey if you wanna treat politics on anything but the craft post-election, be my guest. That they get elected, would only prove that they got elected. It "proves" nothing else. It doesn't "prove" that they have what it takes to lead a country, administration, state, region, or small town. You may have no formal education, no great wealth, and still be the sort of leader your country needs, depending on the situation. That applies to Trump as it applied to Obama, the Bushes, to your PM, to my PM, to every national leader on Earth, in the past, present and future.

Just because he convinced people using feelz instead of facts doesn't make him someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.

And just because we haven't seen him walk on water, doesn't mean he's not the second coming of Jesus... My post was meant as an attack against your poor logic of "powerful and successful means he knows what he's doing". The Americans already fell for hopey-changey feelgood of a seemingly succesful lawyer once, StCapps.

Being factually correct isn't important when it comes to getting elected, so he ignored it. Trump knew that policies didn't matter, how he made people feel did, that makes him smart, not dumb. Just because you think facts matter for some strange reason doesn't mean Trump is a dummy, it means that you think too highly of the average voter. Sorry but Trump knew exactly what he was doing, this he lucky moron theory doesn't hold up because you are saying that Trump is dumb for focusing on what matters and stupid for not focusing on what doesn't matter. That makes no sense.

Maybe y'all should stop to consider that your ability to tell what is and isn't smart politically was way off this year, and your assessment of Trump was clearly off if you still think he's just some lucky idiot, those are a lot of coincidences for only a lucky idiot to exploit in a systematic way and not even realize it. Maybe you should stop to consider that he actually knew what he was doing and was doing it intentionally to gain an advantage.

You're right that facts don't matter for getting elected. Sure as hell matters after in terms of governance, though.

I never asserted Trump was a "lucky idiot", though Trump never "focused" on anything. I have always been clear about why I hate the guy: Because he's a pussy, a whiner, an unmanly "everything is somebody else's fault" . He's also an idiot, in the sense of being ignorant. Not a lucky idiot, because he is good at playing a crowd. If I'm generous, he's an idiot like Richard Dawkins is an idiot. Expert on evolutionary biology. Yet sounds like a wannabe "edgy" 17 year old when he's trying to damn all religion. Obama was a very motivational speaker in his early years. If you love that, if you consider Obama trustworthy, and that he was gonna change everything.... then no reason not to trust Trump to do the same. I guess. After all, he promised to clean the swamp, so no doubt he'll get right on that after the inaugaration.

Personally, from my own political perspective, Trump's election victory - as much as I loathe the guy for being an embarrassingly whiny man-bitch and right-wing version of a SJW - may help put the final nail in the coffin of the EU federalists. While not in favor of EU's total dissolution like Otern is, he and I agree on alot of issues surrounding EU federalism, centralization, bureaucracy and attempts to undermine national sovereignty. The dream of a "United States of Europe" by the federalists is starting to look bleaker and bleaker with the rise of anti-elite, anti-globalist movements. US business interests could benefit greatly from a USE, and Obama seemed keen on the idea himself. Then again, Trump too, may decide the US is better off with a USE and try to influence things in that direction just like Obama. Depends on whose counsel he'll listen to.