Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[TheGreenKnight]

3 hours ago, Padma said:

Jill STein withdrew her recount request in PA today.  And this was after they admitted--before the recount even began--that 22,000 votes that were given to Trump never actually existed. It dropped the difference from 70,000 to 48,000.  Out of 6 million votes cast.

Surely more "mistakes" could be found if a recount took place. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-recount-pennsylvania-idUSKBN13T00L

It makes no sense to keep saying it's "unlikely" the results would change the outcome. If there was widespread cheating (as seems perfectly plausible, given the 22 THOUSAND vote mystery before a recount even starts) and PA, Wisc and Mich should, in reality, have gone to Clinton, why shouldn't that be known?  Why such defeatism and resignation if an election is once again stolen? (Let's not forget the circumstances of the last time a Republican "won" without the popular vote).

I haven't been this disappointed since election night.

I'm skeptical for the moment because I also read this: http://www.palmerreport.com/politics/no-pennsylvania-recount-effort-isnt-yes-mainstream-media-lying/359/

Philadelphia is apparently doing a voluntary recount and if there is voting error there that brings the totals down further to .5 (where it dropped from 1.2 to .8 already), it would trigger an automatic state-wide recount anyway. Who knows, I'll personally wait until tomorrow for the news to be further confirmed or not.

[AntiBeeSpray]

10 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

The more I hear and read about this buffoon, the more I fear the USA will become a nuclear powered banana republic.  

Yep. It's a frightening prospect if you think about it.

[OrigamiNightmare]

I've heard both yes & no about the Pennsylvania recount. Now I'm just confused. Someone's lying. Damnit! I'm trying to stay informed!

[KerleyQ]

11 hours ago, Lunata said:

It's barely a month since the election and there are a growing number of Trump voters who are claiming that they're being discriminated against by non-whites. 49% of Trump voters think increasing diversity comes at the expense of white Americans. They feel diversity is hurting them. Whites take for granted the normalcy of what it's like to be white. They feel they're being oppressed.  If they think getting slow service at a Starbuck's is oppression then clearly they've never been racially profiled by the NY or Chicago police department and asked for identification or frisked because of their color. If they think being asked to pay $1 for a reusable bag at a arts and crafts store is oppression, then they've never been choked out on the streets of Staten Island like Eric Garner was, oppression is being chased down by a  police officer at a distance of 17 feet and shot in the back and we still can't get a conviction for that cop. It's bizarre to have won, and feel discriminated against. This woman was asked to pay $1 at an arts and crafts store instead of a disposable plastic bag. There have already been many documented instances of Trump voters feeling discriminated against, a lot of them are posted on Youtube. This is one. It's just bizarre that they won the election and still feel discriminated against. (cue the non-white, Muslim and Hispanic groans)

 

 

This video happened in Chicago, and, a couple days after this first video hit the internet, someone made the connection to an earlier "entitled chick bitching out service people" video.  Turns out that this was not her first rodeo.  There's one out there of her screaming and ranting at a worker in a coffee shop, repeatedly insinuating that he's gay, and boasting about how she makes $90,000 as means of asserting her superiority over a lowly barista. She's basically the same unhinged hateful bitch in that one that she is in the above video. Watching both of the videos, it's like "oh, honey, you don't need to tell us you voted for Trump, it's pretty obvious." Best part of it, at some point after her "I make $90,000" rant, she lost her job (in HR).  Someone talked to some of her former coworkers, and it seems she was pretty universally loathed and a known racist.  

8 hours ago, backformore said:

Imagine the conversation when the leader of China calls Obama to complain about the incoming idiot.

But also -  wasn't it just a couple of days ago that Trump talked about how he was going to give up his role in all his businesses to devote all his energies to the presidency?  So he was going to eliminate any conflict of interest?   And then, what 24-48 hours later he's talking to the Taiwan president about building HOTELS?  This is so wrong - we can't have businesses with the name of the president on them  in other countries !! Remember when they forced Jimmy Carter to give up all interest in the family peanut farm?  And that was just one business. 

Well, if you recall, he's holding a press conference to announce that on the 15th.  So he has 12 days left now to exploit the shit out of his position to enrich his business before he "steps back."  

And you'll notice that it seems like the only countries he's making an effort to reach out to during his transition are the ones where his company needs some consideration for a current or potential project.  Apparently he doesn't have any new projects on the immediate horizon in Australia, so, instead of him reaching out, the Australian PM had to go to Greg Norman to track down Drumpf's phone number.  But countries where he needs something?  He's all over calling to "introduce himself" as the Pres-Elect and, oh, while I've got you on the phone, I need a permit pushed through, or I need you to focus on getting that nasty wind farm away from my beautiful golf course.  He's not going to go out of his way to buddy up to China.  He owes them a boatload of money, and most deadbeats don't willingly pay social calls to the creditors they'd like to get out of paying.  

So, yeah, he's going to spend the next 12 days continuing to work that Presidential Rolodex to finagle as many special considerations from foreign governments as he can for his business.  Then, on the 15th, he can hand the keys over to his kids, with the various "upgrades" he's managed to add on from his position as Pres-Elect.  And if anyone says anything, he'll be like "well, I said I was making the announcement to separate myself from my business interests on the 15th, I made all of those calls prior to the 15th."  

7 hours ago, candall said:

Well, from over in the "What Now?" thread, I just read (link) that one woman in charge of the recount in her Wisconsin county has discovered, and posted photos, that five of the nine electronic voting machines had broken seals, leaving them vulnerable to tampering, AND that Wisconsin increased the price of the original $1.1M estimate given to Jill Stein to $3.5M!!

Something's fishy in Denmark Wisconsin.

Every "recount" article I read has T losing votes.  In Pennsylvania, oops, they found out a few--22,000--of their T votes weren't real, even before the recount started.   Um . . . pardon?  Please to elaborate on that just a bit. 

It's true that I'm biased, but I'm not trying to limit myself to the articles where T votes look increasingly suspicious--I think that's just what's happening!

As if I could possibly be any more pissed, I'm waiting for everyone to just say, "Oh well, the election results do look kind of sketchy, but we've come this far with Big Orange, might as well keep going and not make a fuss. [shrug]"  I know this is what's going to happen. 

And then will it be five years, or fifty, before the whole truth comes out?

(Mr. Obama, sir, you really let me down on that whole classified Russian/election connection thing.)

.

I will be genuinely shocked if Scott Walker's minions didn't interfere with the election results somehow.  That's exactly the kind of thing that asshole would do.  

And, you know, just the fact that, as soon as the intentions for a recount were clear, suddenly various counties in those states pop up with "Oops! Will you look at that, we just now discovered these ballots that weren't entered properly," makes me think that there was definitely something intentional going on, and even if it did originate from Putin's people, the officials in those states were complicit on some level, and now some of them are trying to cover their own asses by finding and fixing those "mistakes" before the recount even starts.  

Something is absolutely fishy in those states.  And I'd be shocked if they were the only ones (yes, I'm looking at you, Florida).  

7 hours ago, theredhead77 said:

I know what all us "libtard crybabies" can lose if Pence becomes POTUS; however, with the way things are going, we're probably going to lose a lot of those civil liberties under a Trump Administration. I'm willing to take my chances with Pence, because while us women could lose our rights to our bodies (beyond the right to legal, safe abortion) and our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters could lose their equal rights at least he knows what the fuck to do and is open to learning about how and why things are done with regards to foreign policy. The risk of him destabilizing the entire fucking planet due to a phone call or Tweet are probably significantly lower than they are now with Trump and his antics.

This is pretty much where I've finally landed.  I loathe Pence.  He's the worst kind of political figure in that he wraps himself up in Christianity and pretends that everything he does is his own personal mission from Jesus, when, really, it's his own special mission from the corporations who line his pockets and finance his campaigns.  But, even with all of that, and knowing that so many groups will take some hard hits during his presidency, the bottom line is, Trump really and truly could lead us into WWIII as he blunders his way through making all of his foreign relations decisions based on which countries his company is trying to do business in at any given moment.  Pence, at least, will not do that.  We will undoubtedly take some hits from a Pence presidency, but society will still exist after it's over.  

As for Trump wanting out (I thought I had a post or two on that subject included in the posts I was hitting to quote, but they didn't appear), that would not surprise me.  My husband and I were talking today, and I think that it's certainly possible that we've seen the groundwork subtly laid for his way out.  There's all the talk about how even if he steps away from the business, it's still not a blind trust to let his kids run it, and it would still create countless situations that amount to a conflict of interest.  At some point shortly after the election, one of his various insiders (I want to say it was Rudy the Ghoul) said that it would be unfair to put his holdings in a true blind trust, where his kids aren't running things, because what will his kids do for jobs?  So, if he does want out, he could say that he is stepping away because he's between a rock and a hard place.  Everyone in DC is telling him that he can't leave it at his children running the business, because they are all telling him that his children running the business creates the same conflicts of interest that would exist if he was running the business.  He can shrug that off as "not true, blah blah blah," but, it's what he's being told.  But, if he hands the reins of the business over to a true blind trust, it is taking away his children's jobs and their legacy, the business that they've been instrumental in growing for their entire careers.  So, regretfully, he's going to have to step aside, not because he wants to, because he wants so badly to make America great again, and he knows he can do it, but because all those career politicians are telling him that he cannot remain President while his kids run his hugely successful business.  And he just loves his children so much that he cannot force them to walk away from their careers.  So he leaves essentially a "victim of the political machine," and he can go on and start his network which, of course, all of his adoring fans will watch faithfully, lamenting that they were robbed of his ability to make this nation great by the swamp.  

And, hey, if that's what it takes, I'll gladly allow him to play the martyr.  Go right ahead, Drumpf.  You go start your network.  I'll never watch that complete shit show, but you go ahead and start it.  

[backformore]

Well, it's Saturday night,  so what do you think Trump is doing?  

HE'S WATCHING SNL!!!!!!

And they're making fun of him again. 

Quote

 

Donald J. TrumpVerified account ‏@realDonaldTrump

Just tried watching Saturday Night Live - unwatchable! Totally biased, not funny and the Baldwin impersonation just can't get any worse. Sad

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  What an ego-driven fool!    Does he have a clue that the more he bitches and whines about it, the more they will make fun of him?

ETA:  the funniest thing is that the opening skit that Trump objected to was about Trump's compulsive tweeting.  He didn't like it - so he tweeted about it!

Edited December 4, 2016 by backformore

[TheGreenKnight]

4 hours ago, OrigamiNightmare said:

I've heard both yes & no about the Pennsylvania recount. Now I'm just confused. Someone's lying. Damnit! I'm trying to stay informed!

Apparently Jill Stein will be holding a rally outside Trump Tower on Monday to announce her county-by-county recount strategy after Pennsylvania attempted to stop her by asking for higher amounts of money from her.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/308643-stein-to-host-rally-outside-of-trump-tower

EDIT:

There's also these:

Green Party switches strategy in Pennsylvania recount bid, seeks federal court help
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-green-party-pennsylvania-recount-20161204-story.html

Green Party Changes Strategy, Will Seek Pennsylvania Recount
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/green-party-changes-strategy-will-seek-pennsylvania-recount-n691651

Edited December 4, 2016 by TheGreenKnight

[AntiBeeSpray]

1 hour ago, TheGreenKnight said:

Apparently Jill Stein will be holding a rally outside Drumpf Tower on Monday to announce her county-by-county recount strategy after Pennsylvania attempted to stop her by asking for higher amounts of money from her.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/308643-stein-to-host-rally-outside-of-trump-tower

So they were trying to pull a Wisconsin from her now? Well I'm glad that she's hosting that rally. Take that, well poisoners (those who posted false information about it).

I think that this song could fit him, even though it's originally about Dubya.

I can't make this crap up... just came across this load full of you know what.

Along with this one. Fake news supreme here.

[NewDigs]

2 hours ago, Kromm said:

The Surprisingly Easy Way to Get Rid of Donald Trump | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ

 

Can Donald Trump Possibly Believe What He's Saying? | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ

 

Olbermann's rabble rousing is at full steam now.

 

Gail Collins at the NYTimes  thinks that he forgets everything he says. 

Until he sees it on teevee. 

Glad he doesn't watch much tv.

[Lunata]

Sadly, this entire year in politics has re-written how political elections will be conducted in the future. It was a strategic decision to run a campaign based on lies, illegal hacking, slander, scandals, mockery, contempt, scorn and ridicule (just to name a few).

Future candidates will have certainly taken a lesson from all of this and will need to base their campaigns on one of two things, total lies or total truths. Apparently lies can't be refuted and discredited no matter how egregious it is if the voting base is strongly convinced to vote for one candidate. The truth isn't really an option either because the two words 'truthful politician' is nothing but an oxymoron, a unicorn. Truth doesn't exist in politics. Presidential elections will be decided by people who vote for someone that's a filthy rich total liar.

I don't think that I'll ever vote in a Presidential election again. This has erased any little speck of optimism I ever had and any slim hope that just one more time, the American people can get it right. For the times we live in now, people are not only receptive to, but DEMAND to believe fables, deceptions and lies instead of the truth. They demanded 'proof' that Hillary Clinton was evil and dishonest. They got what they demanded.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Lunata

[NewDigs]

Sorry, but I couldn't get past this:

'What too many of these uneducated and unshowered drum circlers don’t know, or don’t care to know, is the popular vote is a meaningless unit of measure. '

in that Townhall link.

25 minutes ago, stewedsquash said:

LOLs. I mean if this were my job I would try harder but it is just a hobby for me so this is what I have:

BeetleJill, math is hard, the recount kind not the scamming fundraising for recount kind, that is easy, huh? I have to actually pay? Uh, yeah I am out PA! Keeping the cash, but for reals going to protest Monday at Trump Towers and he is going to be so scared of me, Oh hey Hillary? No I don't want to go take a walk on those trails behind your house and capture a random fan selfie,  Hey Chelsea I didn't see you there, yeah those are cute grandkids. Whoa there...Did you just pick my pocket full of recount money Bill or are you just glad to see me?

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/12/03/green-party-drops-statewide-pennsylvania-recount/

In other news which I can't bring myself to even link Weiner is broke so he got his parents to mortgage their house for $25,000. UkDailyMail if interested.

Old news:

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2016/11/23/journalists-are-getting-hacker-warnings-from-google/

Maybe it's a Google breach instead of a Russian breach, who knows? I hope they find out the breach was from inside Google. haha

This is just funny, and possibly true:

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2016/12/04/146893

He couldn't possibly expect them to move could he?

 

Did you edit http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2016/12/04/the-unpopular-truth-about-the-popular-vote-n2254534 out of your post? 

That's the link I referred to in my above, and now merged, post.

Edited December 4, 2016 by NewDigs

[Lunata]

31 minutes ago, stewedsquash said:

LOLs. I mean if this were my job I would try harder but it is just a hobby for me so this is what I have:

BeetleJill, math is hard, the recount kind not the scamming fundraising for recount kind, that is easy, huh? I have to actually pay? Uh, yeah I am out PA! Keeping the cash, but for reals going to protest Monday at Trump Towers and he is going to be so scared of me, Oh hey Hillary? No I don't want to go take a walk on those trails behind your house and capture a random fan selfie,  Hey Chelsea I didn't see you there, yeah those are cute grandkids. Whoa there...Did you just pick my pocket full of recount money Bill or are you just glad to see me?

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/12/03/green-party-drops-statewide-pennsylvania-recount/

In other news which I can't bring myself to even link Weiner is broke so he got his parents to mortgage their house for $25,000. UkDailyMail if interested.

Old news:

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2016/11/23/journalists-are-getting-hacker-warnings-from-google/

Maybe it's a Google breach instead of a Russian breach, who knows? I hope they find out the breach was from inside Google. haha

This is just funny, and possibly true:

http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/2016/12/04/146893

He couldn't possibly expect them to move could he?

The "best" unbiased news and information sources are the ones that are barely funded, such as NPR, and PBS. I often trust Reuters, as well. Remember, blogs and podcasts answer to donors and will inevitably treat these contributors in the same way that big outlets treat advertisers. Personally, I'm always on the lookout for unbiased news agencies that have a long-standing reputation for accurate news reporting. If I read a sensational headline like "Hillary Clinton eats fetuses on weekends" I don't even bother to read further because it's obvious just stupid and created with the intention of getting 'hit's because hits means money. It's also good to have a non-US news source like BBC and I like to read the on-line English versions of foreign newspapers to get their perspective, they have no fighter in the game so it's interesting to see what they think is important. News sources like The Onion, Sean Hannity, Townhall, Twitchy and others shouldn't be trusted as legitimate and fair journalism.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Lunata

[NewDigs]

1 minute ago, stewedsquash said:

@NewDigs  haha, no, I didn't edit my post above for that reason. The link you are asking about is in the Hillary thread. Perhaps you were using multiquote and cross posted between the threads? My TownHall link is still there in the other thread.

I swear this isn't my job, I will just be looking at things and other things fall on me. For some reason Anderson is falling all over me:

http://americanlookout.com/lpn-jill-stein-admits-there-is-no-evidence-of-voter-fraud/

I wonder if ol'Andy is trying to make sure HE is the Megyn Kelly of CNN. 

The election that ate my brain.

Actually, I have no earthly idea how that happened. Maybe I accidentally had two tabs open.

Sorry!

[random chance]

When I read the replies to any criticism of him on Twitter I feel like I've slipped into the Upside Down. He tweets some outrageous lie and people say "he tells it like it is!" Someone bothers to provide proof that it's a lie and they say "you're just mad because he doesn't need the lying MSM to speak to his followers!" He talks to Taiwan and they're all, "how refreshing that he ignores the libtard snowflake PC rules!"

One of the promoted ads I see most frequently in my timeline is for the Banana Republic ... I wonder why.

[AntiBeeSpray]

@Lunata Too bad NPR is rather biased now. I don't listen to it as much as I used to. Same goes with PBS. They've both become more right wing. So I don't really consider them fair and balanced anymore.

[Lunata]

5 minutes ago, AntiBeeSpray said:

@Lunata Too bad NPR is rather biased now. I don't listen to it as much as I used to. Same goes with PBS. They've both become more right wing. So I don't really consider them fair and balanced anymore.

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/A-Real-Need-for-the-Real-News

Edited December 4, 2016 by Lunata

[AntiBeeSpray]

4 minutes ago, Lunata said:

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/A-Real-Need-for-the-Real-News

Thanks for the link. I'm aware of some of what they mentioned. NPR and PBS are bought and paid for by corporations now. So I'm very wary of what they put out.

[peacheslatour]

Quote

The "best" unbiased news and information sources are the ones that are barely funded, such as NPR, and PBS. I often trust Reuters, as well. Remember, blogs and podcasts answer to donors and will inevitably treat these contributors in the same way that big outlets treat advertisers. Personally, I'm always on the lookout for unbiased news agencies that have a long-standing reputation for accurate news reporting. If I read a sensational headline like "Hillary Clinton eats fetuses on weekends" I don't even bother to read further because it's obvious just stupid and created with the intention of getting 'hit's because hits means money. It's also good to have a non-US news source like BBC and I like to read the on-line English versions of foreign newspapers to get their perspective, they have no fighter in the game so it's interesting to see what they think is important. News sources like The Onion, Sean Hannity, Townhall, Twitchy and others shouldn't be trusted as legitimate and fair journalism.

The Onion is not a news site, it is purely a satire site.

[numbnut]

28 minutes ago, Lunata said:

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/A-Real-Need-for-the-Real-News

Great link. I like the checklist "Good news sources abide by a code of ethics which should include at a minimum: Accuracy, Fairness, Completeness, Honesty, Independence, Impartiality, Transparency, Accountability, Respect and Excellence." Bloomberg's "With All Due Respect" (hosted by "Game Change" authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann) did a great job with daily updates, insider insights and fact checking, and they did not pull their punches. It also had entertainment value for those of us who get nauseated by politics. Unfortunately, the show folded on Friday after only two years.

[jhlipton]

On 12/2/2016 at 0:07 AM, ruby24 said:

I agree with that- I'm turning 30 in two weeks and my whole life all I have ever seen is successful Democratic presidents and horrific, disastrous Republican ones.

I'm just over 60 and in my time (I've been following politics from shortly after JFK), I've seen some adequate Dems (JFK and LBJ) but the last decent Republican President was Eisenhower (which is why any remaining moderate Republicans are called "Eisenhower Republicans".

On 12/3/2016 at 4:17 AM, Constantinople said:

Is it possible the phone call was a misunderstanding?  That Trump thought Taiwan Garden was calling him back about a take out order?  Or to see if General Tso could serve as White House Chef?

On 12/3/2016 at 6:23 AM, candall said:

Or Secretary of State!

Secretary of Defense.

 

23 hours ago, sleekandchic said:

[H]ave the Republicans on Capitol Hill decided to excuse and to lie for Trump, no matter what his transgression?

Why not?  They've been lying since the Iraq War.

 

1 hour ago, NewDigs said:

[T]he popular vote is a meaningless unit of measure. '

To a major extent, the popular vote is meaningless. It's not how we elect Presidents.  Whether it should be or not is debatable but, right now, the statement is true.

[Shannon L.]

1 hour ago, Lunata said:

1 hour ago, AntiBeeSpray said:

@Lunata Too bad NPR is rather biased now. I don't listen to it as much as I used to. Same goes with PBS. They've both become more right wing. So I don't really consider them fair and balanced anymore.

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/A-Real-Need-for-the-Real-News

Taking my response to the media thread.

[Padma]

6 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

To a major extent, the popular vote is meaningless. It's not how we elect Presidents.  Whether it should be or not is debatable but, right now, the statement is true.

The popular vote doesn't decide who becomes president.

That doesn't make it meaningless. (And part of its meaning may be to show flaws in how our elections are decided. Or in some cases, to help to draw attention to a disparity that suggests widespread fraud.  Or it may have meaning in convincingly showing a new president that, although per Constitution he received at least 270 state electors' votes, he does NOT have a popular mandate from Americans to do whatever he wants to once in office. And so on.)

[Dresdengirl]

2 hours ago, Lunata said:

Sadly, this entire year in politics has re-written how political elections will be conducted in the future. It was a strategic decision to run a campaign based on lies, illegal hacking, slander, scandals, mockery, contempt, scorn and ridicule (just to name a few).

Future candidates will have certainly taken a lesson from all of this and will need to base their campaigns on one of two things, total lies or total truths. Apparently lies can't be refuted and discredited no matter how egregious it is if the voting base is strongly convinced to vote for one candidate. The truth isn't really an option either because the two words 'truthful politician' is nothing but an oxymoron, a unicorn. Truth doesn't exist in politics. Presidential elections will be decided by people who vote for someone that's a filthy rich total liar.

I don't think that I'll ever vote in a Presidential election again. This has erased any little speck of optimism I ever had and any slim hope that just one more time, the American people can get it right. For the times we live in now, people are not only receptive to, but DEMAND to believe fables, deceptions and lies instead of the truth. They demanded 'proof' that Hillary Clinton was evil and dishonest. They got what they demanded.

Please rethink this. The fanatics will always vote. It's up to the educated people to go out and vote. We can't let the nutcases win. They might have won this time, but lets make sure, it doesn't happen again. VOTE.

[NewDigs]

16 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

To a major extent, the popular vote is meaningless. It's not how we elect Presidents.  Whether it should be or not is debatable but, right now, the statement is true.

My point was that I will not read an opinion that begins with an insult.

'What too many of these uneducated and unshowered drum circlers don’t know, or don’t care to know,

is the popular vote is a meaningless unit of measure. '

[jhlipton]

15 minutes ago, Dresdengirl said:

Please rethink this. The fanatics will always vote. It's up to the educated people to go out and vote. We can't let the nutcases win. They might have won this time, but lets make sure, it doesn't happen again. VOTE.

^^^ This!  I think only 40% of eligible voters went to the polls.  A few more voters in key states would have turned the tide.

7 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

My point was that I will not read an opinion that begins with an insult.

'What too many of these uneducated and unshowered drum circlers don’t know, or don’t care to know,

is the popular vote is a meaningless unit of measure. '

Didn't catch that.  Sorry.  And yeah, good way to make friends.

[sleekandchic]

The popular vote is extremely meaningFUL to Donald, however.  That's why he started the lie that 2 or 3 million voters were frauds and ineligible to vote.  He says that deducting those bogus votes shows that HE WON the popular vote.

Secy Clinton's 2.5 million lead in the popular vote is driving Donald cray cray. I personally think he would have rather won the pop vote and lost the election in the electoral college. Bragging rights for the rest of his life, plus a return to the life he really loves.  Right now he's living his nightmare of "careful what you wish for."  Man.  Such a spoiled, narcissistic, pigheaded, whiny crybaby of a "man." Makes me sick.  And he is SO SELFISHLY WILLFUL that he will purposely open us to War just to prove that he's THE MAN, and that his penis is at least average size, although it's actually a teeny weenie.

Teeny-weenie Trump. My latest nick for this monster.

Edited December 4, 2016 by sleekandchic

[sistermagpie]

15 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

'What too many of these uneducated and unshowered drum circlers don’t know, or don’t care to know,

Is it weird that I'm finding myself trying to think this through, because I thought drum circlers were assumed to be hippies and therefore college students and isn't the whole insult usually that people who go to college and get educated are therefore fools as opposed to the salt of the earth non-college educated? Or at least people who went to college for manly things rather than liberal arts? It just seems like drum circle and uneducated are conflicting stereotypes. Which I guess would just add to the pile of conflicting stereotypes, but still.

[AntiBeeSpray]

I wonder how Drumpf will deal with situations such as this.

Source: msn.com

[Guest]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Or at least people who went to college for manly things rather than liberal arts? It just seems like drum circle and uneducated are conflicting stereotypes.

Of course they are. Whoever wrote that dribble was probably trying to elevate the knuckle-dragging, no-nothings who live on a diet of nothing but Fox News. Brietbart, and the Daily Mail as the true intellectuals. And they very well may think they are. They very well may be. We no longer live in a reality-based world. Facts now are only facts when they square with one's worldview and "intellect" is no longer confined to intellectuals. 

1 hour ago, AntiBeeSpray said:

I wonder how Drumpf will deal with situations such as this.

 

Oh, man. That makes me sad. Our local Kmart employs a lot of seniors and disabled folks and residents of a nearby trailer park. They're all super nice and I would suspect they'd have much difficulty finding other employment nearby. 

As for Trump, he won't do shit -- Sears isn't moving to Mexico. 

[AntiBeeSpray]

5 hours ago, Giant Misfit said:

Oh, man. That makes me sad. Our local Kmart employs a lot of seniors and disabled folks and residents of a nearby trailer park. They're all super nice and I would suspect they'd have much difficulty finding other employment nearby. 

As for Trump, he won't do shit -- Sears isn't moving to Mexico. 

Yep. Supposedly Sears isn't getting rid of Kmart, but it is still not looking good. 

Probably. But for all those out there, he'd probably think they're lazy and need to 'get a job'. Thing is, they have one, and they'll be out of one. The question becomes not trying to find one as much as where are they. All that's left (that seems to bump up the unemployment rating) are jobs that pay well below the minimum wage.

And whenever there's a protest dealing with raising the minimum wage, the other side complains about it being them asking for too much and that the wage shouldn't need/have to be raised. I'm betting that Drumpf goes along with that line. So I'm not counting on much in that area once his broken cabinet gets into office.  They'll want people to raise themselves up by their bootstraps, find a job and then try to make a living.

Can't do that with jobs that aren't worth a crap. People end up having to work more than one just to scrape up a living and then still have to choose between medicine, food, paying bills, etc. It's no way for anyone to live. And scratch that, survive. It's not living anymore. It hasn't been for years.

[NewDigs]

And look who was on the Sears board right before the, probable, takedown.

Steve Mnuchin.

Good job, Steven! 

[Duke Silver]

Welp, Munchkin is the economic Grim Reaper, I guess.  Good thing for him that he didn't give a paid speech at Goldman Sachs....he only worked there.

[AntiBeeSpray]

6 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

And look who was on the Sears board right before the, probable, takedown.

Steve Mnuchin.

Good job, Steven! 

Ooh plot twist. Asshole. Damn, this is not going to be good.

@Duke Silver

Quote

Welp, Munchkin is the economic Grim Reaper, I guess.  Good thing for him that he didn't give a paid speech at Goldman Sachs....he only worked there.

 

Yea it's looking that way. Too bad. That company isn't a good one.

[KerleyQ]

4 hours ago, Lunata said:

Sadly, this entire year in politics has re-written how political elections will be conducted in the future. It was a strategic decision to run a campaign based on lies, illegal hacking, slander, scandals, mockery, contempt, scorn and ridicule (just to name a few).

Future candidates will have certainly taken a lesson from all of this and will need to base their campaigns on one of two things, total lies or total truths. Apparently lies can't be refuted and discredited no matter how egregious it is if the voting base is strongly convinced to vote for one candidate. The truth isn't really an option either because the two words 'truthful politician' is nothing but an oxymoron, a unicorn. Truth doesn't exist in politics. Presidential elections will be decided by people who vote for someone that's a filthy rich total liar.

I don't think that I'll ever vote in a Presidential election again. This has erased any little speck of optimism I ever had and any slim hope that just one more time, the American people can get it right. For the times we live in now, people are not only receptive to, but DEMAND to believe fables, deceptions and lies instead of the truth. They demanded 'proof' that Hillary Clinton was evil and dishonest. They got what they demanded.

As a couple other posters have already said, I urge you to rethink that position.  This is what the GOP wants - for the liberal voters to become so disgusted and disenfranchised that we just stop turning out to vote, and then they keep on winning.  It may not be easy, but we have to fight for truth, and we have to fight against the way the GOP is rigging the system.  To give you some hope, there is already some change happening there.  In NC, their gerrymandering and other maneuvers to game the system were so egregious that they're now being forced to make changes and hold new elections next year.  In Wisconsin, Walker's over the top gerrymandering has been recognized, and the court is ordering them to re-do the district map.  And that is exactly how we fight - from the local/state level up.  When the GOP gerrymandering is undone, they will end up losing control of the state in a matter of time.  When they no longer have control of a state, then they cannot engage in their voter suppression shenanigans to affect the Presidential elections.  And, when they no longer have control of the state, they no longer have the same kind of access to control over the election process.  And, in the meantime, we fight the narrative.  We make every effort, every time, to correct misinformation.  We call the media out when they're not being honest, or when they're painting false equivalencies.  We make ourselves heard.  

12 minutes ago, AntiBeeSpray said:

Yep. Supposedly Sears isn't getting rid of Kmart, but it still not looking good. 

Probably. But for all those out there, he'd probably think they're lazy and need to 'get a job'. Thing is, they have one, and they'll be out of one. The question becomes not trying to find one as much as where are they. All that's left (that seems to bump up the unemployment rating) are jobs that pay well below the minimum wage.

Agreed.  It's the highest form of privilege to look at those who are struggling and say things like "get a job."  Similarly, I had a guy say to me, when talking about how corporations will be the ones who benefit from Trump's presidency, "well then invest in those corporations, and you can profit, too."  Like it's simply that easy.  Like the single mother who is working two part time jobs for minimum wage just to keep food on the table for her kids can simply invest in one of these corporations and prosper.  We need to look at why people in this country are struggling, and fix the system to make that better, not blame them for their struggles as we keep making the system easier and easier for corporations to exploit and keep all the money for themselves.  

Of course, I think that, along with privilege, the problem is also a lack of empathy, combined with it being ingrained in our culture to respect someone who is financially successful.  So, while some people can't empathize with someone like the single mother in my above paragraph, they do look up to a company that has become a financial success.  Then, because they respect that successful company, they're not going to begrudge them the tax breaks they get.  And they're not going to blame them for the stingy wages they pay.  Instead, it's up to those who are struggling to survive to "simply" follow the example of the person who runs that successful business and make something of themselves.  It's really twisted.  

[stillshimpy]

Quote

As for Trump, he won't do shit -- Sears isn't moving to Mexico.

As a further nail in the coffin of poor, ancient Sears, J C Penney is apparently now going to sell appliances.  So they are already on deck to do the one things Sears still did reasonably well.   

Quote

I have had to  wade through being called a racist, misogynist, idiot, brain dead, Nazi, and have been condescendingly  pooh poohed and much much more for over a year

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a genuine question, taking as a given that you are not any of those things, how did you make peace with the fact that the candidates are?  They're on record with statements that are overtly racist, misogynistic, and that treat poverty as a crime.  I have to sit through being told that people who need help feeding their families should be drug-tested, told what they are allowed to buy like they are in some sort of scolding corner, where their time out is not being given the dignity of a human being.  Every week I volunteer for an organization that sponsors a food share program, English as a second language tutoring, etc. etc.  Those people are amongst the hardest workers I've ever met in my life, and to put that in context, my maternal grandfather was a Scottish coal miner, who was sent to work in the pits when he was 13, so I am  judging on a steep, steep curve.   Just pointing out that a lot of nasty assumptions about others are also being lobbed out by conservatives without anything resembling shame because I won't even repeat the things Republican candidates have said about people who need help. 

So whereas I'm sure it really does suck to have people assume things about your views that are inherently insulting, the insult is actually based in the views of the candidates that are being supported.  

Calling people who are liberal what passes for "ignorant" and "incapable of personal hygiene" is just insulting someone to lob an insult.  It's not attached to their viewpoints, it's just some form of "you're ugly, and your mother dresses you funny" dig . 

Edited December 4, 2016 by stillshimpy
multiple edits because my brain is clearly broken this morning.

[AntiBeeSpray]

5 minutes ago, KerleyQ said:

As a couple other posters have already said, I urge you to rethink that position.  This is what the GOP wants - for the liberal voters to become so disgusted and disenfranchised that we just stop turning out to vote, and then they keep on winning.  It may not be easy, but we have to fight for truth, and we have to fight against the way the GOP is rigging the system.  To give you some hope, there is already some change happening there.  In NC, their gerrymandering and other maneuvers to game the system were so egregious that they're now being forced to make changes and hold new elections next year.  In Wisconsin, Walker's over the top gerrymandering has been recognized, and the court is ordering them to re-do the district map.  And that is exactly how we fight - from the local/state level up.  When the GOP gerrymandering is undone, they will end up losing control of the state in a matter of time.  When they no longer have control of a state, then they cannot engage in their voter suppression shenanigans to affect the Presidential elections.  And, when they no longer have control of the state, they no longer have the same kind of access to control over the election process.  And, in the meantime, we fight the narrative.  We make every effort, every time, to correct misinformation.  We call the media out when they're not being honest, or when they're painting false equivalencies.  We make ourselves heard.  

Agreed.  It's the highest form of privilege to look at those who are struggling and say things like "get a job."  Similarly, I had a guy say to me, when talking about how corporations will be the ones who benefit from Drumpf's presidency, "well then invest in those corporations, and you can profit, too."  Like it's simply that easy.  Like the single mother who is working two part time jobs for minimum wage just to keep food on the table for her kids can simply invest in one of these corporations and prosper.  We need to look at why people in this country are struggling, and fix the system to make that better, not blame them for their struggles as we keep making the system easier and easier for corporations to exploit and keep all the money for themselves.  

Of course, I think that, along with privilege, the problem is also a lack of empathy, combined with it being ingrained in our culture to respect someone who is financially successful.  So, while some people can't empathize with someone like the single mother in my above paragraph, they do look up to a company that has become a financial success.  Then, because they respect that successful company, they're not going to begrudge them the tax breaks they get.  And they're not going to blame them for the stingy wages they pay.  Instead, it's up to those who are struggling to survive to "simply" follow the example of the person who runs that successful business and make something of themselves.  It's really twisted.  

Yep. I call it being a sociopath as well. They only care about themselves, not about others.

This song fits in part.

 

@NewDigs His timing... guess we can say that a tiger never changes his stripes. Right before the fall out.

@stillshimpy I've seen similar name calling, seen a Republican call Dems, moonbats, before. I called him out on it and he told me not to twist his words. How are we supposed to deal with them if they're unable/unwilling to listen?

[NewDigs]

10 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

Welp, Munchkin is the economic Grim Reaper, I guess.  Good thing for him that he didn't give a paid speech at Goldman Sachs....he only worked there.

He's also stepping down  from the board of CIT. 

'In 2008, CIT became a bank holding company in order to qualify for, and ultimately receive $2.3 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds.

On July 13, 2009, Bloomberg TV reported that CIT was asking for Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation loan guarantees.

On July 15, 2009, the common stock of CIT was halted on the New York Stock Exchangeduring trading hours with "News Pending". At 6:03 pm a press release was issued on the company's website stating that talks of a government bailout were unlikely. The company had been advised that there was "no appreciable likelihood of additional government support being provided over the near term."[19] CIT announced that it believed it was unlikely that it would receive further funding from the federal government, and CIT Group came very close to declaring bankruptcy.[20][21][22] It was rescued in a US$3 billion deal on July 19, 2009, via an agreement with the bondholders group, which included Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO) and some other top CIT holders.[23] CIT said it planned a comprehensive restructuring of its liabilities.[24]

On September 30, 2009, in its continuing struggle to avoid bankruptcy, CIT Group was reported to be in negotiations with Citigroup Inc., Barclays Capital, and its bondholders to secure rescue financing to comply with its filing to find a plan “acceptable” to the majority of a bondholder steering committee that provided it with the emergency cash by Oct. 1.[25]'

 

Tubby sure knows how to pick 'em.

[DollEyes]

  Lord, have mercy. Trump's calling the President of Taiwan, breaking decades of protocol and pissing off China in the process is beyond the pale, even for him. This isn't just deep-fried fuckery; it's burnt to a crisp. Once again, Trump proves that everytime he goes off on his own, it leads to trouble. Now Trump's arrogance has caused his first international incident and knowing him, it definitely won't be his last. Instead of wasting time and taxpayers' money via SS protection going coast-to-coast congratulating himself, Trump would do well to buckle down and finally start taking this job seriously, which would mean doing his homework, listening to actual experts and, once and for all, stepping away from Twitter. However, if Trump must use it, he should do it once in a while, not Every. Single. Day. 

  I would have suggested that Trump start by borrowing Kzhir Khan's copy of the U.S. Constitution, but that, like my previous suggestions, would not only require Trump humbling himself, which wouldn't happen, he wouldn't be smart enough to ask in the first place. 

Lunata: I know things are/will be tough, to say the least, but please don't give up. That's exactly what Trump/the Republicans want. 

[stormy]

The problem is that since he needs to have constant love and adoration, he's proud that he's the first president or president elect in 40 years to stand up to those Chinese bullies.  The republicans are loving this.  They've spent eight years calling President Obama weak, leading from behind and dithering.  Now they finally have a real man in the White House.

Hopefully by the time the 2018 mid-terms roll around they'll pay for this shit fest in a big way.

Edited December 4, 2016 by stormy

[KerleyQ]

26 minutes ago, stormy said:

The problem is that since he needs to have constant love and adoration, he's proud that he's the first president or president elect in 40 years to stand up to those Chinese bullies.  The republicans are loving this.  They've spent eight years calling President Obama weak, leading from behind and dithering.  Now they finally have a real man in the White House.

Hopefully by the time the 2018 mid-terms roll around they'll pay for this shit fest in a big way.

That's my hope.  We need to spend the next two years making sure that everyone knows what they need to do to vote under whatever onerous voting laws the GOP manages to implement and keep in place, and helping those whose financial or employment issues make it difficult for them to meet those laws.   We need to make sure that we get a huge turnout for the midterms.  If we do that, we take back control of Congress, which will limit the damage Emperor Cheeto can do, along with neutering Paul and Mitch.  (In my two and a half decades of voting, I would consider the removal of those two assholes from their positions as Speaker and Majority Leader to be my proudest moment as an American voter.) 

[sleekandchic]

That Mnuchin person is some piece of work. No empathy, no decency, no soul.  Donald's  eharmony match, perhaps?

I read somebody who said the Trump administration will be Bonfire of the Vanities redux.  Masters of the effing Universe.  Or, to put it another way -- to my way of thinking -- the reemergence of the Rule of jerks and creeps and mega-selfish cretins.

Donald's entire campaign -- as well as the spewings of his compatriots Giuliani and Christie and Flynn, et al -- was all about projection. Railing against Secy Clinton's speeches to Wall Street, predicting that she'd rig the election, accusing her of illegally deleting subpoenaed email, for example -- while he and his cronies have done all of the above. He's despicable.

And, obviously, he misspoke when he promised to drain the swamp. Obviously he meant he would fertilize the swamp, then open the dam to make sure the swamp overflows  and suffocates and drowns all of us standing on the shore.

@Lunata, I know how you feel. But I also know you're an intelligent, thoughtful person. You'll never stop voting.  Your sense of fair play won't allow you to shut yourself down.

But, my husband and I have definitely decided not to start our family in 2017, as we planned.  I feel mournful.  He's a few years younger than I, but I'm 33, and ready for a child. Won't do it now, can't do it.  Too much uncertainty.  Trump is a powder keg.  For now, I'll devote myself to my clients, niece and nephews.  My elderly great-grans and grans. What hath Trump wrought?  For me, fear and trepidation. But I'll never stop voting, and @Lunata, neither will you. :)

Edited December 4, 2016 by sleekandchic

[KerleyQ]

13 minutes ago, sleekandchic said:

But, my husband and I have definitely decided not to start our family in 2017, as we planned.  I feel mournful.  He's a few years younger than I, but I'm 33, and ready for a child. Won't do it now, can't do it.  Too much uncertainty.  Trump is a powder keg.  For now, I'll devote myself to my clients, niece and nephews.  My elderly great-grans and grans. What hath Trump wrought?  For me, fear and trepidation. But I'll never stop voting, and @Lunata, neither will you. :)

You know, my first thought was "oh, don't let this stop you from starting the family you want," but, then, I also fully understand your fear.  It's depressing that I've actually had the thought fairly recently (oh, approximately some time after 11/8) that it's a good thing that my teenage son is an insulin dependent diabetic who also has an autoimmune disorder that causes an arthritic like swelling and pain in his joints, because it makes it likely that he will have a valid medical reason to not be drafted.  I really hate that orange asshole for giving me a reason to ever think like that.  I support and respect our military, and, if a career in the military was something my son chose for himself, I'd be genuinely supportive of him and disappointed for him when his medical issues likely made it impossible for him to pursue a career in the military.  But, it would kill me to see him (and any of his friends, classmates, or cousins) ending up drafted to fight a war that started because Emperor Cheeto didn't like that a the leader of another country shook someone else's hand first, or because he stirred up a global shit storm by kissing the ass of the wrong foreign leader for his company's gain.  

[Duke Silver]

https://twitter.com/kurteichenwald/status/805520761565966338

 

^^^ YEP...  It's important to note "Trump supporter/fan" is NOT necessarily the same as "conservative."  I have many conservatives in my life who abhor Trump.  I respect their thoughts and actually feel for them as they legitimately feel (have felt for quite a while since the advent of the Tea Party nutjobs) that they are without a Party.  Many have become registered Independents over the last 10 years or so.

[KerleyQ]

16 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

^^^ YEP...  It's important to note "Trump supporter/fan" is NOT necessarily the same as "conservative."  I have many conservatives in my life who abhor Trump.  I respect their thoughts and actually feel for them as they legitimately feel (have felt for quite a while since the advent of the Tea Party nutjobs) that they are without a Party.  Many have become registered Independents over the last 10 years or so.

I've been saying for a few years now that the Tea Party rightfully should have formed their own new party, but, because it's difficult to form and sustain a new party on a national level, they decided to usurp the GOP.  And the GOP has essentially rolled over and let them.  I mean, some have put up a fight, but they just get shouted down with cries of "RINO!!!" and threats of being primaried.  As you mention, it's driven away voters, both staunch Republicans and moderates (like me, I used to be a moderate, but now I vote a straight Dem ticket).  It's also driven away some elected Republicans, the most high profile case probably being Boehner.  I have no great love for the man, but every time he tried to work with President Obama, or tried to compromise across the aisle, he was heckled and harassed by the Tea Party until he eventually just walked away.  Trump winning the nomination was the official end of the old GOP, and the completion of the Tea Party takeover of that party.  Now?  Now they're working on taking over the country.  That's what the voter suppression is, that's what the gerrymandering is. That's what the hot mess McCrory is trying to inflict on NC is.  The will of the people is no longer important.  They will tell us what we want, by manipulating the process to get the results that they want.  And they won't leave us a democracy.  They'll essentially make us something akin to an oligarchy, where everything is run by whoever is selected by the Koch Brothers and a handful of their fellow billionaires.  

[Duke Silver]

Yeah, the Koch brothers view America as a giant company town for Koch Industries, nothing more.  They're the head of the oligarchs....the Mercers have joined them, since they backed the right horse, Trump....albeit a little belatedly, which is more than the Kochs did, but the latter are benefitting anyway w/ appointment of their guys, Pompeo for CIA & Kobach as the architect of the "let's get rid of the brown folks" portion of the Trump menu.

A comfortably numb electorate drunk on the happiness of being "great again" in a Christian utopia where everyone is equal in their barely above poverty life (other than the select few, of course), is achievable with a country full of scared people, hammered for years to believe that learning new things is un-American.  Ho hum...as long as there are fewer brown people, gays & heathen non-Christians around, no level of poverty is too onerous, I guess.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Duke Silver

[Constantinople]

4 hours ago, jhlipton said:

...any remaining moderate Republicans are called "Eisenhower Republicans"

These days I believe moderate or Eisenhower Republicans are generally referred to as Democrats.

[Dresdengirl]

On 12/3/2016 at 10:09 AM, fishcakes said:

It's 1.25 trillion. They hold more U.S. debt than any other country. The week after the election, my financial advisor sent me bulletins that different investment houses were putting out (I've been his client since 2000 and this is the first time this has happened after an election), basically saying, "we have no idea what's going to happen, but don't panic right now because you're probably going to want to panic later." I think that time is near.

The other part of the story is that one of the reasons why Carrier was losing jobs was because in 2014 Pence signed off on dismantling Indiana's energy program, which had been a job creator and had stimulated investment in green energy. Carrier was one of the companies that asked him to veto the bill killing the program, but he turned them down. Of course I'm sure that Donald and Mike would say, "oh but those are those fake green jobs that you socialists are always trying to say are necessary to prove your global warming hoax. Those aren't the good old American jobs that people are used to. Americans should not have to learn new jobs. They should be able to keep being coal miners and blacksmiths and run livery stables like they did when America was great."

But wouldn't the deal fall through anyway when she killed and ate the guy after mating?

"Those aren't the good old American jobs that people are used to. Americans should not have to learn new jobs. They should be able to keep being coal miners and blacksmiths and run livery stable like they did when America was great."

Lets face it, when the Donald reduces the corporate tax rate to 15% from the current 35%, we'll all be travelling by horse and buggy again, since there won't be any money for roads, bridges etc. So we'll' need those blacksmiths again. See, problem solved. 

[Cupid Stunt]

Because Numbers Are Hard

Quote

The Trump administration is seriously thinking about not submitting a budget to Congress next year .

Although the Congressional Budget Act requires the president to submit the fiscal 2018 budget to Congress between January 2 and February 6, Trump could easily say that it was the responsibility of the outgoing Obama administration to comply with the law before the new president was sworn in on January 20.

But while the new president not sending a budget to Congress might not be illegal, it would clearly be unprecedented.

***

First, it would allow Trump to avoid the complaints that always come from those the budget proposals would harm by denying them a platform to criticize the White House. No proposals on paper would mean nothing to disparage.

Second, it would allow the White House to avoid having to say how much its taxing and spending proposals will increase the federal deficit and national debt.

Given that many estimates put the likely annual deficit from the Trump campaign plans at $1 trillion or more and that the total increase in the national debt before the 2020 election could easily equal the borrowing during the first 4 years of the Obama administration, the likelihood that this is a major consideration should not be downplayed. Just think of the value of not having to publish a table that for the first time shows those very high numbers, and not having to answer to the House Freedom Caucus.

Third, it would also eliminate the need for the administration to publish a table with the very optimistic GDP growth promised during the campaign, the high interest rates many economists think are coming and Trump’s unrealistic assumptions on jobs and unemployment.

Fourth, it would eliminate the need for the House and Senate to hold hearings on the Trump budget. That would expedite Congress’ consideration of its 2018 budget resolution and the reconciliation process that is widely expected to be used to accelerate the passage of many of Trump’s and the House and Senate GOP’s priorities.

Fifth, although there have been a few rumors about possible directors of the Office of Management and Budget, almost a month after Election Day no one has yet been named. That almost certainly will delay the development of the Trump 2018 budget until almost the summer and the GOP congressional leadership might not want to wait that long to begin its work on the all-important 2018 budget resolution and reconciliation.

Finally, because the White House and Congress will be preoccupied until around the end of March with a budget resolution, reconciliation bill and appropriations for 2017 and a new debt ceiling increase, Trump may not have time for the 2018 budget that would have to be developed at that same time. Given that schedule, plus the fact that it will take some time to get the Trump cabinet and subcabinet confirmed, the White House may think that not submitting a 2018 budget and just working with Congress will be its best chance to be successful.

The lack of transparency and accountability are very desirable and will facilitate the great looting that is about to take place, but I suspect there is another reason why they won’t submit a budget.

They don’t have anyone or any staff that know how to do it. They never thought they would win. They never thought about these things. And Trump Republicans aren’t numbers people. Their reactionary radicals who think a Facebook meme is a thinkpiece. They don’t know how government works, they don’t understand budgets, budgeting, and the legislative process. They just want to shut down departments of government they disagree with, sell off the carcass and redirect the money to their supporters and their benefit, and shit on the people that disagree with that plan.

What we are going to see is an administration completely disengaged from actual governance, while within the Republican House and Senate individual fiefdoms will handle the money grab. In the chaos, criminals find and create opportunities. In 20 years if we are still around, we may begin to get a full accounting of how Trump drove the country into financial ruin and how we ended up with the top 1% owning 99.99% of everything while we have two trillion annual deficits but are still all starving.

But that’s if the media hasn’t been banned by then.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Cupid Stunt

[Duke Silver]

^^  Seriously, that made me cough-up the beer I was drinking, hahahahaha.  Unfortunately, it's also very accurate, methinks.  The amount of graft we're about to witness will be beyond belief.  They aren't even really trying to hide the fact that it's underway.  

[callmebetty]

17 minutes ago, Dresdengirl said:

"Those aren't the good old American jobs that people are used to. Americans should not have to learn new jobs. They should be able to keep being coal miners and blacksmiths and run livery stable like they did when America was great."

Lets face it, when the Donald reduces the corporate tax rate to 15% from the current 35%, we'll all be travelling by horse and buggy again, since there won't be any money for roads, bridges etc. So we'll' need those blacksmiths again. See, problem solved. 

But where are we going to get all the hay and oats to feed the horses? 

[Padma]

Kellyanne Conway is such a disgusting excuse for a human being.   http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/11/kellyanne-conway-dodges-students-question-about-sexual-assault.html

I really don't know how she lives with herself. (Note to SNL: Stop trying to make her look like Tubby's moral compass. She's really his Joseph Goebbels.)