Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[NewDigs]

21 minutes ago, stewedsquash said:

Can't wait for 60 Minutes tonight. Checking quick to make sure I have that right. 

I'm planning on watching that but when the network shows the teasers all I can see is Lesley Stahl's lipstick. In my "state" that might be a good thing.

We'll see how long I last. I worry it might be difficult determining fact from fiction. I also have a huge interest and concern in possible actions proposed. Hope Stahl's ready for some fact-checking.

Should be interesting.

Edited November 13, 2016 by NewDigs

[windsprints]

Trump confirms plan to deport millions of immigrants in ’60 Minutes’ interview

[Rapunzel]

31 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

For anyone interested, Donald Trump will be on 60 minutes tonight. I'm not sure if it's live or pre-recorded but I'm guessing pre-recorded.

"Enjoy?" Umm... I will avoid this at all costs. I cannot watch this man gloat about how he "won" an election and not discuss his obvious ties to Russia, Assange, WikiLeaks, etc. or about Comey and the damn e-mails which were all illegal tools (possibly treasonous) that he and his staff used to help him "win" this election. He did not win the popular vote - that proves that most of the Country is against him regardless of what the antiquated, bullshit, Electoral College system may say.

His lazy ass might actually have to work for the first time in his life and have to go where people tell him to go, say what people tell him to say, etc. and he will not like it, just as he is not going to like having to reside in the White House rather than in one of his tacky, gilded,"palaces" that he built with other people's money and never paid the majority of those who helped build them.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Rapunzel

[NinjaPenguins]

I think I'll watch football. It will be more intellectually stimulating and less tragic than watching alphabet soup dribble out of a yam. 

[Padma]

The only thing that would reassure me now would be in the people that Trump surrounds himself with, the people he chooses for their loyalty, the quality he prizes above all others.

I saw Giuliani on "This Week" today and was hopeful that he would show sense and moderation now that they've won. But he soon dashed that hope.  First he talked about the "professional protesters" and how they should "stay on the sidewalks and stay off of my streets" in NY. (The "professional protester" characterization of the tens of thousands who are demonstrating around the country is more "lying to the base". That shows to me they'll govern EXACTLY the way they campaigned).

Then he lied some more, saying it wasn't Comey or the email that made a difference in the last week, "it was Obamacare. Really, that was all we talked about, not the email." 

Yikes! "Liar, liar, pants on fire!" Does he think people just aren't paying attention? The speeches are there on C-Span including his own and it was MOSTLY about the crooked system that was rigged for Hillary who is a criminal because of 'setting up a secret server to hide her crimes and her pay for play corruption, selling favors in the State Department" yaddayadda.

I had to listen to this garbage!!! And read it.  And now he has the nerve to so piously revise history, "Oh no. It was all about health care." Despicable.

As are ALL the people around him who will now be part of the Trump administration--Bannon, Bossie, Lewandowski, Conway, Giuliani, General Hayden, Sheriff Clarke, Gingrich, Christie, plus bankers and lobbyists that made up his economic team. Oh and John Bolton--ugh, GWB's U.N. ambassador. And maybe Steven Hadley, one of the Cheney lackies who outted covert  CIA agent Valerie Plame.

On SNL, Dave Chappelle said "He makes great hotel rooms (Chapelle was staying in one)." and "Let's give him a chance."

But, Dave, it's actually not just about Trump, and so.... no.

"When people show you who they are, believe them the first time." - Dr. Maya Angelou

[potatoradio]

@stewedsquash -

That was a nice moment you described. I had a perfectly lovely moment like that last night. At my wife's hockey game, in small town, conservative Minnesota, I was taking pictures and a family with two kids, grandparents and parents asked who I was taking pictures of.  And my gay, liberal, urban self had a moment of "oh, sh*t, this could really go south fast." But I said, "my wife is the goaltender." And they nodded and smiled and wished her luck and we had a good time.

Like you, I want nothing more than to continue those moments, for us to be able to go out and live our lives without fear.

However, I think the election of Trump makes that highly unlikely.

Those moments are brought to us courtesy of hardcore ugliness and strife, when some people thought it was the end of the world for a black person to be allowed in the same establishment. Some people here thought they were going to wither and die at seeing gay people suddenly "throw their lifestyle in our face." There are still factions that want it to go back to the way it was ("the south shall rise again" and all that). Not you, specifically, but there is a very vocal faction now drooling over the reinstatement of white straight male dictatorship.

And DT has done exactly zero during his campaign and since his win to reassure the majority of us who do want those moments that he'll continue to make them possible. 

Again, I really hope I'm wrong. But I'm not seeing any signs that I am. 

[KIMBERLYANN11]

3 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

 

On Friday I went uptown (nothing spiffy like NYC, just a one stop light country town) to get my Dunkin Donut's iced coffee refill in my own Corkcicle cup, I saw a black lady in an expensive car. She had a tag on the front from a nearby predominately black university. I went in and had to come right back out for something. I tapped her window. I asked her if she had been able to go see President Obama when he came to speak at her university a few weeks ago. She said she had tickets, went to get them, they were gone, was told to come back and stand in line. She said she decided not to because the lines were long and not much chance of getting in. I told her while I would have liked to have seen him, and just between us ladies, wouldn't you have rather have seen Michelle? She guffawed and said Girl! You know it! 

I would venture to say I don't have much in common with that lady. She was black, I am white. She has several degrees, I have a HS diploma. She travels, I rarely venture out beyond my state. She has fears I could never imagine, I have fears to which she can't relate. And yet, I met her, talked to her and it was nice. 

 

You had a nice conversation with a black lady in a nice car because you didn't let her know who you are.

[sistermagpie]

4 minutes ago, potatoradio said:

That was a nice moment you described. I had a perfectly lovely moment like that last night. At my wife's hockey game, in small town, conservative Minnesota, I was taking pictures and a family with two kids, grandparents and parents asked who I was taking pictures of.  And my gay, liberal, urban self had a moment of "oh, sh*t, this could really go south fast." But I said, "my wife is the goaltender." And they nodded and smiled and wished her luck and we had a good time.

Yeah, the thing is, as wonderful it is to be met with courtesy instead of someone being openly hateful, more has to be demanded of people. People need to not just rely on their being able to get along with individuals as proof that they're not bigoted or whatever and vote to protect their rights.

[Rapunzel]

According to the BBC, Trump's plan to build the Wall are back on, though he is stating that it could be "partly fence." So this wasn't some "metaphorical campaign device" like his minions are stating - he still wants to do it and, in his warped, ignorant mind, probably still believes Mexico will pay for it.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, said Wall will do nothing to keep people, drugs, guns, etc. from crossing the boarder. I live in San Diego, 45 minutes from the boarder, and they use tunnels (we regularly hear on the news about ICE or some other law enforcement agency finding them) as well as take things by boat over the ocean. It's a big ocean - the Coast Guard cannot cover all of it and there is a lot of coastline as well. The CG does not stop every single fishing boat they see - it just wouldn't be feasible and the majority of them are legitimate fishing boats.

A Wall will not keep people, drugs, etc. from crossing the boarder. If he is now saying it will be "partly fence," well, that makes it even easier to get through. A simple pair of bolt cutters will let you cut a hole in that thing and there is no way ICE and other agencies can patrol every inch of the "Wall/Fence." This is just so absurd - and this is where our tax dollars will be going.

[parisprincess]

stewedsquash, I see his tweeting all of the congratulation calls as him believing that all of these people are condoning and supporting all of his bad behavior during his campaign. Mitt Romney really blasted him during the campaign, so his phone call was because it was expected as a politician. I'm sure he hasn't changed his opinion of Trump at all.

KellyAnn Conway has said it is Clinton and Obama's place to call for the end of the hate filled stuff that has been going on since the election. I disagree with her; Trump is the one who promoted hate and incited his followers to act like they have been, so HE'S the one who should disavow their behavior AND disavow the KKK and their plan to hold a parade celebrating his win in North Carolina on December 3rd. If he doesn't, it just shows that he is condoning all the shit that is going on.

[parisprincess]

windsprints, of course it's all about protocol. All of these people who have called him have criticized him big time, as he has them, but once the election is over, they all are expected to put their real feelings aside and show good sportsmanship. I wouldn't expect any less of them.

Personally, I admire the Republicans who didn't think they had to support Trump just because he was the nominee. That would have made them hypocrites, as well as making their party come before the good of the country. That's more distressing to me than them not towing the party line.

Although I won't be watching 60 Minutes (I don't care to hear what his four spawn have to say), I hope he DOES do well, although I don't see him coming across as either funny OR smart. I've watched too many of his speeches and interactions with people to expect that.

Edited November 13, 2016 by parisprincess

[theredhead77]

At least the North Carolina GOP is condemning the parade. It's not nearly enough, but it's something.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/kkk-donald-trump-north-carolina-2016-election/index.html

Edited November 13, 2016 by theredhead77

[fishcakes]

1 hour ago, NinjaPenguins said:

I think I'll watch football. It will be more intellectually stimulating and less tragic than watching alphabet soup dribble out of a yam. 

This calls for an old-school TWoP-style:  BWAH! Hands down, the best description of Donald speaking that I've ever heard.

I'm not going to watch either because what's the point? He's already backpedaling on his backpedaling. He told his base that he'd repeal and replace the ACA immediately, he told Lesley Stahl in the 60 Minutes interview that there would be no repeal until there was a new plan in place ready to go and that many provisions of the ACA would be retained, and now he's saying he's going to repeal it on Inauguration Day (moronically calling for a special session of Congress while Congress is in regular session). It's never going to matter what he says because if you wait five minutes, he'll say the exact opposite. He doesn't have any convictions of his own, so he just goes along with the last person who spoke to him, so long as he feels like that person showed him the proper amount of deference. He changes his position frequently and lies constantly, so there's nothing to be gained from listening to him speak.

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Yeah, the thing is, as wonderful it is to be met with courtesy instead of someone being openly hateful, more has to be demanded of people. People need to not just rely on their being able to get along with individuals as proof that they're not bigoted or whatever and vote to protect their rights.

Yes, the bar has been lowered so far in just the last five days that now people seem to think that if a person manages to have a conversation with a black person or a gay person without throwing garbage on them, or if a man passes a woman on the street and doesn't sexually assault her that we should be giving out medals and cookies to those people. Simple decency is fine, but it costs nothing and it's the bare minimum we should accept.

Edited November 13, 2016 by fishcakes

[Danny Franks]

2 minutes ago, fishcakes said:

Yes, the bar has been lowered so far in just the last five days that now people seem to think that if a person manages to have a conversation with a black person or a gay person without throwing garbage on them, or if a man passes a woman on the street and doesn't sexually assault her that we should be giving out medals and cookies to those people.

The worst thing is (well, actually, it's not even close to being the worst thing about this. I'm just using that turn of phrase) that people who don't think like Trump and his supporters feel like they have to make a point of it. That we have to say 'I wouldn't do those things'. And it just makes it seem like doing those things is the norm, and you're the exception. We shouldn't even need to be having that conversation! It honestly feels like we've travelled back in time.

Until a couple of years ago, I honestly thought that we were all making progress, as humans and as societies. But these fucking cro magnon goons have crawled out of the woodwork, urged on by bigger goons with microphones, and done their best to turn people against each other. And why? Because they think it's fun. I don't even know how to get my head around that. I don't know what is fun about spreading hate and division, about enjoying the suffering of others. We have to let everyone have a voice, but how can we let these people go unchallenged for what they do?

[Finagler]

1 hour ago, Rapunzel said:

It's ironic that he is trying to be loved and adored by spewing so much hate in the form of racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, etc.

Negative attention is still attention.....

[DollEyes]

 Thanks to Trump, future Presidential candidates don't have to be smart, qualified, kind and sane anymore; they just have to be rich, famous, stupid and mean.  When it comes to Presidential standards, Trump didn't just lower the bar; he buried it. 

[ClareWalks]

1 hour ago, NinjaPenguins said:

I think I'll watch football. It will be more intellectually stimulating and less tragic than watching alphabet soup dribble out of a yam. 

I absolutely love your posts, just FYI. :)

[windsprints]

Trump's people suggesting critics should be sued:

Edited November 13, 2016 by windsprints

[Danny Franks]

10 minutes ago, DollEyes said:

 Thanks to Drumpf, future Presidential candidates don't have to be smart, qualified, kind and sane anymore; they just have to be rich, famous, stupid and mean.  When it comes to Presidential standards, Drumpf didn't just lower the bar; he buried it. 

Kanye 2020! Woo! Although he's probably much smarter than Trumpster.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if this election heralds a lot more celebrities moving into gubernatorial and presidential politics. There was Reagan and Schwarzenegger and Ventura, but they were exceptions. Now Trumpster might have opened the floodgates. If he can do it, anyone can.

Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Angelina Jolie, Sean Penn, even Oprah. They're all politically active, and might fancy running for office. Is this a good thing or a terrible thing? I honestly don't know.

[KerleyQ]

2 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

@parisprincess I think it would be terrific if he did tweet every single congratulation he gets. I take it as him sharing the win with them, welcoming them into the tent. Letting people know that the unifying is beginning. When Hillary would not concede during the night (she knew she had lost when she sent Podesta out. I am positive that the candidates get the results before the media) Trump was very gracious to Hillary in his acceptance speech , allowed her to get her composure until the next day (or maybe she was getting a head start on those "Well see, here's the deal, I might still be able to help you with some of those shady deals I promised. Bill! Huma! Those checks cleared right??" phone calls) , and he is now gladly taking in support from his previous adversaries. Isn't that what is supposed to happen? We want him to not hold grudges is what has been said. 

**by allow I mean in a polite way not in a Me Man You Woman I Say When You Speak way.

Can't wait for 60 Minutes tonight. Checking quick to make sure I have that right. 

I don't think he's tweeting about them in the name of unity.  He's doing it to say "see, they all bowed down in the end."  

[katha]

1 minute ago, KerleyQ said:

I don't think he's tweeting about them in the name of unity.  He's doing it to say "see, they all bowed down in the end."  

Not understanding, or pretending not to understand, that it's common courtesy to congratulate and that none of these people have changed their opinions on him at all.

[parisprincess]

Good lord! If the buffoon sues everyone who has criticized him, he'll be tied up in the courts long after his reign as dictator-in-chief is over. That KellyAnn is even dumber than he is! Therefore, she'll for sure have a prime position in the White House. Add her to the list of misfits he plans to surround himself with.

[NewDigs]

1 hour ago, stewedsquash said:

Ha, the conversation went on much longer than what I posted. I just didn't want to share it all. She knew who I was by the time we parted ways. We have plans to do some work together. 

Had you both voted for the same candidate?

My experiences this weekend have been a bit different. I'm in retail so pretty much always have to put on a happy face. That's been a little tough this weekend.

Yesterday a customer-of-color entered my place of business and reported a person in full nazi regalia not too far away. He was rattled and had turned around to look for a safe spot. 

A regular customer of mine seemed to think it was now okay to use racist language in front of me. That was new and he's been in and out of here for years. I made it clear, diplomatically but sternly, I considered it unacceptable. I hope he never comes back. 

I try to stay positive but it feels like everything is muted, somehow.

I can't help but think the rhetoric DT used especially at his rallies has taken root. 

NYTimes piece titled: "Voices From Donald Trump Rallies, Uncensored"

“Kill her.”

“Trump that bitch!”

“Build a wall — kill them all.”[/i]

That kind of speech started with the candidate. And the candidate/prez-elect has done nothing to pull-back on his supporters' ugly rhetoric.

Edited November 13, 2016 by NewDigs

[SmithW6079]

Someone else agrees with me that Don the Con will have one of the most corrupt administrations in the history of the United States:

The Corruption Will Be Endless

And let me add -- it will corruption of Brobdingnagian proportions.

Edited November 14, 2016 by SmithW6079

[callmebetty]

37 minutes ago, fishcakes said:

This calls for an old-school TWoP-style:  BWAH! Hands down, the best description of Donald speaking that I've ever heard.

I'm not going to watch either because what's the point? He's already backpedaling on his backpedaling. He told his base that he'd repeal and replace the ACA immediately, he told Lesley Stahl in the 60 Minutes interview that there would be no repeal until there was a new plan in place ready to go and that many provisions of the ACA would be retained, and now he's saying he's going to repeal it on Inauguration Day (moronically calling for a special session of Congress while Congress is in regular session). It's never going to matter what he says because if you wait five minutes, he'll say the exact opposite. He doesn't have any convictions of his own, so he just goes along with the last person who spoke to him, so long as he feels like that person showed him the proper amount of deference. He changes his position frequently and lies constantly, so there's nothing to be gained from listening to him speak.

Yes, the bar has been lowered so far in just the last five days that now people seem to think that if a person manages to have a conversation with a black person or a gay person without throwing garbage on them, or if a man passes a woman on the street and doesn't sexually assault her that we should be giving out medals and cookies to those people. Simple decency is fine, but it costs nothing and it's the bare minimum we should accept.

I'm confused. So are we still talking about people who voted for Trump but don't consider themselves bigots or racists because they are still friendly with POC ? Or are people starting to turn on each other about what level of tolerant you are depending on who you interact with or how involved you are? I assume this election has everybody side eyeing everyone else.

I'm a misanthrope who has few friends, because I like who I like and trust who I trust. I think like some others it might be time to return to the other forums. 

Maybe I totally misinterpreted what was being discussed but I read it as: even a kind words or decent behavior isn't enough for everyone you have to be shouting to the mountains how you  participate in protests and have 100+ friends of all types and donate to whichever cause.

it was stated that no one had to justify why they voted the way they did. I think it's also justified that you don't have to prove that your a decent person who doesn't tolerate or accept what the president elect represents.

 See you all around the tv forums.

[candall]

On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 8:55 AM, Danny Franks said:

Trump has a fully Republican Congress. He can do whatever he likes, as long as they agree with him.

But, bizarrely, the main policy announcement in his victory speech, that of spending an unprecedented amount of money on infrastructure, will be hated by most Republican politicians. I mean, that's Keynesian economics, something that the likes of Paul Ryan find anathema to their beliefs. They'll never let him do it.

The above post is from five pages ago, which was the last time I could bear to visit the DJT thread, but I had a strong reaction to the "infrastructure" remark in the victory speech, so what the hell, here's my thought about that:

DT made fifty (150?) questionable claims during the campaign--things that were impossible/illegal/ludicrous or inflammatory softballs to his fans or simply lies--so why are people examining this remark with such intensity?  Are the first words out of his mouth as prez-elect somehow more credible than anything else he's ever said? 

To me, no.  I'll just add that one to the list and see how that's all panning out a year from now.

[Danny Franks]

1 minute ago, candall said:

The above post is from five pages ago, which was the last time I could bear to visit the DJT thread, but I had a strong reaction to the "infrastructure" remark in the victory speech, so what the hell, here's my thought about that:

DT made fifty (150?) questionable claims during the campaign--things that were impossible/illegal/ludicrous or inflammatory softballs to his fans or simply lies--so why are people examining this remark with such intensity?  Are the first words out of his mouth as prez-elect somehow more credible than anything else he's ever said? 

To me, no.  I'll just add that one to the list and see how that's all panning out a year from now.

Because most of the other policies are ones that the Republicans in Congress would either support him on or not really care about. Deporting immigrants, cutting taxes for the wealthy, dissolving the Dept of Education, repealing the ACA. And they especially won't support him "draining the swamp" because they're the filthiest things in it anyway. The only other one that I can think of right now that they'd fight him on is his less hawkish foreign policy, including his friendliness towards Russia.

As I said, Republicans in Congress will not support legislation that results in a massive, country-wide infrastructure renewal, at the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars.

[NinjaPenguins]

I do think you're misinterpreting, callmebetty. I believe the post is about Orange voters who believe that because  they were polite to a minority, Orange voters aren't racist. The basic human decency that should come naturally to everyone is now an act of special snowflake heroics when it's done by a subset of citizens. 

[ulkis]

5 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

I guess my point is, there doesn't have to be such a closing of our minds. Yes there is real fear, but we can't let that fear be taken by others and transmorgified (sorry reading Version Control by Dexter Palmer) into something bigger than it really is. 

This is exactly what Trump did to win this election.

[callmebetty]

4 minutes ago, NinjaPenguins said:

I do think you're misinterpreting, callmebetty. I believe the post is about Orange voters who believe that because  they were polite to a minority, Orange voters aren't racist. The basic human decency that should come naturally to everyone is now an act of special snowflake heroics when it's done by a subset of citizens. 

Thank you  ninjapenguins. That makes more sense to me. I just didn't want to feel shittier than I already do because I feel like you might be judged for not doing this this this and this.

[backgroundnoise]

Before the election, I saw Trump as Hitler.  I am a Trump dissenter who took him both literally and seriously.  Now I no longer see him at Hitler, I see him as... a nothing.

By that I mean, to me he seems to be a completely empty shell, with no soul.  No convictions of right or wrong beyond equating right with anything that helps win a game.  I no longer think he's Hitler, so, yay I guess?

I don't get why he doesn't SAY something to the protesters.  Denouncing the KKK would certainly give him more gains in his next big game, "Approval Ratings."

I've decided the best response to any type of Crooked Hillary comments is to just ask them for specifics.  And wait for the baffled looks to appear when I don't accept, "Well, Trump said she is."

Edited November 13, 2016 by backgroundnoise

[Nysha]

23 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

A regular customer of mine seemed to think it was now okay to use racist language in front of me. That was new and he's been in and out of here for years. I made it clear, diplomatically but sternly, I considered it unacceptable. I hope he never comes back. 

I had a similar occurrence with a student who comes into the tutoring lab. He wouldn't back down, even when I and my supervisor called him out for his language. It took a Latina student, who was in the room but not participating in the conversation, telling him that his words were hurtful for him to stop, and even then, he took her to task for not speaking up until asked. According to him, he's an asshole, not a racist, because he's just "telling it like it is" and his kids are half Mexican, so obviously he doesn't hate POC. According to me, if he spews the same rhetoric that known racists spew, he's a racists. According to my supervisor, who took him out into the hall for a private dressing down, if he ever talks like that in the lab again, he'll be cited for breaking the college anti-racist speech rules and kicked out of college. Thankfully, that threat got his attention.

[BW Manilowe]

16 hours ago, Rapunzel said:

If he stays in office long enough and doesn't get impeached and subsequently ousted (I still have hope that he will be impeached as some are predicting), I don't know that he'd have anything named after him if he were found guilty during his impeachment proceedings. I don't think Nixon ever got a library, did he? Just curious since Nixon was impeached and, in fact, resigned before he could actually be tried/found guilty  (though I don't think he really had a choice about resignation at that point - the writing was on the wall). Bill Clinton was impeached, but was found not guilty so stayed on as President. 

Andrew Johnson was the only other President to ever be impeached and he was found not guilty as well. Others (though not Presidents)  have been  impeached as well, mostly federal judges and a couple of senators, a cabinet member, etc., but it appears to be mostly judges that were actually found guilty. One judge from KS was impeached due to drunkenness back in 1873. He ended up resigning. Is drunkenness still even considered an impeachable offense? If so, I would think there would have been a lot more impeachments.

Nixon actually does have a combination Library & Birthplace, in Yorba Linda, CA. He's apparently buried there (as President & Mrs. Reagan are buried on the grounds of the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA). So it doesn't appear impeachment/resignation is an impediment to having a Presidential Library, Museum, whatever--especially since Clinton was impeached; he has a Library & Museum in Little Rock, AR (neither is assassination while in office a detriment to having a Library/Museum--at least JFK, among those who were killed in office, has a Library & Museum, in/near Boston). As long as you've served in the office, you're apparently entitled to a monument to your service to our nation, no matter how your presidency might've ended or how long it lasted.

https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/

Considering Trump already has so many buildings, of his own design, with at least his last name on them, I don't think they should add his name to any future Federal buildings, airports, etc., as they've done with other former presidents.

[FuriousStyles]

I have absolutely no hope for this Admininstration and they havent done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt.  Quite the opposite actually.  

Nothing will please me more to see the looks on all DT's idiot supporters when they realize he's not bringing back their jobs. He's already walked back one campaign promise and said he wont repeal Obamacare afterall.  

[ruby24]

I hope Obama is talking to decent Republicans behind the scenes, and that there is SOME plan for people with a conscience to be a check on this man's authoritarianism. Because the thing is, they all KNEW he was unfit, and I have to believe that some of them are really, really concerned about how this is going to go and be committed to not allowing him to trample all over the constitution.

[Rapunzel]

2 minutes ago, BW Manilowe said:

Nixon actually does have a combination Library & Birthplace, in Yorba Linda, CA. He's apparently buried there (as President & Mrs. Reagan are buried on the grounds of the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA). So it doesn't appear impeachment/resignation is an impediment to having a Presidential Library, Museum, whatever--especially since Clinton was impeached; he has a Library & Museum in Little Rock, AR (neither is assassination while in office a detriment to having a Library/Museum--at least JFK, among those who were killed in office, has a Library & Museum, in/near Boston). As long as you've served in the office, you're apparently entitled to a monument to your service to our nation, no matter how your presidency might've ended or how long it lasted.

https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/

Considering Trump already has so many buildings, of his own design, with at least his last name on them, I don't think they should add his name to any future Federal buildings, airports, etc., as they've done with other former presidents.

Let's just please make sure Trump doesn't get an airport or military base named after him. His name is now basically synonymous with racism, sexism, homophobia, bigotry, etc. Can you imagine how people coming to visit the US from other countries would feel landing at what would essentially be "Racist Field?"

[BW Manilowe]

10 hours ago, Ceindreadh said:

He said that during the campaign though. Does anybody really believe he's going to follow through on it, and if he doesn't, is there any way to find out? I mean, would security/confidentiality issues preclude anybody from confirming whether he was taking the salary?

 

Re the official Twitter account, when is that likely to be handed over? I want to make damn sure I unfollow it that day. (Would really love to see the follower numbers plummet!)

 

(apologies for the double post, my reply box kept coming up with the above post and wouldn't let me overwrite it)

The POTUS, FLOTUS, VP & other White House/government-related Twitter accounts will probably be handed over on Inauguration Day (January 20th), just like the offices, whether or not the new users actually post there on that day. 

[Danny Franks]

9 minutes ago, backgroundnoise said:

Before the election, I saw Drumpf as Hitler.  I am a Drumpf dissenter who took him both literally and seriously.  Now I no longer see him at Hitler, I see him as... a nothing.

By that I mean, to me he seems to be a completely empty shell, with no soul.  No convictions of right or wrong beyond equating right with anything that helps win a game.  I no longer think he's Hitler, so, yay I guess?

I'll be honest, those pictures of him with Obama, looking scared, overawed and just plain out of his depth, and those of him with McConnell and Ryan looking completely depressed, actually humanised the Trumpster for me a little. I now see him as a sad little man who has gotten himself into a situation he doesn't want to be in, but can't get out of. I almost pity him.

It's the people he has around him that scare me more, now. Pence and his zealotry. Guiliani and Gingrich finally being given real power on a national level. Bannon and his racist scum. And, of course, Ryan and his dumbass objectivist ideas, McConnell and his dereliction of duty for eight years.

1 minute ago, ruby24 said:

I hope Obama is talking to decent Republicans behind the scenes, and that there is SOME plan for people with a conscience to be a check on this man's authoritarianism. Because the thing is, they all KNEW he was unfit, and I have to believe that some of them are really, really concerned about how this is going to go and be committed to not allowing him to trample all over the constitution.

Assuming he can find any decent Republicans. Most of the sensible, moderate ones were driven out of office by the Tea Party. All that's left now are the raving dickheads. I think most of them just decried Trump because they thought he'd lose. Now he's won, they'll look to manipulate him into carrying out their plans. Unless he proves to be less biddable than they imagine, they won't be looking to curb him at all.

[merriebreeze]

What about this - Trump looked as uncomfortable as hell because during their 90 minute meeting PBO revealed that he has big league dirt on Trump (Dworkin Report) and will release if/when necessary? Thus the backtracking. 

[katha]

Just now, ulkis said:

This is exactly what Trump did to win this election.

Yes, and he did something all populist demagogues do: He presented easy scapegoats and "new ways of doing things", while underhandedly basically bringing in the same establishment figures that have been around since forever. Gingrich? Guiliani? Bolton? Sessions? Various Wall Street fat cats whose names are being thrown around. People like Berlusconi, Haider, Wilders in the Netherlands worked with similar strategies and rode that to success as well, at least for a time. I do think unfortunately, though, it's not so much that they "create" hate, it's that they rip open what's always present under the surface for a considerable part of the population in any given country. But then, I'm not sure I believe that man is essentially good. The history of mankind with its countless atrocities is certainly rather pointing in the "man is wolf to man" direction.

So that base of voters indulging in their ugliest impulses was always going to vote for Trump, where HRC lost it is probably the voters who are so frustrated with everything they voted for Trump as a sort of misguided "protest", third party voters and those who just stayed away because they've lost faith in politics helping them in their struggles at all. The ones staying away are the greatest problem IMO. Because even though it's an easy narrative for the media to depict, the reality is that many people have been left behind and probably rightly feel that the Democrats aren't really committed to helping them either.

[theredhead77]

45 minutes ago, candall said:

The above post is from five pages ago, which was the last time I could bear to visit the DJT thread, but I had a strong reaction to the "infrastructure" remark in the victory speech, so what the hell, here's my thought about that:

DT made fifty (150?) questionable claims during the campaign--things that were impossible/illegal/ludicrous or inflammatory softballs to his fans or simply lies--so why are people examining this remark with such intensity?  Are the first words out of his mouth as prez-elect somehow more credible than anything else he's ever said? 

To me, no.  I'll just add that one to the list and see how that's all panning out a year from now.

Considering he wants to live in Trump Tower and Mar a Lago I think he's confusing the infrastructure with what his new status requires to the infrastructure that keeps this country going.

I bought a new car about 6 weeks ago. I went from no car payment to a payment I can afford (but at the cost of some 'extras'). I wish I paid the $$ to keep my old car running for a few more years. I fully expect my taxes to go up, gas to go up, my overall cost of living to go up (and I live in SoCal where cost of living is already insane) while my salary remains around the same.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, KerleyQ said:

I don't think he's tweeting about them in the name of unity.  He's doing it to say "see, they all bowed down in the end."  

Not to mention that it was reported that Dubya didn't vote for him. He didn't vote for Hillary either, he left that blank.  So this  ? ? tweeting 'Look who congratulated meeee!!' is just pathetic desperation.  I believe Bush Elder also said he would "pray for his family." Take that for what you will.

[windsprints]

Scottish Leader Responds To Trump’s Win - perhaps it will be some pressure from abroad that will cause him to reexamine his policies. 

From the article:

Quote

“During the campaign, I found so many of President-elect Trump’s comments to be deeply abhorrent, and I never want to be — I am not ever prepared to be — a politician who maintains a diplomatic silence in the face of attitudes of racism, sexism, misogyny or intolerance of any kind. We hope that President-elect Trump turns out to be a president who is very different from the kind of candidate that he was and that he reaches out to those who felt vilified by his campaign.”

Edited November 13, 2016 by windsprints

[ruby24]

He names white supremacist Steve Bannon as chief strategist and advisor. Totally unacceptable. Reporters need to go after this guy immediately. We can't have a neo-Nazi in the White House, guys. This is BAD.

[BW Manilowe]

29 minutes ago, Rapunzel said:

Let's just please make sure Trump doesn't get an airport or military base named after him. His name is now basically synonymous with racism, sexism, homophobia, bigotry, etc. Can you imagine how people coming to visit the US from other countries would feel landing at what would essentially be "Racist Field?"

That's my point. Let him have all the existing TRUMP buildings, & let him have his eventual monument to his presidency. But don't name any new Federal buildings, airports (all the NYC-area airports already have good names anyway), military facilities or ships (which would be a laugh since didn't serve in the military), or any other buildings & things traditionally named for presidents/former presidents after him. And don't rename anything for him. Not even the schools he went to as a kid or buildings at whatever university/universities he went to.

[katha]

Bannon was always going to have a role in the WH, though, let's not kid ourselves. I feared he'd be chief of staff.

[Constantinople]

17 hours ago, Rapunzel said:

If he stays in office long enough and doesn't get impeached and subsequently ousted (I still have hope that he will be impeached as some are predicting), I don't know that he'd have anything named after him if he were found guilty during his impeachment proceedings. I don't think Nixon ever got a library, did he? Just curious since Nixon was impeached and, in fact, resigned before he could actually be tried/found guilty  (though I don't think he really had a choice about resignation at that point - the writing was on the wall).

Articles of Impeachment were passed by the House Judiciary Committee, but Nixon resigned before the full House could vote on them so Nixon was never impeached.

[Chicken Wing]

5 minutes ago, katha said:

Bannon was always going to have a role in the WH, though, let's not kid ourselves. I feared he'd be chief of staff.

For real. But picking Priebus instead for COS and Bannon as chief strategist is like, "Whew, I thought I stepped in cow poop. Turns out it's just dog poop."

[theredhead77]

The irony of all the Trump supporters calling the rest of us special snowflakes is lost on them.

Trump is the ultimate special snowflake

He:

• can't handle losing
• can't handle criticism, constructive or otherwise
• can't handle being told what to do
• can't handle being told no

His reaction is a temper-tantrum of epic proportions and holding his breath or melting down until people give in.

[candall]

41 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Because most of the other policies are ones that the Republicans in Congress would either support him on or not really care about. Deporting immigrants, cutting taxes for the wealthy, dissolving the Dept of Education, repealing the ACA. And they especially won't support him "draining the swamp" because they're the filthiest things in it anyway. The only other one that I can think of right now that they'd fight him on is his less hawkish foreign policy, including his friendliness towards Russia.

As I said, Republicans in Congress will not support legislation that results in a massive, country-wide infrastructure renewal, at the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Well no, of course they won't.  And "infrastructure overhaul" has about as much chance of happening as a gigantic wall stretching across the bottom of the country, over mountains, deserts, water.

But improved roads and safer bridges is an appealing thought to all of us regular Joes, regardless of political affiliation, so once again, DT's just tossing out holograms of candy and hoping people will cheer for him as they stretch out their hands reaching for it.

Maybe tonight on 60 Minutes, he'll talk about his plan to build a staircase to the moon, because, cool!