US

[The Bedge]

I'm thinking Trump will be fine as a President.. sometimes i think the media just love to beat up on people and paint a negative picture - i thought he would be a disaster at first, especially when you hear/see snippets of comments that the media chooses to play, but i sat and watched the debates in full yesterday and it's not that i like Trump so much as Hilary put me off.. reckon she's a fair snake in the grass..

[Jimmy_041]

The realities of office are that he has to deal with two houses of congress, and the agenda he spruiked won't be as easy to implement with the mere stroke of a pen at the Oval Office

This ---------------^

All he can really do is veto stuff he doesn't like
This will be interesting with the Republicans in charge at every level

[bulldogproud]

I have theory about how the Trump presidency is going to unfold. I reckon there's a good chance he's not going to honour the inflammatory language and protectionist/nationalist policies that marked the election campaign. In fact, I'd say he's likely to turn out to be quite an ineffective and lame president that falls short what he said he'd do.

The realities of office are that he has to deal with two houses of congress, and the agenda he spruiked won't be as easy to implement with the mere stroke of a pen at the Oval Office. You might say that Trump can't afford to not implement his controversial policies, because it would piss off the masses of rust-belt disaffected middle Americans who adopted Trump as their idol and savior from a modern world they see as having left them behind. They've invested themselves, their personal hopes and dreams for a better future into his idea of making America great again. They made him, and they'll be baying for his blood if he doesn't honour his suite of promises to build the Mexican wall, kick out all the Muslims, nuke Syria, bring back jobs and impose tariffs etc. He would become another member of the political establishment, someone who promises everything but fell short, just like all the other members of the political elite.

I say Trump, unlike all other presidential candidates (and political candidates), doesn't care about what he's going to do as president. He only cares about being the president. Like all massively successful male white businessmen, it's all about the contest. Trump, Murdoch, Packer, or whoever else don't take over companies and build extravagant buildings because their family will starve if they don't. They don't need the money. For them, business is a sport. It's about winning, the thrill of the chase and getting the trophy. Once you've won the match, you can point to the trophy. You have bragging rights. I won, you lost. The presidency is another trophy for Trump to put in his cabinet and point to in case you don't think he's a really smart and super awesome guy. He doesn't want to exercise the power, because he doesn't know what to do with it, as evidenced by a campaign that focused on why you should vote for him (or no Hillary) as opposed to outlining a clear agenda for what he was going to do when he got there.

The same way that people invest money in Trump's businesses and schemes is no different to the emotional and philosophical investment that people have made in his message. Trump's no stranger in the business world to taking people's investments and burning them for his own benefit, and walking away from the mess whilst telling everyone how great he still is. Trump's legacy to date has not been about it's substance, its all about style (for want of a better word) and vanity. There's no reason to suggest this is going to change.

I can hear Trump in four year's time, having been defeated in a landslide election, answering to his angry rust-belt supporters. They'll say, "Trump, you were a shit president and a liar because you reneged on all your policies that were going to start a revolution. You're just like all the other politicians. We believed in you, and you took us for a ride, **** you." And Trump will reply with his trademark smug grin and shrugged shoulders, "Hey, guess what? I got to be the president, and you didn't. Thanks for getting me there, it was a real blast to be the most powerful man in the world."

Of course, if this pans out like this it won't address the core issues at the heart of democratic politics in the US and the exclusion of large numbers of the disaffected. In fact it'll probably exacerbate it, but that's the last thing on Trump's mind, safe in his ivory tower in Manhattan and satisfied with his most prized trophy.

Excellent post. The signs are already there too. He has already reneged on the 'round-up of illegals' and is not stopping Islamic immigration. Both of these key promises have already been deleted from his website. Next to go will be the threat of the trade-war with China and the building of the wall.

Cheers

[Jimmy_041]

Id still like him to go after the Clintons....

[stan]

I have theory about how the Trump presidency is going to unfold. I reckon there's a good chance he's not going to honour the inflammatory language and protectionist/nationalist policies that marked the election campaign. In fact, I'd say he's likely to turn out to be quite an ineffective and lame president that falls short what he said he'd do.

The realities of office are that he has to deal with two houses of congress, and the agenda he spruiked won't be as easy to implement with the mere stroke of a pen at the Oval Office. You might say that Trump can't afford to not implement his controversial policies, because it would piss off the masses of rust-belt disaffected middle Americans who adopted Trump as their idol and savior from a modern world they see as having left them behind. They've invested themselves, their personal hopes and dreams for a better future into his idea of making America great again. They made him, and they'll be baying for his blood if he doesn't honour his suite of promises to build the Mexican wall, kick out all the Muslims, nuke Syria, bring back jobs and impose tariffs etc. He would become another member of the political establishment, someone who promises everything but fell short, just like all the other members of the political elite.

I say Trump, unlike all other presidential candidates (and political candidates), doesn't care about what he's going to do as president. He only cares about being the president. Like all massively successful male white businessmen, it's all about the contest. Trump, Murdoch, Packer, or whoever else don't take over companies and build extravagant buildings because their family will starve if they don't. They don't need the money. For them, business is a sport. It's about winning, the thrill of the chase and getting the trophy. Once you've won the match, you can point to the trophy. You have bragging rights. I won, you lost. The presidency is another trophy for Trump to put in his cabinet and point to in case you don't think he's a really smart and super awesome guy. He doesn't want to exercise the power, because he doesn't know what to do with it, as evidenced by a campaign that focused on why you should vote for him (or no Hillary) as opposed to outlining a clear agenda for what he was going to do when he got there.

The same way that people invest money in Trump's businesses and schemes is no different to the emotional and philosophical investment that people have made in his message. Trump's no stranger in the business world to taking people's investments and burning them for his own benefit, and walking away from the mess whilst telling everyone how great he still is. Trump's legacy to date has not been about it's substance, its all about style (for want of a better word) and vanity. There's no reason to suggest this is going to change.

I can hear Trump in four year's time, having been defeated in a landslide election, answering to his angry rust-belt supporters. They'll say, "Trump, you were a shit president and a liar because you reneged on all your policies that were going to start a revolution. You're just like all the other politicians. We believed in you, and you took us for a ride, **** you." And Trump will reply with his trademark smug grin and shrugged shoulders, "Hey, guess what? I got to be the president, and you didn't. Thanks for getting me there, it was a real blast to be the most powerful man in the world."

Of course, if this pans out like this it won't address the core issues at the heart of democratic politics in the US and the exclusion of large numbers of the disaffected. In fact it'll probably exacerbate it, but that's the last thing on Trump's mind, safe in his ivory tower in Manhattan and satisfied with his most prized trophy.

Excellent post. The signs are already there too. He has already reneged on the 'round-up of illegals' and is not stopping Islamic immigration. Both of these key promises have already been deleted from his website. Next to go will be the threat of the trade-war with China and the building of the wall.

Cheers

If he doesnt stuff around with FTAs and a trade war with China then it will be business as usual.

If he wants to build a wall then heck he should speak to the Chinese about that.

[bulldogproud]

I'm thinking Trump will be fine as a President.. sometimes i think the media just love to beat up on people and paint a negative picture - i thought he would be a disaster at first, especially when you hear/see snippets of comments that the media chooses to play, but i sat and watched the debates in full yesterday and it's not that i like Trump so much as Hilary put me off.. reckon she's a fair snake in the grass..

Zartan, by chance would you happen to be a white anglo-saxon/European male, aged over 40, and not of a minority religion? In the debates, Trump did enough to infuriate anyone who belonged to any other group.

We have to be quick not to condemn US citizens too quickly though. Trump was voted for by less than 19% of the US population. Over 81% of Americans did not vote for him. This is why compulsory voting really needs to occur in all societies.
Cheers

[bulldogproud]

Id still like him to go after the Clintons....

I don't think he would get far if he did. After all, searches of hundreds of thousands of emails have found absolutely nothing criminal about her behaviour. What she did was akin to one of us accessing our work emails through our personal computer or our phone. I am pretty sure most of us have done this at one stage or another.
Yes, in her position, it is rather careless and should not have been done... however, definitely not criminal.
If Hillary Clinton should be in jail for this, then so should every member of the LNP. It was revealed earlier this year that all parliamentary members of the LNP access their government records through their private servers.

Compare these actions against the fact that Trump has been the defendant in over 1 000 civil cases, many of which have been in relation to fraud, almost all of which he settled out of court.

Cheers

[bennymacca]

Pretty sure if I did the same at my work I would be sacked and prosecuted.

I'm sure they have an official secrets act or similar too

[Jimmy_041]

Id still like him to go after the Clintons....

I don't think he would get far if he did. After all, searches of hundreds of thousands of emails have found absolutely nothing criminal about her behaviour. What she did was akin to one of us accessing our work emails through our personal computer or our phone. I am pretty sure most of us have done this at one stage or another.
Yes, in her position, it is rather careless and should not have been done... however, definitely not criminal.
If Hillary Clinton should be in jail for this, then so should every member of the LNP. It was revealed earlier this year that all parliamentary members of the LNP access their government records through their private servers.

Compare these actions against the fact that Trump has been the defendant in over 1 000 civil cases, many of which have been in relation to fraud, almost all of which he settled out of court.

Cheers

But Trump was subject to corporate laws and common law
If politicians were subject to similar laws; most would be in jail just based on misleading & deceptive conduct and the pure lies they tell and get away with

[Magellan]

Id still like him to go after the Clintons....

I don't think he would get far if he did. After all, searches of hundreds of thousands of emails have found absolutely nothing criminal about her behaviour. What she did was akin to one of us accessing our work emails through our personal computer or our phone. I am pretty sure most of us have done this at one stage or another.
Yes, in her position, it is rather careless and should not have been done... however, definitely not criminal.
If Hillary Clinton should be in jail for this, then so should every member of the LNP. It was revealed earlier this year that all parliamentary members of the LNP access their government records through their private servers.

Compare these actions against the fact that Trump has been the defendant in over 1 000 civil cases, many of which have been in relation to fraud, almost all of which he settled out of court.

Cheers

Trump, when he said in that debate that he'd implement a special prosecutor to go after Clinton, made probably one of the scariest propositions in his whole campaign.

Clinton has been investigated over the email thing, and whether you like it or not, she has been found to have no case to answer. That's it, case closed. You can't be tried twice for the same thing. Sure, if you find extra evidence you can try to re-open the case, bit otherwise it's a no go zone.

When political leaders use their power to take the law into their own hands, in particular the criminal law, to pursue political adversaries, it's called an abuse of power. It's taking a shit on the rule of law, which is the bedrock principle that underpins western democracies like here and the US. Such abuses typify what totalitarian regimes do to silence their political opponents.

Imagine if you'd been acquitted of a crime, and then straight away the premier appointed someone to go after you specifically. Sure as shit they'd 'find' something, eventually, to put you away. Sounds unfair, right? That's because it is. If the cops can't make charges stick, then too bad. The law is not there as an arbitrary plaything of those who obtain power.

Like I've said in a earlier post, I don't think Trump's going to go ahead with most of his bluster. He lacks the political philosophy and convictions to properly go after Clinton.

[Magellan]

Ross Gittins from The Age makes some interesting points in this morning's article re: what is really likely to happen during his presidency.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/world ... smvx3.html

[Jase]

Clinton has been investigated over the email thing, and whether you like it or not, she has been found to have no case to answer. That's it, case closed. You can't be tried twice for the same thing. Sure, if you find extra evidence you can try to re-open the case, bit otherwise it's a no go zone.

While I agree with pretty much everything you have said, she hasn't been tried at all, merely investigated. . Very different things... Investigations can be reopened at any time...

She has been tried in the court of public opinion only, and while it is powerful it doesn't actually count for anything...

Sent from my F8131 using Tapatalk

[Magellan]

If there's no prospects of success or insufficient evidence to ground the charges there's no need to waste public money going to a trial. The Attorney General has made the decision to not press charges on the basis of the State Department's investigation, presumably for these reasons.

At any rate, she has been tried in the court of public opinion - last Tuesday. And the people spoke in the loudest way possible.

[therisingblues]

Ross Gittins from The Age makes some interesting points in this morning's article re: what is really likely to happen during his presidency.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/world ... smvx3.html

Agree with most of that article,

They voted for him because, in their anger with the business and political establishment, they wanted to give the system a kick up the bum. The less he sounded like a proper politician, the more they thought him the man for that job.

I think this hits the nail on the head

I think the journalist should explore the idea that the world is still suffering from the Bush reign. Isis and the refugee crisis are products of his mismanagement, and he didn't announce half the ridiculous shit Trump did during his campaign. I'd love to read an informed response t that.

[LaughingKookaburra]

Which Bush?

[therisingblues]

Bush Jr

[LaughingKookaburra]

Issues with the Middle East and the West were created far before Bush Junior took over and it's escelated greatly with the evolving technologies making the information easier to access. Don't get me wrong there is more to it than that but issues with the said parties and the West were beginning in the 80's and even before that.

[therisingblues]

There've been issues with the Middle East going back a long time, agreed. However, the birth of Isis and the current refugee crisis has more to do with the U.S attempts to introduce democracy to Iraq than anything before it. Information technologies have exacerbated the situation certainly, but if I recall correctly, it was the mass of people fleeing persecution from Isis that got the ball rolling, then the information about their ability to escape to Europe that caused millions to follow.
Would history have been different had Al Gore been President? I'm certain it would have.
Would there have been a revolution in Libya without a U.S takeover in Iraq? Debatable, yet likely, given the role that IT played in that scenario, yet the influence of what was happening in Iraq would have to be a factor.
Bush Jr grabbed the spoon and gave a massive stir in a situation that had been evolving for decades. For all the issues that had been present, he declared war on a soveriegn nation, and overthrew, then executed its leader. No Preseident and attempted that before, and he did it on the heels of having invaded another country. The acts of his presidency hang over us like none before them.
My point remains in any case, a bad President has a capacity to cause a lot of trouble, even if he does have to push his agenda through congress.

[LaughingKookaburra]

If there wasn't massive financial gain to the head(s) of all Political, Religious and Extremist parties involved in all these conflicts then it wouldn't be an issue. Whilst this happens we'll have issues. Everyone has an agenda of some sorts and unfortunately society pays the price. If we weren't so difficult to reach without being caught we'd be in the middle of the carnage too.

[therisingblues]

That might all be true.
But put the wrong person in charge, who sees only the money and potential gains without considering the risks and you go down a different path to one that the correct leader would have chosen.
I'll keep referring back to my point, if one leader is able to influence events so drastically, then another is also potentially capable, even though there is a system that he has to manipulate in order to achieve it.