Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[axj]

I might be totally projecting but I actually feel kind of sorry for Trump. Like, I feel that behind all the bluster and narcissism he is just a pretty decent, realistic guy and actually does just want to have a good life, let other people have the good life, and chill.

If he just wanted to have a good life and chill, he could have done it easily. Instead he ran for president and paid $100 million for that out of his own pocket. The question is of course, how much of his motivation was narcissism, a power trip, wanting to improve the value of his brand and business and how much he actually cares and believes in making the country a better place for everyone. I don't know the answer to that, but it's certainly a combination of the two.

 

[Carl]

If he just wanted to have a good life and chill, he could have done it easily. Instead he ran for president and paid $100 million for that out of his own pocket. The question is of course, how much of his motivation was narcissism, a power trip, wanting to improve the value of his brand and business and how much he actually cares and believes in making the country a better place for everyone. I don't know the answer to that, but it's certainly a combination of the two.

Thinking about it again it's true that's not entirely accurate, but kind of on the point as well - he wants to be the popular one, and wants to be incredibly famous and known for that. That is his 'good life'. The only way to really do that is bring back the American dream for many people.

He just seems like such an open book. It's been his biggest strength, but may be his biggest weakness now.

 

[Alada]

I am amazed that there is so much grief for Killary. But I am glad everyone is finally showing their true colors. They either wake up by the shock are they disintegrate further. Whatever happens, it seems the US is after all a powder keg ready to explode.

On that the above and the theme of splitting realities, I wonder if it's a case of you reap what you sow, or "life experiences reflect exactly what you give to life".

There's an expression along the lines of 'if you don't use your mind, someone else will use it for you'. Those who willingly went along with Killery's lies were happy to have someone else think their thoughts for them, happy to suck up the mainstream narrative and not have to think anything through for themselves. Authoritarian followers disguised as progressives. Well, the bubble burst, and the hollow media has nothing to say, nothing 'real' to offer them now, no cosy sleep inducing 'dreams of a better tomorrow'. The word 'dream' being quite literal there.

That's what may be driving the process of people freaking out in part, you do have to take into account to vast amount of programming they've been subjected to, but by coasting along in happy bubble to begin with it's kind of asking for it to be burst at some point. Now that it has, there's suddenly no figure head to turn to, and no media to tell them what to think - "somebody please tell me what to think!"

So they're angry because they've woken up into a world where they feel screwed, well, maybe they should have been paying attention. Because if they had been then they would have noticed what their idols were doing to everybody else, that led them to want to vote for Trump.

People have mentioned a sense of relief coming at the end of the election, and I felt it here too, I think in part that's what a vote for Trump symbolized to regular folk who felt the stress of living under the current system and just wanted to make it stop. Hilary's followers are starting to get a wee taste of that stress (of having nothing or no one you feel respresents you) and they don't like it, they want that cosy bubble back! So the progressive mask slips and there's something unsavory beneath.

On polls, the BBC coverage ran through a whole bunch of stats on election night, one that caught my eye (as they mostly seemed to present stats where Clinton was more favoured), was that Trump was way ahead in terms of who people thought could deliver change, something like 80% in favour of Trump. I think that says a lot, people had had enough and wanted real change not the usual hollow promises.

 

[angelburst29]

This article goes into some detail in what Trump was facing in his bid for President and how Soros money might flow into a movement for “regime change” within the USA. We may be looking at a Color Revolution in the very near future?

Trump Victory: An Epochal Event?
http://katehon.com/article/trump-victory-epochal-event

Trump succeeded beyond the odds through an indomitable will. That is something that has not been seen in American politics for generations. Trump was accused of being vague on policy (albeit, Clinton did not evince any more detail of policy than Trump) but what he represented is an idea whose time had come, which asserts itself regardless of party platforms, with a personality that was able to withstand the most vicious domestic smear campaign against a politician in memory.

The pundits are right in this if nothing else about Tump: that this was a vote against the Establishment, with much reference among Trump supports in regard to defeating the “elite”. Who this “elite” is has been clearly recognised by Trump, and is easy to identify insofar as it provided the funding for Clinton, as it had for Obama: the financial oligarchy headed up by George Soros. Among Clinton’s coterie of billionaire donors, Soros was by far the largest, giving over $11,000,000. Trump’s largest donor was American rental homes businessmen Bradley Wayne Hughes, who gave less than half a million. (“Hillary is outraising tump 20-to-1 among billionaires”, Bloomberg, Sept. 26, 2016; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/billionaire-donors-led-by-soros-simons-favor-clinton-over-trump). Trump caused controversy to the point of being smeared as “anti-Semitic,” when he said before a Jewish lobby that he did not need their money.

“Global power structure” However, worse still, one of the Trump campaign’s last advertisements prior to the election attacked the “global power structure”, supposedly an anti-Semitic code for “Jews”, with depictions of Soros, Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs, and Janet Yellen, chair of the Federal Reserve Bank, as representing “special interests” in Washington, “controlling the top levers of power”. One is apparently not supposed to mention such globalists because they are Jewish. Are we seriously supposed to believe that there is NOT a “global power structure,” and that Soros and Blankfein are NOT at the top of this structure? Like “the emperor’s new clothes,” it is supposed to be something that should not be mentioned aloud, and when it is, the knee-jerk reaction is to refer to “conspiracy theories”, as though conspiracies do NOT exist, whether as Mafioso meeting in secret to plan a “criminal conspiracy”, as defined by law; or Bilderberg conferences meeting in secret to arrive at a global consensus (and one can be sure that “what to do about Trump” will be top of the agenda of the next Bilderberg conference). If Soros’ vast network of foundations and NGOs is not in itself a “global power structure” then what is it? Clinton was stated to be a “partner of these people” in the Trump campaign advertisement. Of Blankfein the advertisement stated: “It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities”. (“Donald Trump’s final ad evokes ‘centuries-old anti-Semitic dog whistles”, Nathan Guttmann, Forward, November 6, 2016; http://forward.com/news/national/353563/donald-trumps-final-ad-evokes-centuries-old-anti-semitic-dog-whistles/). Hence Trump, despite Jewish family connections, and pro-Israel statements, has shown that he is not beholden to money or moral blackmail and intimidation from the Israel lobby.

Russia In regard to Russia, Trump’s pro-Russian sentiments have been used against him as though he is a traitor, while, simultaneously being attacked as a war-monger by supporters of Clinton, whose record as Sectary of State was very much that of a war-monger. It is one of the features of the presidential campaign: projecting Clinton’s outlook onto Trump, as “nasty”, “dangerous”, “unstable”, “moneyed”; all characteristic of Clinton in magnified form. Indeed, Trump’s praise for Putin was regarded as outrageous. The possibility of a Russo-American accord in world affairs strikes terror into the hearts of the “global power structure” and the “special interests in Washington”. An immediate, hopeful result could be the reversal of U.S. policy in the Islamic world by seeking “regime change” through the arming of terrorists in the name of “fighting terrorism”, specifically in regard to Syria.

Trump was ridiculed for stating that he has a “secret plan” to deal with the Islamic State. Yet considering that Trump’s military adviser has been the former head of the American Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a brilliant strategist, that Trump has developed a far-reaching plan with Flynn is plausible, one might say likely. Of arguably more importance however is that Flynn is no Russophobe; to the contrary, he is pro-Russia, and an analyst for Russia Today. (“Donald Trump to bring adviser with Russia ties to classified briefing”, The Huffington Post, Aug. 16, 2016; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michael-flynn-trump-classified-briefing_us_57b3939fe4b0edfa80da28ca).

Another Trump foreign policy adviser has been Carter Page, who in 2015 wrote in the Global Policy Journal condemning Obama’s sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine. Page also criticised U.S. officials such as Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland for fomenting the Ukrainian riots. (Huffington Post, June 21, 2016; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-carter-page-russia-sanctions-black-lives_us_5769bf64e4b065534f482504). Michael Pence, vice president elect, has evoked anti-Russian sentiments, unknown to Trump who, when questioned on them, promptly repudiated Pence’s view. Hopefully Pence will be kept in line. More problematic, although no more belligerent than Clinton, has been Trump’s rhetoric condemning Iran as sponsor of “Islamic terrorism”. It does not fit well with Trump’s positive positions in other areas of foreign policy.

Anti-globalist The Trump revolt is also a major blow to globalisation. Trump stood as the anti-free trade candidate against Clinton, pushing her into opportunistically and cynically reversing her attitude towards the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. He has spoken of applying tariffs, of re-industrialising the USA, and rebuilding the infrastructure of roads and bridges, in what will have to be a colossal undertaking of state planning. The infamous “Wall” that became an inordinate focus of the campaign both for and against Trump, is one part of a process that is required to free the USA from the “global power structure”, since the free movement of labour (people), is as much part of globalisation as the free movement of capital, resources and technology. There are more complex factors at work than “racism”; a red-herring. (See Bolton, Babel Inc., London: Black House Publishing, 2013).

Trump has criticised the Federal Reserve; can and will he act to retrain its power? This also has made the “global power structure” nervous: “As Wall Street grapples with the election of Donald Trump as the next president of the US, it appears the order of the day is uncertainty. Among the myriad of uncertain consequences of Trump’s election is the real possibility of a major shake up at the Federal Reserve”. (Bob Bryan, “Donald Trump’s election has Wall Street questioning the future of the Federal Reserve”, Business Insider Australia, Nov. 10, 2016; http://www.businessinsider.com.au/donald-trump-presidential-election-federal-reserve-janet-yellen-2016-11?r=US&IR=T).

Leftist stooges Here we have what might seem a paradox about the whole election, but is really historically consistent: the Left and the oligarchy both backed Clinton. Her policy was that mixture of social liberalism and free trade that sees a convergence of the Left with international finance (See Bolton, Revolution from Above, Arktos Media Ltd., 2011), remarked on by Oswald Spengler nearly a century ago when he said that Leftists movements operate in the interests and direction of “money”. (Spengler, The Decline of The West, London: Allen and Unwin, 1971, Vol. II, 402).

A dichotomy will be established in the USA if Trump proceeds with the anti-Establishment revolt once in Office: The USA under Trump’s presidency could become a bulwark of anti-globalisation while simultaneously remaining the world headquarters of the globalist “power structure”.

Wall Street will continue to exist and so will Hollywood. However, under Trump will the U.S. State Department continue to sponsor multiculturalism throughout the world, including Hip Hop concerts in Europe, as a means of breaking down traditional cultures, in tandem with the programmes of the Soros network, Freedom House and many others, listed as undesirable NGOs by Russia? (See Bolton, Babel Inc., op. cit.). One hopes not. Will U. S. Congress continue to provide funds for the privately run National Endowment for Democracy to continue sponsoring subversive organisations to create “colour revolutions”, and interfere in the domestic politics of sundry nations; Russia in particular? Trump has questioned the USA’s mission to “police the world”, and the wisdom of having overthrown Gaddafi and Saddam, charging the global power structure, fronted by Clinton and Obama, with having “created Isis”. The question occurs as to whether the Trump Administration can or will reign in the mostly U.S.-based NGOs that have created what globalist strategist Ralph Peters has lauded as “constant conflict”.

The Leftist convergence with the “global power structure” is already being played out on the streets of the USA, a day after the Trump victory. The Clintonistas are rioting and demonstrating. These Leftists follow their historic role as the useful idiots of a capitalist dialectic; supposed anti-globalists, pacifists, effete males, butch-lesbians, agitated Afros and Latinos, Bernie Sanders Social Democrats, venting anger against the only revolt driven by rural America and the “rust belt” whose candidate opposes globalisation, free trade agreements, U.S. global meddling, and the escalation of war scenarios. (“Thousands of anti-Trump protestors take to streets of U.S. cities”, Reuters, Nov. 10, 2016; http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-protests-idUSKBN1343CO). One can expect Soros money to flow into a movement for “regime change” within the USA in the way Soros money flows into the “Black Lives Matter” movement. (Bolton, “Megabucks for BLM: another Left-wing cause with capitalist sponsors”, Right On, Aug. 6, 2016; https://www.righton.net/2016/08/06/megabucks-for-blm-another-left-wing-cause-with-capitalist-sponsors/). Plutocracy-orchestrated riots against Trump could be the catalyst for the revival of the type of New Left anarchy that was promoted by oligarchs during the 1960s and 70s. (Bolton, Revolution from Above, op. cit., “New Left from Old”, 144-200).

 

[Ruth]

It's worth noting these incidents of random racism occuring now, similar to post-Brexit:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656

Quite a collection so far

Yeah, well evil is not going to rest regardless of which 'color' it wears, or which flag it flys under. Especially after a rather public slap in the face by the American people. By evil I mean corruption of the democratic system.

I don't think the American people voted for Trump (the establishment's 'stalking horse'), as much as they voted against Hillary (the establishment's preferred candidate).

This is really something that the hysterics don't seem to see, so lost in their dreams of a perfect world and projecting their own 'morality' on the system. Trump's problems and America's problems aren't going to stop with his election. He's going to have to be very smart and chose his battles if he hopes to guide a very troubled and corrupt country out of a complete melt down.

 

[Windmill knight]

It's worth noting these incidents of random racism occuring now, similar to post-Brexit:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656

Quite a collection so far

I actually don't think Trump is going to fulfill his most outrageous promises, such as building a wall (nope, cause in fact there is one already) or profiling Muslims (cause it's undoable and pointless). In fact, I doubt he is racist at all - I mean, if a an Arab sheik approaches him with a multimillion deal, he is certainly not going to turn him down on the basis of the color of his skin or religion. Or when it comes to making deals with his southern neighbours, he is not going to decline because "Mexicans are not really our friends". You can't change neighbours and it would be stupid to pretend otherwise. I think all those shocking declarations were just campaign strategy; it was what he thought would get him more votes and all that will be forgotten once he gets into office, in the same way that Obama saying he would close Guantanamo was one reason he got into the White House and one thing he never did. So I'm not worried about HIM in that respect (not yet, anyway; and by the same token I'm also not hopeful that he will fulfill his good promises, but we'll see).

However, I am worried about 'grass-roots' racism and discrimination, and judging by the link above, it's not looking good, and I'm very sorry that stupidity has taken hold of some people already. :(

I'm also wondering if those incidents, plus the black/white social divide, plus anti-Trump demonstrations will end up in a 'color revolution' of sorts, as the Cs once hinted. Well, it's way too early to tell but it's an intriguing possibility. Things are going to be very interesting, for sure.

 

[Joe]

Well, we thought for years now that the Potus has no real power. But is that really true?

I think it depends. A Potus that comes up through the privileged martha's vineyard-type set (most of them) is much more likely to go with the flow and basically do what he is 'advised' to do. Someone like Trump though, being an outsider, might come with ideas about doing his own thing. There's probably some leeway for someone like that to change things a bit, but what and how far can he go? That would depend on his own view of him as president and his own personal convictions and how likely he is to fall in line. All unknowns. I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

 

[JEEP]

"All these things are orchestrated, you know."

And there it is. I wondered from the beginning of Trump's run for the Presidency if it was all a sham - and I said so to my spouse many times over the course of this election cycle - that the whole thing was a big ruse. And boy, THEY sure pulled out all the stops - right up to and including the Comey investigation on/investigation off scenario. Yeah, Soros rigged all those voting machines - and BTW, not gonna make the same mistakes that were made w/ Brexit - and yet, somehow, Trump is victorious. Hmmm. And it looks like there were fewer numbers of voters this election than the last Prez election.

I, btw, chose to vote by absentee ballot and purposely left all the Prez choices blank (along w/ Senate choices) - firstly, because I didn't feel any of the candidates were worthy and secondly, to affirm that voting is merely giving the PTB permission to continue to deceive the citizenry into believing that democracy exists and somehow works. I did vote against Rep. Tiberi in our highly Republican gerrymandered district just to satisty my own sense of whapping him w/ a metal-studded butterfly wing! County/city races/issues also received votes w/ really only one actually under real contention - the guy I voted for won. The brazen political upstart lost - and a Democrat. Felt real satisfaction w/ that one.

The PTB rejected HRC (her illness too far progressed or she wasn't ever the choice?) w/ The Donald as the pre-selected winner all along. So, for sure, we have all been played, but has The Donald been played as well?

Now it appears the 2nd phase is kicking in - orchestrated color revolution. Perhaps some of you will recall that during the 2000 W selection, there were protests in the streets regarding that illegal, unconstiutional 'victory' except THOSE protests were not covered by MSM. Whereas, now, these election protests are being given free reign & plenty of coverage. How long before BLM starts doing their thing again?

Well, it all really is a 'really big show' - and now we wait for the fireworks to begin. Course, the PTB think they will be the ones handling that aspect. The Cs say otherwise - the wrath of Mother Nature anyone? Ka-BOOM!

 

[Joe]

"All these things are orchestrated, you know."

And there it is. I wondered from the beginning of Trump's run for the Presidency if it was all a sham - and I said so to my spouse many times over the course of this election cycle - that the whole thing was a big ruse. And boy, THEY sure pulled out all the stops - right up to and including the Comey investigation on/investigation off scenario. Yeah, Soros rigged all those voting machines - and BTW, not gonna make the same mistakes that were made w/ Brexit - and yet, somehow, Trump is victorious. Hmmm. And it looks like there were fewer numbers of voters this election than the last Prez election.

I wouldn't go so far as to it's all orchestrated. Instead I tend to think of it as a natural process that is 'tinkered' with here and there, or nudged in certain directions, but other than that, things evolve 'naturally'. Imagine the flow of a river. It's going to the sea one way or another. The fact that its course can be shifted somewhat does not change the end result nor that it remains a natural process. In fact, the 'nudging' is part of the natural process, but the actually flow of the river and the ups and downs it experiences are all part of a natural function of water running over land.

That there is a major division in the USA right now is natural if you consider that for years the rich and powerful have been progressively destroying the US and global economy, bit by bit, and increasing the suffering of people, to one extent or another, around the world in the process. When you create and then marginalize and forget about the poor in a society, you create an at least two tier system, and the results of that division will eventually manifest in a way that impacts everyone.

 

[lilies]

Don't know if this has been posted before, but it is definitely a MUST SEE. He's been consistent through the years.

http://<iframe width="560" height="...SM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

There must be a possibility through many timelines, where Trump fights and stumbles and has the chance to realize the potential to remain true to his visions. When fighting corruption and control of the establishment: look into himself and little by little - through many branching timelines - among those there must be favorable ones, where he makes better decisions resulting in better realities and a more livable environment for everybody.

I want to be there to quote members of this forum stating that it looks like we again and again shifted to a slightly better timeline.

We work on ourselves, so we will have the chance to shift to those better timelines, where world leaders made better decisions and the results were more favorable, little by little, step by step, just as we have done so far.

Remember we could have had far worse. Now there is Putin and no Killary and numerous allusions to disasters that have been averted, possibly through a series of timelines we have traveled so far.

Lets be positive, aim and go again to a better one.

 

[Ruth]

Well, we thought for years now that the Potus has no real power. But is that really true?

I think it depends. A Potus that comes up through the privileged martha's vineyard-type set (most of them) is much more likely to go with the flow and basically do what he is 'advised' to do. Someone like Trump though, being an outsider, might come with ideas about doing his own thing. There's probably some leeway for someone like that to change things a bit, but what and how far can he go? That would depend on his own view of him as president and his own personal convictions and how likely he is to fall in line. All unknowns. I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

Well, a pawn can have as much power on the chess board as a King (or a Queen), just depends where all the pieces are, and how the game is being 'played'. Also these 'chess pieces' can often have individual free will too. That's sometimes why things don't work out as planned for the 'Powers That Be'. :P They can't always control it their pawns free will!

 

[Cleo]

What will it take, indeed? Maybe the last months/years were the last chance for people to finally get a glimpse of the man behind the curtain - after what's been happening in Syria, Putin's actions, the Clinton emails, Wikileaks & Co, it has become OBVIOUS how rotten, corrupted and criminal the West is. Many of us have been pounding out these things on social media every day during this time, and so have many other activists. What about those people who still don't get it, AT ALL? Reality split, anyone?

Exactly what I'm hearing in conversations - so many people do not get it AT ALL! It really is difficult to listen to people praising Killary's wisdom and goodness, they simply do not have a clue about her true nature and what's more they DON'T want to know.. Reality split indeed!

Yeah. I'm thinking Reality Split too. I'm sticking with the Cs take on it and I reckon those who don't are headed off on another reality timeline based on their decisions right now about how to perceive what is going on here and what decisions they make based on it. Kinda like the Flat Earthers: I think they are splitting onto a different timeline/reality too.

I guess we perceive these splits as ideological disagreements, more or less, that lead to breaking of relations. When we break relations, those individuals and their "reality construct" and its emanations/frequency fades from our reality and the one we have chosen gets stronger and more stable at which point we can then encounter new decision points and splits.

I early pointed out the similarity between Trump and Hitler; Alana has pointed out the differences. Still, he got elected and I'm willing to wait and see what he does (really, what choice does one have?) and to possibly conduct myself in an encouraging way if at all possible. That's pretty much the approach we took with Putin and over time, he demonstrated that his actions match his words and he's a kick-a** dude. So we now live in a reality where the defeat of terrorism and the conservation of Syria is a real possibility. Maybe our persistence on this decision timeline led to a reality in which Donald Trump ran for president?

I dunno. It can all get complicated but I do think we are on trajectories and some of us are colinear wave-reading consciousness units!!!

Yeah, events like these really sort out the wheat from the chaff when it comes to people's opinions. It makes me pretty angry and sad to see friends who I thought were awake seem to be believing nothing but lies these days. Western Millenials/students really are the most clueless people on Earth right now. But there are a few good surprises also.

Family, friends, I think most everyone close to me anyway sees Killary as the lesser of two evils-if not out right being in support of her in some instances.

I guess it gives me ample opportunity to practice external consideration when around them…although there's been a couple times this past year when I didn't about the election and yes, there were repercussions. So, the way I've been dealing with it since then, especially the last couple days..is to pretty much keep quiet when they discuss their opinions/outrage/disappointment etc on Trump's win. It's a strange place to be at really.. Not really sure how to navigate it.

 

[goyacobol]

Smurf won, but it won t make any difference for Merica and it s self destruct sequence. I can not say I am sorry.

Thank DCM there is an Urban Dictionary. Oh, well I learned something.

 

[JEEP]

When not reading Sott, I peruse whatreallyhappened dot com for some different perspectives. It was my antidote to all the pro-Killary BS being thrown around elsewhere and I relished all the anti-Killary material featured there in spades. Now that she's done, the site is featuring all the anti-Trump/pro-Killary protest crap it can find. Additionally, we're being told ad nauseam the 'whys' of Trump's spectacular upset victory, including this webpage blurb for this article entitled, Why Trump Won and Why Clinton Lost:

Hillary Clinton’s stunning defeat reflected a gross misjudgment by the Democratic Party about the depth of populist anger against self-serving elites who have treated much of the country with disdain

That there is a major division in the USA right now is natural if you consider that for years the rich and powerful have been progressively destroying the US and global economy, bit by bit, and increasing the suffering of people, to one extent or another, around the world in the process. When you create and then marginalize and forget about the poor in a society, you create an at least two tier system, and the results of that division will eventually manifest in a way that impacts everyone.

Hmmm - why does the top quote seem like a more succinct version of the bottom one? So - just in case anybody has failed to get the message - the rich & powerful have royally screwed you, impoverished you, diminished you, don't represent you - and by dam*, by voting in The Donald when all the bellwethers showed that was all but impossible, you have punched them in the face and said 'take that!' Feels good, no?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, all youse guys who didn't get the satisfaction of having the first female POTUS break the glass ceiling have every right to be angry as h*ll, reject the election outcome and create as much chaos - especially w/ help from your friends at moveon.org - and outrage as humanly possible, all completely justified in your own minds . . . completely free of any influence from MSM whining/harping/sour grapes/subtle suggestions/active promotion. Result? A nation divided against itself and overripe for even more PTB manipulation - just as planned.

Feels like the country is falling apart.

Whatever happens, it seems the US is after all a powder keg ready to explode.

Family, friends, I think most everyone close to me anyway sees Killary as the lesser of two evils-if not out right being in support of her in some instances - when they discuss their opinions/outrage/disappointment etc on Trump's win

That is his 'good life'. The only way to really do that is bring back the American dream for many people.

You mean like, Make America Great Again? What a coincindence that the anti-Killary candidate ran on that mantra . . .

I wouldn't go so far as to it's all orchestrated.

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

Why do I get a mental picture of a gaggle of elites laughing their a**es off saying, 'gotcha!'

Please review the thoughts and sentiments being expressed on this thread to the latest outcome & possible future. Are we unknowingly contributing to the wrong 'signal' being sent out? Are we failing to see things as they really are? Are we underestimating just how cunning/manipulative the PTB truly are?

 

[JGeropoulas]

I might be totally projecting but I actually feel kind of sorry for Trump. Like, I feel that behind all the bluster and narcissism he is just a pretty decent, realistic guy and actually does just want to have a good life, let other people have the good life, and chill.

If he just wanted to have a good life and chill, he could have done it easily. Instead he ran for president and paid $100 million for that out of his own pocket. The question is of course, how much of his motivation was narcissism, a power trip, wanting to improve the value of his brand and business and how much he actually cares and believes in making the country a better place for everyone. I don't know the answer to that, but it's certainly a combination of the two.

Hillary supporter and billionaire, Mark Cuban (of "Shark Tank" fame and owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team) said he thought Trump was going see his fortune shrink once defeated because his campaign was destroying his "brand". That is, he's rallying against the wealthy establishment who are the primary consumers of his brand (e.g. luxury hotels, office buildings).

Of course, Cuban in his certainty didn't pontificate about the effect winning the presidency might have on the Trump brand! (e.g. tax cuts for corporations).