Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[Beau]

Fwiw here is the full picture:

The ironic thing is that Trump got more votes from white women than Killary. Clearly women cared more about Clinton's warmongering than Trump's behavior.

 

[NormaRegula]

Hillary is scheduled to do a concession speech at this time. Delayed it by an hour. Then an additional hour.

The media gave her a standing O. Close-up of creepy Podesta looking devastated. Interesting to note that Wikileaks is still releasing Podesta's emails. Today's batch: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/59101

I just left the room while my household watches the speech on TV. I can't bear to listen to that woman's voice. Maybe a transcript will appear.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= NormaRegula]And don't forget that the Zionists, who currently are the 4D representatives here on earth to foment negative energy for their masters, may encourage this behavior by creating a few false flag events - like a dirty nuke set off on American soil.[/quote]

Yes, that will make everyone forget real fast about Trump his promises since a new more dangerous threat has emerged. It may also be a way to offset Trump his plans.


[quote author= NormaRegula]Trump may fall in line to avenge this event, as will his more ardent supporters.[/quote]

Trump will respond the only way he knows how. Which is I am afraid based on some of his remarks and behavior, nothing good.


If Trump has the potential to be one of the good guys. Than he is in the worst company you can ever find yourself into. They may try to impeach him but it depends if public opinion will support it. As I see it, to accomplish anything real you have to find a way to clean house Erdogan style to free the US from these tyrants. And for that he has to risk his life and those of the people he loves. You either fight these people or you don't. Any halfway response leaves you open.

 

[Laura]

Meanwhile, there is this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/hillary-clinton-election-president-loss

Why Hillary Clinton lost the election: the economy, trust and a weak message

How Hillary Clinton managed to lose an election to a candidate as divisive and unpopular as Donald Trump will baffle observers and agonise Democrats for years to come. Once the shockwave passes, some glimpses of rational explanation may become visible.

{Why should it baffle anyone? The majority of Americans are totally disgusted with the 1% and the status quo; Killary represented that and she made no effort to distance herself from it and find out what was really on the minds of the people. I think that the only REAL votes she got was from the 1% and those surrounding them who are so ponerized they can't think straight anymore. The rest of her votes were from rigged machines. But still, it wasn't enough.}

Incumbent parties rarely hold on to power after eight years in office. George HW Bush, following Reagan, was an exception, but politics has become steadily more polarised since and pendulums have a habit of swinging.

Trump’s defiance of expectations has itself also become somewhat of a golden rule in American politics in 2016. Written off repeatedly during the Republican primary, and only rarely taken seriously during the general election, he nonetheless epitomises the same anti-establishment mood that led Britain to vote to leave the European Union and Democrats in 22 US states to nominate Bernie Sanders. Fairly or not, it is an establishment with which Clinton could not have been more closely aligned in the minds of many voters if she tried.

{Exactly. And that just went right over their heads??}

The economy

“It’s the economy, stupid” was a phrase coined by her husband’s adviser James Carville in the 1992 election and, in many ways, it ought to have helped Democrats again in 2016. Barack Obama helped rescue the US from the financial crash and presided over a record series of consecutive quarters of job growth.

{All that nonsense about Obama creating jobs was just propaganda to keep people quiet while the wars went on and homelessness increased and cops tasered people. People know better. THAT'S why; not because the pendulum swung the other way.}

Unfortunately for Clinton, many Americans simply did not feel as positive. {Because they were figuring out it was all lies!} Stagnant wage levels and soaring inequality were symptoms of the malaise felt by many voters. Trump successfully convinced them to believe this was caused by bad trade deals and a rigged economy.

{Soaring inequality is not a symptom of malaise... it was a direct cause of the anger at the 1%!!! What a slimy idiot this writer is. Trump didn't have to convince anyone that this was "caused by bad trade deals and a rigged economy: everyone knows it. Plus they know that the rich are getting richer on wars and death and destruction.}

Despite being pushed in this direction by Sanders in the Democratic primary, Clinton never really found a satisfactory response. Her volte-face on trade sounded – and was later proved by leaked emails – unconvincing at best; deeply cynical at worst.

{Just say it: she's an elitist LIAR.}

Neither socialism nor the proto-fascist homilies of Trump offered much in the way of coherent alternatives either, but the bottom line was that Clinton simply failed to articulate a convincing defence of modern American capitalism.

{Notice the paramoralistic slur about "proto-fascist homilies". Clinton couldn't defend her oligarchy because, as a psychopath, she didn't think they needed defending and there is NO defense for modern American capitalism.}

Trust

One big problem which undermined many otherwise plausible policy positions was a lack of trust. Paid speeches to Goldman Sachs and a murky web of business connections to the family charity left many Americans doubting Clinton’s sincerity on matters of money and much else.

{Ummm.... that's almost the understatement of the year. It is obvious that Clinton is a criminal running a criminal operation.}

That the Federal Bureau of Investigation was investigating the Democratic candidate until just two days before voting with a view to bring possible criminal charges for her flouting of data security laws was just the most extreme manifestation of the issue.

It was damaging not just that the FBI bungled its timing of what ultimately proved to be a dead-end investigation but because it played into the notion that the Clintons behaved as if the law did not apply to them.

{This last remark is interesting: perhaps that was the real message? To emphasize to the voters that Clinton was obviously above the law and further anger them?}

Message vacuum

It also did not help that what Clinton was selling was mainly herself. {And everybody hates her. That is the main thing that everyone in the Democratic party failed to grok: Hillary is just not a likeable person. Who wants to "buy" a woman who can bomb and maim and laugh about it? No redeeming qualities whatsoever.} The campaign’s strongest message was that she was uniquely qualified to become president. This was largely true, especially when compared with the grotesquely inexperienced Donald Trump, but big ideas took a backstage role. {No, she is no "uniquely qualified" to be president; she's a failure at everything she has ever done. She has caused more chaos on this planet in the past ten years than anybody else I know of. A rank amateur is preferable to Hillary's qualifications! At least a person who plays the odds is bound to get things right about half the time; Hillary NEVER got anything right!}

There was a cast of a thousand policy prescriptions, from tweaks to the healthcare system to a watered-down version of the Sanders college debt proposals. Few were memorable, even among supporters.

Campaign slogans are notoriously vacuous. Obama’s “hope and change” turned out to be more of the former than the latter. Yet Clinton’s “stronger together” only really began to take shape in response to Trump’s divisiveness. It was attractive to many Democrats as a symbol of what they felt the campaign was about but it ensured the battle was fought on Trump’s terms.

Broken polls

Amid the recriminations, special attention is likely to be reserved for the pollsters, who showed Clinton clinging to a comfortable three- or four-point lead in national opinion polls going into the election. Granted, some, such as Nate Silver’s 538 website, flagged up the risk of an upset in key swing states, but even he had downgraded expectations of a Trump win to less than 30% on the eve of polling.

The failure partly reflects a broken industry. Reaching a vast audience no longer using landlines, or even mobile voice calls much, with a 20th-century modeling of statistical sampling has produced dangerously misleading results in elections around the world of late.

{How about this: the polls were manipulated in the hope that they would influence voters and now they see that doesn't work anymore?}

But the US fortune tellers were particularly confused by the scrambled demographics of the 2016 election. Trump in many ways ran to Clinton’s left on some economic issues, with a populist appeal to a growing group of unaffiliated independent-minded voters, and yet analysts continued to assume that if registered Democrats were voting early, or telling pollsters they were going to vote, it meant a vote for Clinton.

That all changed in 2016, a ground zero for a political bombshell that will mean the US electoral map never looks the same again.

What a vacuous article.

 

[BHelmet]

Thanks for all the insights; e.g., timeline shift etc. yeah it feels...different. Interesting times indeed.

All my liberal friends are totally melting down. I did mention to them the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow and that somehow we lived through the presidency of Tricky Dick Nixon and survived that. But MAJOR angst and hand-wringing from my friends on the "left".

My analysis why Trump won. (Hindsight, of course)

Even though Trump is a massive, arrogant egotist and and just generally a huge jerk: He was authentic about it - he didn't try to hide it or apologize for it: he was seen as a flawed but genuine, honest jerk.

Whereas Clinton was pretty much seen in the same way except she was seen as trying to hide and avoid her true nature so she was seen as deceitful and dishonest. Hillary did not get the landslide women's vote they thought she would, even among educated white women. I think that is because a lot of women are not stupid about other women. I think women have a genetic built-in insight into themselves and other women and they could see right through Hillary's fake front and saw her as a phony and mean (insert the "B" word).

Anyway, bottom line:

Trump = change / authentic and unapologetic ass
Clinton = status quo / inauthentic dishonest bitch

That right there is it in a nutshell:

Desire for any unknown change beats continuity of status quo.

and

Authentic negativity beats inauthentic BS.

(for those of you hoping Hillary gets indicted, I don't think it will happen. On the other hand she has now lost her reason to live and will probably fade from the scene rather quickly.)

BTW, for those worrying about bully boy redshirts...I would be less surprised if the bad behavior came actually from the sore losers on the left.

 

[HiThere]

But it feels like we narrowly averted a certain timeline.

Seconded. :o

Thirded (ahem) - had the same feeling this morning :)

 

[Mr.Cyan]

<SNIP>
But for the moment, it feels good to feel this relief from the pressure of what a clinton win would have been. Still. Waiting. For. The. Other. Shoe. To. Drop.

Well, you can sure say all of that again and I'll echo it!

Although I'm relieved that warmonger killary lost, not sure if I follow the excitement of Trump in presindency. The guy is a narcisistic spelbinder. There is no guarantee at all that he will follow up on the soft tone. As far as I know, with his huge ego he may end up being just as bad for the planet.
Am I missing something?

No, don't think so. Change MAY be good. Or it may get worse. We only know that the status quo was intolerable. And, as has been pointed out, everybody KNOWS for sure that Killary was Death by Evil so voting for Trump was - in the minds of many - voting for the diet coke of evil. So, in their consciousnesses, the people rejected what Killary and her oligarchy represented. I would say that this was a resounding rejection of 4D STS plans even if they now go into overdrive to manipulate.

I had a dream last night - that my wife and I were in a city in a post apocalyptic like scenario - where law and order broke down; and we were wondering with a group of people seeking shelter from the chaos. I woke up this morning - and also felt like a major timeline had shifted; and when I checked the news on The trump victory - the only thing I could think of was that "the C's were right again ".

I really think too that this is definitely a resounding rejection of 4D STS plans. And I wonder if all this is somehow connected to Putin's intervention in Syria. The universe has shifted...and its been not a great time for the "Controller's" since then....

Well, now we truly live in interesting times...

 

[happyliza]

In NJ where I live, people (from what I've seen so far) seem to be waking up from a bad hangover, they're really sad and upset and are joking about leaving the country. But I guess that's expected.

Same here in Luxembourg - people were taken by surprise when they woke up this morning and are really saddened by the outcome. They feel that the rise in populism is driving the world backwards and are blaming it on the ignorance of the masses, and now fear that this will fuel a rise of fascism and racism here in Europe.

Well with any luck perhaps people are now shown the insanity, chaos and circus prevailing in US/Western politics and 'elections'?

I won't hold my breath - but maybe some will be looking for some more sanity-based countries and leaders - like Russia and China. Many in Europe already had enough of the Russia demonization and 'Nato's ' recent comments over Trump will not help either. But those in disbelief - of which it appears there are many - may realize the total farce they have been fed. Well when they are not blaming everyone else but themselves! Good Carlin quote btw.

Amazing they are on food stamps, infrastructure and health is abysmal, many lost their houses, knowing so much money goes into warfare and 'foreign policy'. While the West is also fed the propaganda about the 'refugee crisis'. It is absolutely amazing how China has brought so many out of poverty and continues to do so quietly. And I find it so comical that what was deemed the 'third' world is now leading the world with outstanding projects that cannot fail to be noticed as they proceed and progress. Whilst those in the West and US who considered themselves 'top of the heap' get relegated to the real 'third world' countries!!

And will they wake up on seeing this? Seeing their jobs outsourced? Imports galore and exports diminishing - other than MIC ones? Not to forget the aging populations in the 'top of the heap' countries either!

Interesting as to what 'diversions' will come about in order to hide all this truth and wake up calls in the making.

I wonder how long Trump can maintain his 'build relations and no warfare' stance. I have yet to see any political leader in these countries keep to even one word or their pre-election manifesto.

 

[HiThere]

In his victory speech, Trump mentioned massive infrastructure projects to create jobs. Where does the cash for that come from? Giant government spending to create jobs is hardly a Republican strategy... It is just so darn funny.

Echoing New Deal by F. D. Roosevelt in the Thirties? Trump is foremost a salesman it seems, and this seems like a good marketing ploy to get the downtrodden on his side.

 

[goyacobol]

Thanks for all the insights; e.g., timeline shift etc. yeah it feels...different. Interesting times indeed.

All my liberal friends are totally melting down. I did mention to them the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow and that somehow we lived through the presidency of Tricky Dick Nixon and survived that. But MAJOR angst and hand-wringing from my friends on the "left".

My analysis why Trump won. (Hindsight, of course)

Even though Trump is a massive, arrogant egotist and and just generally a huge jerk: He was authentic about it - he didn't try to hide it or apologize for it: he was seen as a flawed but genuine, honest jerk.

Whereas Clinton was pretty much seen in the same way except she was seen as trying to hide and avoid her true nature so she was seen as deceitful and dishonest. Hillary did not get the landslide women's vote they thought she would, even among educated white women. I think that is because a lot of women are not stupid about other women. I think women have a genetic built-in insight into themselves and other women and they could see right through Hillary's fake front and saw her as a phony and mean (insert the "B" word).

Anyway, bottom line:

Trump = change / authentic and unapologetic ass
Clinton = status quo / inauthentic dishonest bitch

That right there is it in a nutshell:

Desire for any unknown change beats continuity of status quo.

and

Authentic negativity beats inauthentic BS.

(for those of you hoping Hillary gets indicted, I don't think it will happen. On the other hand she has now lost her reason to live and will probably fade from the scene rather quickly.)

BTW, for those worrying about bully boy redshirts...I would be less surprised if the bad behavior came actually from the sore losers on the left.

I agree, I vote for "unstable gravity waves". :)

 

[Aeneas]

Just to recap as if this had happened in Russia, we would here all about the repression of freedom and police state.

Hillary was

• supported by the whole Wall Street cabal, in other words Big Capital
• supported and treated with kids gloves by the mainstream media bar perhaps one station (FOX?)
• actively supported by the current president and vicepresident who were both busy campaigning for her and who both lost no time in demonizing Trump
• supported by the whole Hollywood circus
• supported by the whole Democratic party and also by most in the republican party's establishment
• supported by the chief of NATO and also the past chief both of whom vilified Trump
• supported by all the US intelligence agencies, NSA, FBI, CIA etc, who talked about Trump as being a threat to National Security
• supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and a number of other nations with money
• supported by most if not all Western leaders and certainly the whole Western media
• supported by all the US oligarcs, except perhaps one
• actively helped and supported by the moderators in all three debates
• supported by the Justice Department and all other departments for that matter
• supported by all the above despite the records showing how corrupt she and her husband are

And still she didn't win. That says a lot about the hatred of this woman and what she stands and represents and I think it might be true as Laura wrote that only the elite and the machines voted for her.

It must also be a sigh of relief for women, as having Hillary as the first female president, would have destroyed all chances for a woman to be elected for centuries to come and given women a bad rap as no one would wish for a repeat. If there was anyone still alive after such an ordeal that is.

So this could well be the big miscalculation the C's mentioned or just another one, though a PTB repair team is undoubtedly working feverishly to fix it.

 

[aaronfransen]

It's interesting because I have family posting on Facebook this morning about how the Terror is about to begin (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the idea).

They'll talk about how worried they are that Trump is going to start WW3. Then in the next sentence they criticize him for being so chummy with Putin...uh, it's that "chumminess" that's going to prevent WW3. Clinton couldn't wait to get into office to start bombing the s**t out of any country she felt like, and if it antagonized Russia all the better.

Clinton should be the one to be afraid of starting WW3 it seems to me. But what do I know? I'm just a Canuck :)

 

[shijing]

Yeah, and it's 11-9, so today is like 9-11 in reverse!

Well, maybe...

I should probably clarify what I meant by that. I have no idea at this point whether Trump's election will prove to be a sinister development, a positive one, or something in between -- that remains to be seen. The parallel with 9-11 that I see is primarily an emotional one. People have been given a real shock with this -- I don't recall any event since 9-11 that seems to have unhinged them from their collective moorings and consensus reality than this election seems to have done. There are plenty of events that should have -- if only people would have reacted the same way to the invasions of Libya and Syria, for example :( But just as on 9-11, when there was a widespread belief that America couldn't be attacked on its own soil (putting aside for now the fact that we know the real story was quite different than the one portrayed in the media) and that belief was directly undermined, so the election of Trump has severely challenged not only what many people wanted, but what they even thought was possible. In that sense, it has really put reality into flux in a way that may represent a significant marker IMO.

b) Everyone will now know that Slovenia exists, and possibly even where it's located

Certainly a good thing

In all seriousness though, I felt SURE that if Hillary got in, it would be WWIII x 1000. I woke up this morning and couldn't believe my ears/eyes. Now, everything isn't magically fixed. And certainly, change depends on what a Trumpy presidency does, and if they're even allowed to do certain things.

I was also among the many who began yesterday with the expectation that Hillary would be declared the winner, by hook or by crook, and was very surprised when things went consistently the other way. I also share the hope that she will be prosecuted and imprisoned (and not pardoned in the 11th hour, or allowed to flee the country as some people have speculated). The one thing I think is important is that if Trump proceeds in this direction, it's vital that he adheres meticulously to the letter of the law. If he tries to railroad that through in any way other than the up-and-up, it will not only vindicate what so many people have said about him, but will also set a dangerous precedent.

But, at the very least, this seems like a change for the better, even if only in terms of "there's the possibility for a different/better/mitigated outcome" vs "guaranteed pure madness & chaos".

It is very heartening to see that things are not so scripted, and the establishment elites are not so powerful as to always game a Bush or Clinton into the White House -- it was really entertaining to see the NYT headlines this morning. Whether this outcome ultimately serves the agenda of some other faction remains to be seen. Trump is no Putin -- he still carries all of the same baggage that he did before the election, and if he was eminently downloadable before, he still is now. But I agree that it's empowering to know that things aren't set in stone in the way that we are often led to believe.

Speaking of Putin, his congratulations message to Trump is here:

https://www.rt.com/news/365966-putin-trump-congratulates-victory/

 

[Richs]

In his victory speech, Trump mentioned massive infrastructure projects to create jobs. Where does the cash for that come from? Giant government spending to create jobs is hardly a Republican strategy... It is just so darn funny.

Echoing New Deal by F. D. Roosevelt in the Thirties? Trump is foremost a salesman it seems, and this seems like a good marketing ploy to get the downtrodden on his side.

Yes, it is a good marketing ploy to increase his popularity. To answer the question of where the money will come from for such projects, consider the trillions which Cheney mentioned just the day before 911 which were missing from the Pentagon, the trillions missing from the Federal Reserve, the 6 trillions or so spent on the invasion of Afghanistan (which is now in it's 16th year) and other military atrocities costing who knows how much money.

If Trump is successful in shutting down at least some of the bases we have all over the world, which cost an enormous amount, and returning many troops back to the US, a heck of a lot of money would be saved and could be redirected to other things. The same could be done with the NATO funding and other totally wasted dollars spent on revolutions and funding of terrorists, etc.

He is no doubt correct that some of our trade deals need to be re-negotiated or scrapped and that could also add to the ability to pay for some projects.

Of course, there is also deficit spending which has been used for a long time to fund things too.

It's pretty likely that quite a few other ways to divert money from war plans would shift finances to other more productive activities.

Although this is all possible, it is not going to be very easy for him, or anyone, to do as there will be massive resistance from the MIC to any such changes.

He probably doesn't really know who as actually 'running things' but will soon find out just who is the boss and actually gives the orders. Still, if he is a good negotiator, as he claims, maybe he can strike some deals which keep everyone fairly happy.

 

[Eboard10]

Well with any luck perhaps people are now shown the insanity, chaos and circus prevailing in US/Western politics and 'elections'?

I won't hold my breath - but maybe some will be looking for some more sanity-based countries and leaders - like Russia and China. Many in Europe already had enough of the Russia demonization and 'Nato's ' recent comments over Trump will not help either. But those in disbelief - of which it appears there are many - may realize the total farce they have been fed. Well when they are not blaming everyone else but themselves! Good Carlin quote btw.

Yes, if Trump manages to stick to his non-interventionism policy, Europe will be forced to step-up and take matters in its own hands if it wants to have any say in today's multi-polar world. My only fear is that given the current mentality in the European institutions, the politicians will close themselves up even more and continue their senseless anti-Russian propaganda rather than realigning themselves to face the new reality.