What Have You Jackasses Done...

[Jurgis]

I don't know how this will all play out.  I don't think anyone does. 

 

The founding fathers of the United States constitution were well aware of the history of tyrants and how power deranges so they put in a lot of checks on balances on a possible tyrant as president.  It is a strange bit of luck that the stars lined up and we had some high character, pragmatic founding fathers.  The constitution may very well be tested and even come out stronger.

 

Yes. Hoping on checks and balances.

[Cardboard]

"2016 is such a surreal year."

 

It is the turning point away from tyranny that people like yourself, billionaires and the media have brought on us. All over the world people are saying no more of this BS.

 

The S&P is now up by the way as I suspected and mentioned. Just proof that all these lies from the Left to induce fear was all it was.

 

Cardboard

[Liberty]

"2016 is such a surreal year."

 

It is the turning point away from tyranny that people like yourself, billionaires and the media have brought on us. All over the world people are saying no more of this BS.

 

The S&P is now up by the way as I suspected and mentioned. Just proof that all these lies from the Left to induce fear was all it was.

 

Cardboard

 

Trump will save us from the tyranny of billionaires, uh?

[wachtwoord]

"2016 is such a surreal year."

 

It is the turning point away from tyranny that people like yourself, billionaires and the media have brought on us. All over the world people are saying no more of this BS.

 

The S&P is now up by the way as I suspected and mentioned. Just proof that all these lies from the Left to induce fear was all it was.

 

Cardboard

 

Yes I love this year. First Brexit now this. Next up Europe please?

[hyten1]

fyi, i thought this observation was salient:

 

the media takes trump literally but not seriously and his supporters take him seriously but not literally

[onyx1]

Trump skeptics forces Canadian immigration website to its knees. [You can read it using the translation tool in Chrome.]

 

Maybe it's these guys?

 

23 Celebrities Said They'll Leave The Country If Trump Win

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/catherinedunn/2016/11/09/these-10-celebrities-say-theyll-leave-the-country-if-trump-is-elected-n2215391

[rkbabang]

"2016 is such a surreal year."

 

It is the turning point away from tyranny that people like yourself, billionaires and the media have brought on us. All over the world people are saying no more of this BS.

 

The S&P is now up by the way as I suspected and mentioned. Just proof that all these lies from the Left to induce fear was all it was.

 

Cardboard

 

Yes I love this year. First Brexit now this. Next up Europe please?

 

I'm hoping for the secession movements to really pick up some steam.

 

The US:

CA: http://www.yescalifornia.org/

NH: http://nhindependence.org/

TX: https://www.texassecede.com/

VT: http://vermontrepublic.org/

AK: http://www.akip.org/

 

Canada:

  Alberta: http://www.republicofalberta.com/

  Quebec: http://www.mlnq.org/

 

Scotland and a bunch of other movements in Europe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe

 

[John Hjorth]

Monday evening at 10:21 PM my local time I got an e-mail notification about a new memo from Howard Marks.

 

Basically it's about: Now it's time for comity, and the need for constructive, bipartisan gorvernmental action. I highly recommend my fellow board members to spend some of your time on reading it. It's food for thought - as allways, when Mr. Marks has been writing.

[Liberty]

Some perspective here:

 

http://waitbutwhy.com/2016/11/its-going-to-be-okay.html

[ERICOPOLY]

...down there. 

 

Really!  You're taking this all the way?!  Wake up stupid...wake up! 

 

Finally America has become one big reality show!  Even PT Barnum as President would make some sense!

 

Cheers!

 

I am in no way shape or form a Trump supporter but I believe the attitude expressed above is the most salient reason that gave rise to Trump and Trump-ism.  The sort of attitude prevalent among American I guess I'll call them "elites" for lack of a better word whose sort of attitude is "let the smart people figure it out for the masses and we'll tell you what we've decided."  The institutions of the elites in the United States - the government, academia, the media that seemingly only represents this elite worldview - seem to continuously expand their reach with the aim to dictate how people are supposed to think, their attitudes, how their resources should be spent, how much of their paycheck people are allowed to keep, etc.  You can see it in people in the media's attitude about Trump, "How dare you even think about voting for him?"  [i didn't vote for him, but that elitist attitude is grating.]

 

So it is not surprising that a backlash to elitism took hold.  In the 1980s, the music scene was dominated by Bon Jovi, Poison - hair bands - men with hairsprayed heads and skin tights pants.  So in the early 1990s, grunge took hold.  Quite literally the opposite.  Rather than skintight leather tights, Kurt Cobain rocked shirts with holes in them.  The elitist attitude that has taken hold in so many American institutions gave rise to Trump, just the way that hair bands gave rise to grunge.

 

Incidentally, the original post was meant tongue in cheek...thus the "jackass"reference.  But it was also meant to question why American's have chosen to self-flagellate themselves for the next four years.  Cheers!

 

The Republicans originally called the Democratic candidate (Andrew Jackson) a "jackass".  That's why the Democratic party's mascot is the Jackass.  I think back then the Republicans were the liberals and the Democrats were the conservatives -- so it was the liberals calling the conservatives jackasses, both then and now.

 

I've seen a couple of articles written comparing this election to that of Andrew Jackson's.  Trump is portrayed as the new Jackson.

 

So I kind of liked the historical significance of Sanjeev's  "jackass" label.

 

 

[LC]

it's easy to be divisive, it's hard to unite people.

[Peregrine]

Monday evening at 10:21 PM my local time I got an e-mail notification about a new memo from Howard Marks.

 

Basically it's about: Now it's time for comity, and the need for constructive, bipartisan gorvernmental action. I highly recommend my fellow board members to spend some of your time on reading it. It's food for thought - as allways, when Mr. Marks has been writing.

 

This may be the best piece I've read on this election.

[wachtwoord]

"2016 is such a surreal year."

 

It is the turning point away from tyranny that people like yourself, billionaires and the media have brought on us. All over the world people are saying no more of this BS.

 

The S&P is now up by the way as I suspected and mentioned. Just proof that all these lies from the Left to induce fear was all it was.

 

Cardboard

 

Yes I love this year. First Brexit now this. Next up Europe please?

 

I'm hoping for the secession movements to really pick up some steam.

 

The US:

CA: http://www.yescalifornia.org/

NH: http://nhindependence.org/

TX: https://www.texassecede.com/

VT: http://vermontrepublic.org/

AK: http://www.akip.org/

 

Canada:

  Alberta: http://www.republicofalberta.com/

  Quebec: http://www.mlnq.org/

 

Scotland and a bunch of other movements in Europe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe

 

If Texas goes independent that might be a place I end up living some day.

[Sunrider]

You know - for this to be the case you have to believe at least on of the following:

 

(1) He actually didn't mean most of the things he said

(2) He has an actual realistic plan and policies that make sense

(3) He will appoint advisers that are competent and let them get on with things without interfering

(4) Institutions are strong enough in the US to withstand populism and to rein in any ill-conceived policies

 

... It is on the last point that I'm particularly worried, having seen how populism and corruption ultimately eat away at the foundation of a society and eventually kill democracy. So I really hope that won't be the case here. Sadly, if you look across the world, precedent is against it and even though the US is built on the idea of exceptionalism, I am worried.

 

The Howard Marks memo was right on the ball - Trump may end up being an ok or even good president if he controls his mouth (and actions). Atleast I hope so.

 

 

...down there. 

 

Really!  You're taking this all the way?!  Wake up stupid...wake up! 

 

Finally America has become one big reality show!  Even PT Barnum as President would make some sense!

 

Cheers!

 

I am in no way shape or form a Trump supporter but I believe the attitude expressed above is the most salient reason that gave rise to Trump and Trump-ism.  The sort of attitude prevalent among American I guess I'll call them "elites" for lack of a better word whose sort of attitude is "let the smart people figure it out for the masses and we'll tell you what we've decided."  The institutions of the elites in the United States - the government, academia, the media that seemingly only represents this elite worldview - seem to continuously expand their reach with the aim to dictate how people are supposed to think, their attitudes, how their resources should be spent, how much of their paycheck people are allowed to keep, etc.  You can see it in people in the media's attitude about Trump, "How dare you even think about voting for him?"  [i didn't vote for him, but that elitist attitude is grating.]

 

So it is not surprising that a backlash to elitism took hold.  In the 1980s, the music scene was dominated by Bon Jovi, Poison - hair bands - men with hairsprayed heads and skin tights pants.  So in the early 1990s, grunge took hold.  Quite literally the opposite.  Rather than skintight leather tights, Kurt Cobain rocked shirts with holes in them.  The elitist attitude that has taken hold in so many American institutions gave rise to Trump, just the way that hair bands gave rise to grunge.

 

Incidentally, the original post was meant tongue in cheek...thus the "jackass"reference.  But it was also meant to question why American's have chosen to self-flagellate themselves for the next four years.  Cheers!

 

The Republicans originally called the Democratic candidate (Andrew Jackson) a "jackass".  That's why the Democratic party's mascot is the Jackass.  I think back then the Republicans were the liberals and the Democrats were the conservatives -- so it was the liberals calling the conservatives jackasses, both then and now.

 

I've seen a couple of articles written comparing this election to that of Andrew Jackson's.  Trump is portrayed as the new Jackson.

 

So I kind of liked the historical significance of Sanjeev's  "jackass" label.

[bookie71]

I've seen a couple of articles written comparing this election to that of Andrew Jackson's.  Trump is portrayed as the new Jackson.

You can't get any more raciest than good old Andy

 

[NBL0303]

From Nate Silver:

We expect that Trump will eventually finish with about 47 percent of the popular vote which, if he wins the Electoral College, would be the lowest vote share for a president-elect since Bill Clinton in 1992 (43 percent).

Are the electoral votes binding?

 

That is actually a fascinating question.  In this United States' history there have been, I believe 157, so-called "Faithless Electors" - meaning Electors who vote for a candidate in the Electoral College that won their state.  Of those Faithless Electors more than half have been due to the death of the POTUS/VPOTUS candidate that won their state prior to the date of the Electoral College vote - so there have actually been about 70 "True Faithless Electors."  The Faithless Electors have never impacted who was elected but in 1836, 23 True Faithless Electors from Virginia refused to vote for Richard Mentor Johnson, the presumed VP elect, so the United States Senate eventually had to elect Johnson VP itself.  In response to the Faithless Elector phenomenon, approx. 30 states have based so-called Binding Laws - which hold that an elector must vote for the winners of the state (or congressional district in the case of Nebraska or Maine) which they represent.  Some have claimed that Binding Laws are unconstitutional and electors can "vote their conscious."  BUT a 1952 SCOTUS case called Ray v. Blair upheld that Constitutional validity of Binding Laws.  With that said, can you guess how many Faithless Electors have been charged with a crime under Binding Laws?  Go ahead and guess...

[infinitee00]

Found this article interesting and relevant

 

White riot - How racism and immigration gave us Trump, Brexit, and a whole new kind of politics

[NBL0303]

Though I'll add "People acting as groups are prone to stupidity." And I think, as one FT writer put it, this was an election in which people wanted to make a choice first and worry about the implications later - kinda like with Brexit, it doesn't matter that the promises are self-evidently empty. Satisfaction now! Bring out the pitchforks! Put these evil people onto the pyre! Etc. :P

 

 

These are good points but I would add Obama offered the "Satisfaction Now" framework as well, which is part of what gave rise to so much frustration in this country.  Remember when he promised, literally, to "slow the rise of the oceans and to begin to heal the planet."  I'm not actually making these words up, he used these during the 2008 campaign.  He did not offer hard trade-offs with long-term payoffs, but he offered the satisfaction of simply not being Bush.  Not Being Bush though and expecting people to not ask hard questions about what your doing or say, what's in a $900 billion "stimulus" package, or whether or not a person has a right to even ask whether Affordable Care Act is a good idea when your best friend's company eliminated her medical insurance due to the Affordable Care Act and then signed up through an exchange and after one year the insurer terminated that plan and after selecting yet another new plan it was dropped again after one year so having four different medical insurers in four consecutive years.  Again, Not Being Bush is not a sufficient answer to those questions. 

[NBL0303]

it's easy to be divisive, it's hard to unite people.

 

Indeed, as Parsad's post has so clearly illustrated.

[Uccmal]

I have a question for anyone here.  We have a president Trump in power come January. 

 

The party banner he ran under was as a Republican but, they didn't do a good job supporting him. 

 

He is the president now, but he is sort of, maybe, also a republican.  We have two chambers of the house that are Republican controlled at the moment.  I am not seeing an easy pass for The house or the senate with a President Trump.  If anything, I see the opposite unfolding. 

 

Thoughts.

 

Edit: Now I know what I am getting at.  The US just elected an independent, not a republican.

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

I have a question for anyone here.  We have a president Trump in power come January. 

 

The party banner he ran under was as a Republican but, they didn't do a good job supporting him. 

 

He is the president now, but he is sort of, maybe, also a republican.  We have two chambers of the house that are Republican controlled at the moment.  I am not seeing an easy pass for The house or the senate with a President Trump.  If anything, I see the opposite unfolding. 

 

Thoughts.

 

Edit: Now I know what I am getting at.  The US just elected an independent, not a republican.

 

I don't think the U.S. knows what it just elected. Lol.

 

He hasn't had anything of substance to say outside of trade policy and building that damn wall...but it certainly didn't elect a traditional conservative. Many Republicans despise Trump too - it may be easier for him to get some things done with a red Congress, but I don't think it's just going to be Trump running the show willy-nilly given how little he is liked by both sides.

 

But, given that he hasn't promised much, he can't be accused of flip-flopping much. He can take whatever position needs to be taken to get a deal done. We'll see how productive he actually is.

[Guest longinvestor]

No matter if you were for or against Trump, we just witnessed a very very shrewd mind at work. Throw in the ultimate contrarian behavior that politics has ever seen. Talk about going against the herd. One that worked too. Value investors can surely learn.

[tengen]

The US election is over and now we're going to get the sequel reality TV series where we find out what sort of president Donald Trump will be. Who is he going to appoint to his cabinet? Will he get along with establishment Republicans like Paul Ryan? How will he remove the potential for conflicts of interest with the Trump Organization? What is he really going to do about immigration, trade, NATO, Russia, China, etc. Will he ever reveal his tax returns? Will Mike Pence be the Dick Cheney to Trump's Bush 43? Who is he going to appoint to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court? There are a lot more questions but the one I am most interest in is whether Trump will regain control of his twitter account.

 

As a Canadian, I can only wish good luck to our southern neighbours.

[NBL0303]

The US election is over and now we're going to get the sequel reality TV series where we find out what sort of president Donald Trump will be. Who is he going to appoint to his cabinet? Will he get along with establishment Republicans like Paul Ryan? How will he remove the potential for conflicts of interest with the Trump Organization? What is he really going to do about immigration, trade, NATO, Russia, China, etc. Will he ever reveal his tax returns? Will Mike Pence be the Dick Cheney to Trump's Bush 43? Who is he going to appoint to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court? There are a lot more questions but the one I am most interest in is whether Trump will regain control of his twitter account.

 

As a Canadian, I can only wish good luck to our southern neighbours.

 

Great post.  That is a great summary of the initial questions that will hover around the early days of the Trump administration.

[Cardboard]

"fyi, i thought this observation was salient:

 

the media takes trump literally but not seriously and his supporters take him seriously but not literally"

 

+1 Hyten1

 

By the way, Nelson Peltz mentioned that exact same quote at lunch time on CNBC... Any connection?

 

Cardboard