What Have You Jackasses Done...

[LC]

Trump has 4 years to justify himself. I for one, selfishly hope he does. Everyone seems to be jumping off a cliff but what else can one be except hopeful that he will do a good job?

[SharperDingaan]

If only this was true. The likely outcome of Trump presidency is actually more income inequality and benefits to 1%. For poor people to think that Trump is their guy and what just happened is "revolution" (like some commentators said) is likely total delusion.

Exactly my thoughts. This whole notion of middle class America being better off under Trump is laughable.

 

This is a guy who's lived a lavish lifestyle boasting about his wealth. He couldn't care less about the other 99%.

It all comes down to who he is surrounded by and how much or little influence they have over him.

 

I'm pretty sure a large number of people realized that, when they stepped up to vote  .... and yet millions of people still thought it the better choice. We just don't want to hear it.

 

SD

[John Hjorth]

- His promises and overall plan seem to be boiled down to what he said in the time span 5:13 - 11:13 in the clip - six minutes!, and a total U-turn in behavioral dimension compared to before this [especially longinvestors post above comes to mind here].

 

I have read a lot of posts in this topic, to which I can relate - both pros and cons. I really don't know what to think right now. I just really want my fellow US board members to hold Mr. Trump up on what his has promised here.

[Jurgis]

- His promises and overall plan seem to be boiled down to what he said in the time span 5:13 - 11:13 in the clip - six minutes!, and a total U-turn in behavioral dimension compared to before this

 

We can hope. :)

[rb]

- His promises and overall plan seem to be boiled down to what he said in the time span 5:13 - 11:13 in the clip - six minutes!, and a total U-turn in behavioral dimension compared to before this [especially longinvestors post above comes to mind here].

 

I have read a lot of posts in this topic, to which I can relate - both pros and cons. I really don't know what to think right now. I just really want my fellow US board members to hold Mr. Trump up on what his has promised here.

Is this another Trump pivot? How many of those did he have?

 

I definitely hope that it was all an act and that he's really a reasonable and capable person as opposed to a petty dishonest vindictive nut job.

 

The scary part is that many people in the past said exactly what you did and boy were they wrong.

[Jurgis]

From BAC thread:

 

Lots to like about financials right now:

1.) US 10 year bond is up 22 basis points and is now over 2%; it was 1.4% a few months ago

2.) good bye Elizabeth Warren

3.) financial regulators appointed by Trump will likely be much more supportive of the big banks

4.) likelihood of new anti big bank laws getting passed is very low

5.) likelihood of Dodd Frank getting watered down is medium to high (Trump said he wants to repeal it)

 

The big banks are over capitalized. They are also very profitable. They are returning around 8% to shareholders (dividends plus stock buybacks). The political tone in Washington will likely shift in the coming months and become more pro bank (from rabid anti bank). Weave it all together and I see earnings growth, much lower share count and multiple expansion. This usually results in much higher stock prices. And if the fed raises in Dec this will be icing on the cake for bank investors,

 

PS: and, yes, the past 12 months have been very hard for investors in bank stocks (felt like I was living the movie Groundhog Day).

 

I'm confused. What about all the articles claiming that people voted against Dems/Clinton because they were in bed with big banks? Wasn't Trump supposed to be for the little guys and against (financial) establishment?

[randomep]

From BAC thread:

 

Lots to like about financials right now:

1.) US 10 year bond is up 22 basis points and is now over 2%; it was 1.4% a few months ago

2.) good bye Elizabeth Warren

3.) financial regulators appointed by Trump will likely be much more supportive of the big banks

4.) likelihood of new anti big bank laws getting passed is very low

5.) likelihood of Dodd Frank getting watered down is medium to high (Trump said he wants to repeal it)

 

The big banks are over capitalized. They are also very profitable. They are returning around 8% to shareholders (dividends plus stock buybacks). The political tone in Washington will likely shift in the coming months and become more pro bank (from rabid anti bank). Weave it all together and I see earnings growth, much lower share count and multiple expansion. This usually results in much higher stock prices. And if the fed raises in Dec this will be icing on the cake for bank investors,

 

PS: and, yes, the past 12 months have been very hard for investors in bank stocks (felt like I was living the movie Groundhog Day).

 

I'm confused. What about all the articles claiming that people voted against Dems/Clinton because they were in bed with big banks? Wasn't Trump supposed to be for the little guys and against (financial) establishment?

 

 

WTF happened to health insurance companies, are we not expecting them republicans to repeal obamacare? And the MCO are up 3-5%!

 

[randomep]

Just think.  In four years Hillary will run against Trump again and we can have a repeat of this whole election season!  What fun.

 

 

Surely you are kidding.  Surely you realize that Hilary is the worst thing to happen to the democratic party in living memory.  She is unelectable for prez.  The pundits should have realized that point.  She comes in as the early favorite and when people really have to think about it hard and make a decision they just can't vote for her.  I mean her campaign against Sanders was a warning to the party.... Sanders should have been a lightweight.

 

I hope many of us have changed our world view after this election. I thought I was cynical, but my pre-election cynicism is nothing compared to after.  I was so wrong at understanding the US - where I reside BTW.  And I think Hilary being the kind of woman she is cannot be prez.  This is my theory of course. But I have thought about successful women leaders. They are the kind of low key non pushy types in male-dominated societies who don't threaten the status quo between men and women.  For example, Butto or Thatcher. Thatcher can never be considered a feminist. She looks so motherly with her trademark purse.

 

But Hilary is different she is a strong and smart and elite woman. If she runs the country, many will think that women have a strong place in america. And that is a threat, to both men and women. It is upending their view of their society.  I cannot otherwise cannot explain the visceral hate towards her. I mean all they got on her is some improper handling of emails?? 

 

I think a lot of people who voted against her think of her as a unelectable bitch. (sorry I just cannot find a more apt word)

 

[John Hjorth]

- His promises and overall plan seem to be boiled down to what he said in the time span 5:13 - 11:13 in the clip - six minutes!, and a total U-turn in behavioral dimension compared to before this [especially longinvestors post above comes to mind here].

 

I have read a lot of posts in this topic, to which I can relate - both pros and cons. I really don't know what to think right now. I just really want my fellow US board members to hold Mr. Trump up on what his has promised here.

Is this another Trump pivot? How many of those did he have?

 

I definitely hope that it was all an act and that he's really a reasonable and capable person as opposed to a petty dishonest vindictive nut job.

 

The scary part is that many people in the past said exactly what you did and boy were they wrong.

rb,

 

My answer to your question #1: Personally, I don't know.

My answer to your question #2: I can't count them. [i think valcont posted about it some days ago with a link to www.star.com about Mr. Trump's lies, inaccuracies etc.]

 

As I have already posted: I really don't know what to think right now. What for me really matters here: I do not in any way underestimate Mr. Trump, one way or another.

[Peregrine]

Just think.  In four years Hillary will run against Trump again and we can have a repeat of this whole election season!  What fun.

 

 

Surely you are kidding.  Surely you realize that Hilary is the worst thing to happen to the democratic party in living memory.  She is unelectable for prez.  The pundits should have realized that point.  She comes in as the early favorite and when people really have to think about it hard and make a decision they just can't vote for her.  I mean her campaign against Sanders was a warning to the party.... Sanders should have been a lightweight.

 

I hope many of us have changed our world view after this election. I thought I was cynical, but my pre-election cynicism is nothing compared to after.  I was so wrong at understanding the US - where I reside BTW.  And I think Hilary being the kind of woman she is cannot be prez.  This is my theory of course. But I have thought about successful women leaders. They are the kind of low key non pushy types in male-dominated societies who don't threaten the status quo between men and women.  For example, Butto or Thatcher. Thatcher can never be considered a feminist. She looks so motherly with her trademark purse.

 

But Hilary is different she is a strong and smart and elite woman. If she runs the country, many will think that women have a strong place in america. And that is a threat, to both men and women. It is upending their view of their society.  I cannot otherwise cannot explain the visceral hate towards her. I mean all they got on her is some improper handling of emails?? 

 

I think a lot of people who voted against her think of her as a unelectable bitch. (sorry I just cannot find a more apt word)

 

The unrelenting, sensational and unsubstantiated attacks on her over the years ultimately took its toll.

[CorpRaider]

Yeah, I mean I think that had an impact but he won the regan democrats because of his tough talk on jobs and trade and the stresses remaining from the financial crisis.  We will see if he can deliver.  Not sure how he's going to make them competitive against robots.  Hopefully we don't think thin out this oversupply of labor and quench the thirsty populists like we did after the great depression...

[John Hjorth]

... There are a lot more questions but the one I am most interest in is whether Trump will regain control of his twitter account. ...

 

tengen,

 

I'm not in any way trying to troll or beeing condescending here: I like your comment - if fits my Scandinavian humor.

 

[Hawks]

Tonite, I have read all of the posts on this topic. Some of my observations:

 

1. I really do not see how the so-called "elites" were dealt a well deserved defeat. Some political elites both left and right maybe got hit. But the super rich elite (including Donald Trump) are as rich today as ever and will be even more so tomorrow. With a billionaire now in charge (and given the elites he associates with) the 1% just hit the jackpot.

 

2. Many have said that Trump tapped into the "anger of Americans, especially the white, non-college, older and younger males" especially.  I find this plausible because it seems that is where a lot of support came from, both Republican and Democrat.  But, I find it laughable, sorry to say. It reminds me of the phrase "a sucker is born every minute". Given how Trump has treated and stiffed former employees, contractors, etc.  I find it hard to believe that so many citizens really seemed to believe his sales pitch that he represents them.

There is no doubt, he is one great salesman.  I really hope he does help some of these citizens; time will tell.

[CalvinL]

Chances are he will have a group of advisors holding his hands over issue he has no knowledge of, like foreign trade policies and military. The real concern I have about him is his moral ineptitude and the social progression over the past 8 years he could undo within his term.

[sys]

this is a decent reminder that it is easy to allow the narrative to outpace the results.

 

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/

[Guest Schwab711]

Chances are he will have a group of advisors holding his hands over issue he has no knowledge of, like foreign trade policies and military. The real concern I have about him is his moral ineptitude and the social progression over the past 8 years he could undo within his term.

 

www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/09/trump-left-just-lost-war-climate-change/

 

Not a great start

[Jurgis]

this is a decent reminder that it is easy to allow the narrative to outpace the results.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/

 

Good article. Unlike others that I've criticized for Monday morning quarterbacking the narrative to fit the results, Silver makes valid points on existing data as well as showing how small margin is there from another narrative. A++.

[Jurgis]

www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/09/trump-left-just-lost-war-climate-change/

 

Not a great start

 

Yeah, unfortunately Paris climate agreement promises are likely dead.

[wachtwoord]

www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/09/trump-left-just-lost-war-climate-change/

 

Not a great start

 

Yeah, unfortunately Paris climate agreement promises are likely dead.

 

Human induced climate change is a complete lie. Great that he's revoking that. More evidence he's not a puppet of the elite (who invested so much in the world wide climate change scam and getting everyone to buy it).

 

The social "progress" over the last 8 years was a great mistake. It's the road to turn into Euro, a nigh communistic state where laziness is rewarded and hard work is punished. Europe will slowly collapse ascthe late Roman empire did.

[rkbabang]

Tonite, I have read all of the posts on this topic. Some of my observations:

 

1. I really do not see how the so-called "elites" were dealt a well deserved defeat. Some political elites both left and right maybe got hit. But the super rich elite (including Donald Trump) are as rich today as ever and will be even more so tomorrow. With a billionaire now in charge (and given the elites he associates with) the 1% just hit the jackpot.

 

2. Many have said that Trump tapped into the "anger of Americans, especially the white, non-college, older and younger males" especially.  I find this plausible because it seems that is where a lot of support came from, both Republican and Democrat.  But, I find it laughable, sorry to say. It reminds me of the phrase "a sucker is born every minute". Given how Trump has treated and stiffed former employees, contractors, etc.  I find it hard to believe that so many citizens really seemed to believe his sales pitch that he represents them.

There is no doubt, he is one great salesman.  I really hope he does help some of these citizens; time will tell.

 

I don't know what others mean, but when I say "elites", I am not talking about the super rich.  I'm talking about political elites: people who's money and power derive not from serving humanity in the free and open marketplace, but rather from political pull and influence.

 

[Guest Schwab711]

Human induced climate change is a complete lie.

 

Would you mind explaining your rationale?

 

If "human induced" is the sticking point than it seems moot. We could argue about the % of human contribution but if one accepts the evidence of climate change and the science behind the various mechanisms, it's a minor detail.

 

If you ascribe to the Breitbart article then I wonder why you think the US and UK would purposefully destroy their manufacturing bases to help the Chinese and hurt themselves? Where's the incentive? US manufacturing was in severe decline before the late 80's and early 90's when climate change science was in its infancy. What's the evidence, how sure are you, and why?

[wachtwoord]

Human induced climate change is a complete lie.

 

Would you mind explaining your rationale?

 

If "human induced" is the sticking point than it seems moot. We could argue about the % of human contribution but if one accepts the evidence of climate change and the science behind the various mechanisms, it's a minor detail.

 

If you ascribe to the Breitbart article then I wonder why you think the US and UK would purposefully destroy their manufacturing bases to help the Chinese and hurt themselves? Where's the incentive? US manufacturing was in severe decline before the late 80's and early 90's when climate change science was in its infancy. What's the evidence, how sure are you, and why?

 

I'm saying humans have no signficant influence either way. The climate goes through cycles induced by many subcycles such as many cycles of the sun, cycles of the liquid core of the earth etc many of which we haven't discovered as the cycles have periods of millenia. The periodic changes of climate are natural and we can't even predict them yet, let alone influence them.

 

Have you read the scientific papers behind the "climate change mantra"? They are based on extrapolations which are not statistically valid. They are only out there because academic institutions get subsidies and monetary gifts if the produce papers claiming climate change is real. Institutions who claim the opposite see their incone streams dry up. There's a lot of people who are making a shit ton of money of off the climate change lie and all the retards in the world are eating it up. Sorry for the language but it's really frustrating to see everyone be manipulated this easily.

 

And yes I have an academic background (phd). Not that that's an argument but nowadays people don't believe you're competent unless you show a certificate given out by the politically corrupted and scientifically hollowed out institutions known as universities.

 

EDIT:

 

I attached a more detailed rationale with sources (not written by me)

ClimateChangeComment.docx

[Jurgis]

I'm so happy there's ignore feature on this forum.  ;D

 

I'd say "don't feed the trolls", but it's really your choice guys.

 

Peace.

[Liberty]

Here comes the window-dressing "blind trust" run by his kids:

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/10/the-future-of-donald-trumps-businesses.html

[tengen]

... There are a lot more questions but the one I am most interest in is whether Trump will regain control of his twitter account. ...

 

tengen,

 

I'm not in any way trying to troll or beeing condescending here: I like your comment - if fits my Scandinavian humor.

 

No worries, humor helps to deal with bad situations or long nordic nights.