The economic consequences of a Trump US Presidential Victory?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

calling people who voted for Brexit, racist, xenophobic, stupid, illiterate, etc..

Is no different to calling people who voted against Brexit elitist, corporate puppets, remoaners, corrupt, unpatriotic, etc.

zagubov

kabayiri wrote: »

IMO Clinton dodged a bullet.

That's true. And as for Trump, (and his voters) what's that saying- "be careful what you wish for";)

Crashy_Time

Masomnia wrote: »

Fearing a tyrant yes, as the war of Independence was fought against George III whom they did consider a tyrant, it was the climate in which the nation was founded. You could have a situation like pre-Civil War where a collection of states want to secede, and if they all united behind one candidate could take power over the whole Union if they were against split opposition, and having an electoral college prevents this, because as I say it ensures that the winner has support across the Union. As Trump does.

But really it's a classic Hamish putting your spin on things - there's no reference in there to the 'manipulation of public opinion', 'populism', or people being 'unqualified' for the job. All of which is your opinion, and imposing your modern viewpoint on Early Modern thinkers.

I don't like Trump and I wouldn't have voted for him, but he won under the system that they have. If America wants to change the system it's up to them.

Hamish must be spinning like a top most of the time now, his world view is being shattered on a regular basis, first Aberdeen tanks, then Brexit, and now Trump :rotfl:All we need is for mortgage interest rates to soar for the final meltdown of his thinking process :rotfl:

Crashy_Time

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Is no different to calling people who voted against Brexit elitist, corporate puppets, remoaners, corrupt, unpatriotic, etc.

The difference is that one side are claiming higher intelligence.

Gavin83

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I wouldn't go as far as saying they're 'wrong', centre-left has some good ideas to improve everyone's lot in life, some of it pragmatic in my opinion. But the current state of affairs with safe spaces, trigger warnings, the rise of the radical feminist (see Ghostbusters remake where men are ridiculed), amongst many other "progressive" agendas which are actually regressive, particularly against white males who are to be branded as whatever derogatory term the "liberal" left want and are expected to just accept that society sees them this way unless they agree with the "progressive" agendas.

Winning rights is a good thing (same sex marriage), fighting for equal rights under law in a secular state can only be good. Demonising those who disagree is not, they too have the right to be heard, calling people who voted for Brexit, racist, xenophobic, stupid, illiterate, etc.. is symptomatic of a politics on the left that is failing to connect with the "normal" voter. Looking at Labour under Corbyn could also corroborate this I believe. Core support is falling away at the expense of a committed hard line support from a minority who proclaim they're right and everyone else is wrong and therefore evil. Labelling people has become fashionable again, I think we're seeing a wider reaction to this across Europe and in the US, so typically western liberal (in the true sense) democracies.

I agree with this post. I think the current feminist and the politically correct movements have a lot of answer for in regards to the current mood in US and European politics. The 'we know what you want better than you do, now hush' attitude of the political elite hasn't helped either.

Personally I don't think gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, etc should have any baring on the situation at all but it's gone entirely beyond this to the point where minorities are given preferencial treatment and put on a pedestal. The people are starting to rebel.

In an ideal world the left and right would sit down and reach some happy medium where both sides compromise but I can't see this happening. However it does appear than the non liberals are beginning to win.

zagubov wrote: »

I'm more wondering about the effect it would have on politicians if they had to earn the trust of the electorate, including all minorities.

In fact it made me think of why Australia doesn't overall seem to have our cynical attitude to politics (and society in general, as discussed in this recent Freakonomics podcast). I wondered if that was due to their compulsory voting system.

It is interesting to note that the Australian government have a less liberal attitude than most of the rest of Western Europe. Their treatment of immigrants and refugees make Trump look welcoming.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Is no different to calling people who voted against Brexit elitist, corporate puppets, remoaners, corrupt, unpatriotic, etc.

I have to ask, how do you feel about getting yet another political prediction wrong? Hope you didn't place any bets!

As someone who's been fairly accurate so far I'll make some more. In the U.K. the next GE will be called early and UKIP will gain the most seats of any party. Labour will lose the most.

Across Europe we'll see successful right wing anti EU parties in Belgium, the Netherlands and France, but not Germany. By 2020 we'll see another 4 countries confirm their plans to leave the EU.

Fancy making some more of you given up?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Gavin83 wrote: »

minorities are given preferencial treatment and put on a pedestal.

That may be your perception but the facts disagree with you.

As someone who's been fairly accurate so far

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

A year of a temporary populist blip in no way makes your blinkered worldview even remotely accurate.

Across Europe we'll see successful right wing anti EU parties in Belgium, the Netherlands and France, but not Germany. By 2020 we'll see another 4 countries confirm their plans to leave the EU.

Fancy making some more of you given up?

Sure.

Anti-EU parties will not become the majority party of government in any of the countries you listed. None of them will vote to leave the EU.

By 2020 the number of countries with membership of the Single Market will be the same as it is today.

The current fad for populism will be over in a few years once it becomes abundantly clear the populist leaders/movements have lied through their teeth and cannot deliver any material change to people's lives.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That may be your perception but the facts disagree with you.



:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

A year of a temporary populist blip in no way makes your blinkered worldview even remotely accurate.



Sure.

Anti-EU parties will not become the majority party of government in any of the countries you listed. None of them will vote to leave the EU.

By 2020 the number of countries with membership of the Single Market will be the same as it is today.

The current fad for populism will be over in a few years once it becomes abundantly clear the populist leaders/movements have lied through their teeth and cannot deliver any material change to people's lives.

do keep up the ignorant arrogant ranting: people like you and Clegg and Ferron are the surest way of ensuring the that actaully brexit happens.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

do keep up the ignorant arrogant ranting: people like you and Clegg and Ferron are the surest way of ensuring the that actaully brexit happens.

So the surest way of ensuring that Brexit actually doesn't happen would presumably be for all the people that disagree with it to suddenly start agreeing with people like you, Farage, etc...

How convenient.:rotfl:

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So the surest way of ensuring that Brexit actually doesn't happen would presumably be for all the people that disagree with it to suddenly start agreeing with people like you, Farage, etc...

How convenient.:rotfl:

no that wouldn't be the best policy
but some non hysterical, well argued, non offensive data and logic would probably be better to achieve your aims of denying the referendum result of all those uneducated, moronic, racist, xenophobes

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I find the irony of those claiming the higher popular vote for Hillary means she should challenge the result (as yet to be conclusively determined) are some of the same on here who want to deny the popular vote in the UK for Brexit. Interesting.

I propose that the left's brand of politics has become toxic and it is this that is being rejected. In the same way that in history toxic politics on the right has been roundly rejected by the majority in favour of the left for many decades, they've now become too arrogant to succeed, in my belief the support for this brand of politics now reflects this too. The politicians, the politics, the manifestos and policies, the support of the left appears to have gone too far and can no longer claim to be anywhere near the centre politically. Those who used to be liberal are now increasingly authoritarian, one case in point regarding the US election is Trump's proposal to deport illegal immigrants. The left in the US claim this will tear apart families, they're probably correct, however Trump is just suggesting that they uphold the law of the land. Where is the controversy in that? When did the politics of the left become more powerful than law?

I'm sure even those with only a minor interest in what happens in the US, UK and politics in general can point to problems the so called "liberals" on the left have with the following definition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

Both Putin and Trump court populism to defend extremism and their own ugly brands of nationalism. The oldest trick in the book. Trump totally lied to the American electorate and pretended that he has the answers of the failure of capitalism to value them or protect their interests. He's a snake oil salesman selling hate and there has always been a huge pool of people who can be conned into acting against their own self interest because hate is a powerful thing. Adolf knew better than anyone.