How do you think people will look back at Trump's presidency in the future?

[JCAll]

With all the things that the GOP stands for today, one would hope not. Or else this country will go down a darker path in the future.

Don't get me wrong, the GOP will have Presidents again, but they will never win the popular vote again. It will always be victory by electoral college alone. The "tyranny by the majority" and the "popular vote doesn't matter, loser libs" talk that we're hearing now is just the propaganda circulating to get us ready for that. This is deliberate and what the GOP wants, the fewer people you have to represent to stay in power the easier it is to remain in control.

[Coin Biter]

In a sense, it must be seen as a tribute to how strong the US and its governmental system is, that it is able to survive the Presidency of this spiteful charlatan without going into complete meltdown. God knows we’re doing badly enough in the UK at the moment, probably worse in terms of how perilous the next couple of years will be for our economy, and that’s without having a Trump in charge. Although if Boris Johnson ever becomes Prime Minister, he might be as close as we could get.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Don't get me wrong, the GOP will have Presidents again, but they will never win the popular vote again. It will always be victory by electoral college alone. The "tyranny by the majority" and the "popular vote doesn't matter, loser libs" talk that we're hearing now is just the propaganda circulating to get us ready for that. This is deliberate and what the GOP wants, the fewer people you have to represent to stay in power the easier it is to remain in control.

Along that line, I really wish Republicans would stop claiming they're all about populism and the people when that's ANYTHING but true. The GOP's abhorrent policies do NOTHING for the people and EVERYTHING to further enrich the wealthy and keep arrogant white men in positions of power while pissing on and laughing at minorities, women and gays.

[Adrian Fomble]

Don't get me wrong, the GOP will have Presidents again, but they will never win the popular vote again. It will always be victory by electoral college alone. The "tyranny by the majority" and the "popular vote doesn't matter, loser libs" talk that we're hearing now is just the propaganda circulating to get us ready for that. This is deliberate and what the GOP wants, the fewer people you have to represent to stay in power the easier it is to remain in control.

Funny how it's only the Republican presidents that lost the popular votes after their elections. But after looking up this page on wikipedia: John F Kennedy is the closest we'll get to the only Democratic president that lost the popular vote.

Anyways I'm no political expert, so I'm just reading this thread out of curiosity to see how American politics work.

[Username taken]

Funny how it's only the Republican presidents that lost the popular votes after their elections. But after looking up this page on wikipedia: John F Kennedy is the closest we'll get to the only Democratic president that lost the popular vote.

Anyways I'm no political expert, so I'm just reading this thread out of curiosity to see how American politics work.

It's basically as a result of changing demographics, increased urbanization and the GOPs own rampant stupidity of the 1980s that's put them in this position.

The GOP has been working hard to limit the number of voters across various demographics and in various areas simply because the larger the voter turnout, the virtual impossibility of a GOP candidate winning the popular vote in a Presidential vote.

Donald Trump is basically the last gasp of a dying right wing philosophy that once dominated the discourse in the United States. Contrary to what some folks say online things like universal (or least very wide coverage) health care, basic rights for everyone, fiscal discipline, e.t.c, you know, positions being championed by the left are things that will benefit most people in the country.

[JackDaw]

In a sense, it must be seen as a tribute to how strong the US and its governmental system is, that it is able to survive the Presidency of this spiteful charlatan without going into complete meltdown. God knows we’re doing badly enough in the UK at the moment, probably worse in terms of how perilous the next couple of years will be for our economy, and that’s without having a Trump in charge. Although if Boris Johnson ever becomes Prime Minister, he might be as close as we could get.

I think the most surprising thing for me was that the Donald could win the Republican nomination without a strong existing power base in that party.

I don’t see how the equivalent could be done in UK, which I think would rule out Boris Johnson...I don’t think his own party like him much at all, which is why Michael Gove withdrawing support was so damaging last time he had a tilt at leadership.

Before I saw how he performed as Foreign Secretary, I would have been amazed at you comparing Boris to the Donald...but having seen that, can readily understand that view.

[DrNewGod]

If anything, people in the future will probably look back and wonder how The Democratic Party managed to screw that simple math up twice in less than fifty years.

Never mind that they couldn't see that the year in question had "Change" scrawled across it in gigantic red letters.

True that with someone as divisive as Trump as the Republican candidate, all the Democrats had to do was run someone who was not so divisive and who at least appeared to be a moderate leaning slightly left and they would have won. Also, sadly, Trump was smart in knowing what the concerns of most people were while the Democrats seemed focused on issues that most people could care less about. And yes, he promised everything under the sun and lots of things that pandered to fear and resentment and bigotry in ways that people often don't even recognize as such, but it worked.

Was Hillary Clinton overwhelmingly more qualified for the job? Of course. Does she understand economics way better than he does? That's not a difficult task. But people dislike her for reasons both legitimate and based at the core in sexism and the Democrats knew that and threw away a potentially easy win.

These are interesting and compelling thoughts. The truly depressing irony of all this is that both parties were roiling in their own self-serving corruption, and that it was the Democratic party - who claim to be champions of just and equitable policy - that was unable to sufficiently motivate a base to throw it off, while the GOP did so through an utterly self-serving and corrupt demagogue who appears to hate accountability and democratic institutions.

The Republicans will never sit a president who wins the popular vote again. I'm absolutely sure of that.

The last two years have taught me the danger of employing the word "never."

[DrNewGod]

What do you think the books that come out from staffers who have no reason to lie in the future, and can make a quick buck on them are going to say? And even if someone wants to defend policies like locking children in cages, like Stephen Miller... how the hell would history remember that well?

Based on the books being written about his presidency that have already come out... it's already being remembered as a farce. There are so many "new lows" that are achieved, and we've probably not seen the lowest yet.

My bet: there will be a few that synchophantically cling to the He Made Us Great Again BS, but most will be self-reputation salvagers, claiming they were the sole voice of reason that protected us from The Mad Would-Be-Monarch.

I think the most surprising thing for me was that the Donald could win the Republican nomination without a strong existing power base in that party.

IMO: that says less about Trump than about how disgusted people were with the self-serving party status quos, including Clinton.

[Dalak]

So, when did a "Trump Presidency" thread become yet another excuse to **** on Hillary Clinton?

[Scott Taylor]

Funny how it's only the Republican presidents that lost the popular votes after their elections. But after looking up this page on wikipedia: John F Kennedy is the closest we'll get to the only Democratic president that lost the popular vote.

Anyways I'm no political expert, so I'm just reading this thread out of curiosity to see how American politics work.

The Republicans will always be the ones who have that happen. The system is set up that way because cities tend Democratic and rural areas tend Republican. And if we just went with popular vote alone for each election, the cities would win every election hands down.

So instead we have the electoral college system which is intended to give the rural areas a chance to actually compete with cities. But yes, the odds of a losing Democrat having anything but a close or better popular vote to a Republican is pretty low. A Democrat with an extremely low popular vote would have to be absolutely abysmal (cough Dukakis).

[numberthirty]

I think the most surprising thing for me was that the Donald could win the Republican nomination without a strong existing power base in that party.

I don’t see how the equivalent could be done in UK, which I think would rule out Boris Johnson...I don’t think his own party like him much at all, which is why Michael Gove withdrawing support was so damaging last time he had a tilt at leadership.

Before I saw how he performed as Foreign Secretary, I would have been amazed at you comparing Boris to the Donald...but having seen that, can readily understand that view.

On that...

Republicans had been pitching the idea that Washington doesn't work for the voters for quite a while. It's how the "Tea Party" candidates wound up in office.

They just never counted on having to deal with a primary contender who could actually take advantage of that they actually were not from "Washington".

[BruceWayneJr.]

President Trump has been trying to revive the coal industry, but the only way to do that is ban the cheaper natural gas and renewable energy sources in America.

Well considering how many plants have closed this year and are planning to close in the near future, it looks like he's doing a shitty job.

You can't roll back the clock on everything. Some industries have evolved, and fighting that is a fools' errand. Renewable energy will still exist after Donnie is gone.

[Witchfan]

Unemployment is the lowest rate in 50 years. Crime rates are the lowest in 50 years. Inflation is not a problem. We are talking peace with North Korea. ISIS is defeated. We are going back to the Moon and then we are going to Mars. My salary is increasing. The town I live in is the best I have ever seen it. Lost manufacturing jobs are returning to the country. I like the way things are.

[Witchfan]

Unemployment is the lowest rate in 50 years. Crime rates are the lowest in 50 years. Inflation is not a problem. We are talking peace with North Korea. ISIS is defeated. We are going back to the Moon and then we are going to Mars. My salary is increasing. The town I live in is the best I have ever seen it. Lost manufacturing jobs are returning to the country. I like the way things are.

Trump’s list: 289 accomplishments in just 20 months, ‘relentless’ promise-keeping
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...romise-keeping

[DrNewGod]

Unemployment is the lowest rate in 50 years. Crime rates are the lowest in 50 years. Inflation is not a problem. We are talking peace with North Korea. ISIS is defeated. We are going back to the Moon and then we are going to Mars. My salary is increasing. The town I live in is the best I have ever seen it. Lost manufacturing jobs are returning to the country. I like the way things are.

It's nice you are doing well, for now. It's not going to last.

Neither ISIS not Alqueda are deafeated (who, after all is it that we're having to shoot at in both Iraq and Afghanistan?). The economy was already moving this way, with stock uncertainty of 2016 being typical of an election year. The effects of the tariff on factor market supplies have not yet hit, but it's coming (watch gold prices and major Corp investment strategies).

So these "gains" are either unmerited credit-taking or straight falsehoods. On top of that,:

The tax breaks have been aimed at the top 0.1%, who can't trickle it down meaningfully even if they wished, growing income inequality. Interest rates are climbing. Regulations that restrain the kind of dangerously risky investment that brought us 2008 are being gutted. Nations that share our interests are being alienated. Public education is being starved, constricting opportunity for the poor. Protections for anyone who isn't a white wealthy male are being undermined.

So, while it may be working out for you, I find the price a little too high.