|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
there are a lot of working ideas on revitalizing rural communities. it just wasn't being presented as a central message.
whatever plan you might want, it still will take a lot of time. this is time that the people can't wait as they lose to opioid addiction and meth.
so the politics will lag the policy focus. you can probably look at a guy like JD Vance as an example of a cultural message to address the political problem. HRC should have had him write her some speeches.
|
On November 10 2016 03:21 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:09 Logo wrote:On November 10 2016 03:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 10 2016 03:04 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 10 2016 03:02 BronzeKnee wrote:On November 10 2016 03:01 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2016 02:58 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Trump already backed off the building of a Wall with Mexico including backing off getting Mexico to pay for it. I think he talked it down for the sake of the election, but his supporters are going to hold him to building it. He's already going to be walking back a lot of other things ("LOCK HER UP!!!!"), so he better build the wall. Yeah this is a really interesting time in American politics. Either he walks back a lot of things he said he would do, or his Presidency will careen from one crisis to another. Why not both? (seriously, it will probably be both) It will be interesting to see what he does walk back when/if he does. Is it the things he was forced to say by the GOP or his own gut feelings and gibberish policies. Actually, you are probably correct. But honestly, he will alienate his base in about 10 days if he doesn't try to jail her and build the wall. Those were the highlights of what he said at his rallies. And I attended one. I think you are giving way way too much credit to the ability of Trump's base to continue caring after 2 months of no real news. Without the daily flood of media coverage, big rallies, and Clinton scandals you're probably going to see them drift apart. The party is over, there's nothing to be constantly angry about anymore. I think you are underestimating them. Go to any given Dunkin's Donuts in a red area and sit down and in the morning and watch the white working class come in and sit down and eat while talking politics. It happens every day, of every year. I've seen that for years, watch the plumbers, factory workers and truck drivers come in and talk. And they sound just like Donald Trump with how they comment on the women that come in, talk about immigrants and minorities, and blame welfare and bad trade deals for their problems. I've been hearing that since I was 16 years old, when my friend in high school used to work there. They aren't angry for the sake of being angry. They are angry they don't have the opportunity their fathers had in manufacturing, to make a good living without getting a degree. And you'll never hear them stop talking about how the country is dying. And Trump said he would bring back manufacturing jobs and lift them up. Another promise that has to be held, or they'll never stop talking about how Trump is just another politician who failed them, they will blame him like they turned on Bush. Politics is life for them. They don't want government handouts, but they want the government to deliver them jobs.
And that is simply never going to happen. Trump raising tariffs is not going to bring jobs back to America. It's just going to plunge the world into a recession (hey, at least those jobs will no longer be in China either). Most of those jobs are gone forever due to automation, at least at wages that Americans want (need) to be paid for them.
|
On November 10 2016 03:30 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He wasn't part of the "establishment" in Washington, and so passed off his wealth as proof he wouldn't be paid off or influenced by lobbyists in Washington. Rural America doesn't hate the rich, more the social and cultural associations with having money + urban attitudes.
It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker.
|
On November 10 2016 03:30 MyLovelyLurker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:25 LegalLord wrote:On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He spoke to the issues they wanted addressed in a way no one else did and for that they were willing to look past everything else. Yeah, it always astonishes me how the GOP not only gets away with talking to working class Americans whilst being on the board of Chevron/Halliburton at the same time, but also thrives from it. You have to admire these marketing skills. You think Hillary's the one to make sure the GOP doesn't get away with it? The Dems were uniquely unqualified to criticize, with a lawyer that hitched her wagon to a rising star and made millions in a time she remembers being dead broke. So Trump doing the plain-talk schtick on reality TV did cement his image as friend of the working class. How more removed can you get from rural america than mincing words about the plight of victim groups A-G?
|
On November 10 2016 03:26 BronzeKnee wrote: Remember that Adolf Hitler and Iran's current government won fair elections too. Democracy has serious flaws.
That's not true for Adolf Hitler. He only got like 43 % and in germany that's not enough to win the election. You have to get over 50 %, alone or with another party together. Hitler just used a clause to his advantage and got appointed to be the "supreme leader" for a limited amount of time because of a current "crisis". What he did after that was securing that the majority would certainly vote for him on a later date and his measures surely weren't constitutional.
|
On November 10 2016 03:26 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. It is very ironic. But in the end, they are voting for someone who says he wants to fight the political machine. And all of his non-politically correct talk and actions was evidence that he wasn't part of the political machine for working class, as he was relentlessly assaulted by the media. Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:26 Blisse wrote: Yeah, the fact that we're talking about this means that they voted for the right person. Whoo democracy. Remember that Adolf Hitler and Iran's current government won fair elections too. Democracy has serious flaws. Oh come on. Iran does not have democratic elections in any meaningful sense of the word. They can vote for their free choice of any of the people preselected by their ultraconservative supreme leader. Hell, their government doesn't even pretend to be a democracy (unlike Russia), and is classified as a theocracy.
|
On November 10 2016 03:35 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:30 CosmicSpiral wrote:On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He wasn't part of the "establishment" in Washington, and so passed off his wealth as proof he wouldn't be paid off or influenced by lobbyists in Washington. Rural America doesn't hate the rich, more the social and cultural associations with having money + urban attitudes. It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker. Heroes usually come from the most unlikely places.
|
not going to read 750 posts, but market has already recovered. not even sure i can tax loss harvest, or whether its worth it to buy stock outside my normal cycle. where are the doom and gloom idiots now?
|
On November 10 2016 03:29 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:27 Reaps wrote:On November 10 2016 03:24 VayneAuthority wrote:On November 10 2016 02:43 Acrofales wrote:Plansix was just temp banned for 90 days by Sn0_Man.
That account was created on 2011-04-03 05:22:58 and had 14501 posts.
Reason: By Request
For those wondering what happened to P6. This is going to be a very quiet thread once all the election heat dies down, with both kwark and p6 banned. With all of kwizach's talk about a banbet, I'm surprised he's still here. Fiwifaki must be kicking himself for squeeming out of that money bet, though. plansix is the quintessential "I have no idea if i voted correctly, but at least he's gone" Why anyone has to be as unpleasant as he is, is beyond me. Plansix took a banbet? looks like he asked for it himself, maybe to avoid discussing politics and cool down after the defeat? Trully a great day, getting rid of him on top of getting rid of Hillary.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 10 2016 03:30 MyLovelyLurker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:25 LegalLord wrote:On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He spoke to the issues they wanted addressed in a way no one else did and for that they were willing to look past everything else. Yeah, it always astonishes me how the GOP not only gets away with talking to working class Americans whilst being on the board of Chevron/Halliburton at the same time, but also thrives from it. You have to admire these marketing skills. you can see that as enabled by a rather inaccurate picture of how the world works from the rural folks. it's always useful to harken back to historical roots and look at a guy like william jennings bryan and that populist movement. the identification of corporate neglect with cosmopolitan east coast attitudes is unmistakable. they look at 'fake talk' from polished politicians and smell the same kind of bull.
|
United States15275 Posts
On November 10 2016 03:35 Acrofales wrote: It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker.
Smug but never cosmopolitan. For decades, he was regularly mocked and belittled by the cultural elite for his lack of class and brazen egotism. Even during his initial forays into politics he was treated as a joke. Obviously he used that to his advantage on the campaign trail.
|
On November 10 2016 03:35 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:30 CosmicSpiral wrote:On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He wasn't part of the "establishment" in Washington, and so passed off his wealth as proof he wouldn't be paid off or influenced by lobbyists in Washington. Rural America doesn't hate the rich, more the social and cultural associations with having money + urban attitudes. It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker.
Indeed. The same people who were apoplectic at Hillary giving GS speeches are now overjoyed they will have a banker/lobbyist for Treasury Secretary : 'Steven Mnuchin (born c. 1963) is an American banker, film producer and political fundraiser. Mnuchin amassed a fortune estimated at over $40 million while working for Goldman Sachs, where his father had worked for three decades and had also made a fortune. In 2002, Mnuchin left Goldman and worked briefly for his Yale roommate Edward Lampert, chief executive of Sears. He also briefly worked for Soros Fund Management in their Private Equity division during the "Goldman" period with Jacob Goldfield and Mark Schwartz.'
While I understand the 'they were already rich ergo no graft' point, it'd be hard to believe these people will have the interest of the little man at heart. And I'm saying Trump's done a good job of not advertising him too much.
|
Remember that Adolf Hitler and Iran's current government were elected too. Democracy has serious flaws. Hitler wasn't elected directly, even though the NSDAP won the two 1932 elections in a landslide. President Hindenburg refused to appoint him as chancellor for a very long time. The Nazis had to pull some strings to get the old man's agreement: 1. They deliberately escalated the riots between communists and nazis on German streets, which led to a rising fear of civil war. 2. They formed alliances with other nationalistic forces like the DNVP to get Hindenburgs support.
The Weimar constitution was very modern but it had one fundamental flaw: To keep monarchists quiet, the president had lots of power. In the final years of its existance, the republic was struggling hard with the global economical crisis, which led to major frustration in the working class. Combine this situation with nazi propaganda and doors are opening up for you.
Hitler's way to power is one of the most fascinating subjects in German history. The people wanted him, but the old elites did not. Actually, Hitler's star had begun to sink in late 1932, but then everything went down very quickly. Democracy had been destroyed due to the so-called presidential cabinets long before the NSDAP got lots of votes. All Hitler had to do was to wait for the right time. And it came when Hindenburg finally gave in, because he had been convinced that Hitler could be controlled.
(I could go on for pages, but that would be too much off-topic content.)
|
On November 10 2016 03:37 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:30 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:25 LegalLord wrote:On November 10 2016 03:23 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 03:20 TheYango wrote:On November 10 2016 03:07 BigFan wrote:On November 10 2016 02:44 Jormundr wrote:Also this is probably the most realistic explanation of this election I've seen so far. Point #3 hits very close to home. extremely well written article. Recommend everyone to read it. So the question going forward is--if a Trump presidency is an expression of rural America's discontent, then how will a Trump presidency fix that discontent? Rural America has been left behind by the rest of the country. But this is not an easy problem to solve, and certainly not one that's solvable by even the best possible president. Were things better for them in the 50s and 60s? Probably. But we can't go back to the 50s and 60s. The rest of the world isn't going to shift back in time for us. What we have to be doing is coping with how technology and the rest of the world are changing America, and that unfortunately also means a huge shift in America's economy toward urban centers. No amount of protectionist trade policy is going to be able to reverse that shift. I understand that rural America is discontent with the way things are in 2016, but it's not clear to me where the way forward is, especially with their deeply-ingrained aversion toward far-left progressive welfare reform. Maybe someone with a better understanding of these things has a clearer understanding of where we go from here and can explain it to me (preferably with the smallest possible amount of condescension or right-wing rose-tinted glasses). I would also like to understand how rural America votes for a billionaire with friends such as Mnuchin and Icahn, and doesn't see the irony. He spoke to the issues they wanted addressed in a way no one else did and for that they were willing to look past everything else. Yeah, it always astonishes me how the GOP not only gets away with talking to working class Americans whilst being on the board of Chevron/Halliburton at the same time, but also thrives from it. You have to admire these marketing skills. You think Hillary's the one to make sure the GOP doesn't get away with it? The Dems were uniquely unqualified to criticize, with a lawyer that hitched her wagon to a rising star and made millions in a time she remembers being dead broke. So Trump doing the plain-talk schtick on reality TV did cement his image as friend of the working class. How more removed can you get from rural america than mincing words about the plight of victim groups A-G?
I was referring to a long-term tendency that harks back to at least Dick Cheney, not just this election. Just be gracious in victory.
|
On November 10 2016 03:40 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:35 Acrofales wrote: It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker. Smug but never cosmopolitan. For decades, he was regularly mocked and belittled by the cultural elite for his lack of class and brazen egotism. Even during his initial forays into politics he was treated as a joke. Obviously he used that to his advantage on the campaign trail.
he put Trump Plaza "on the map" by hosting Wrestlemania4 and Wrestlemania5. Trump had the rassin' fan vote. not wrestling... rasslin'.
if he brought in Jesse Ventura as a special advisor that would be awesome. Ventura can head up the committee in charge of proving Obama was born in Kenya.
|
On November 10 2016 00:41 VayneAuthority wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 00:35 Logo wrote:On November 10 2016 00:33 VayneAuthority wrote: Democrats lost independents like me when they continued to focus on anything except their actual candidate. The smugness and constant name-calling got to an absurd point. Calling everyone that didn't support Clinton with you racist and sexist...Democrats were their own worst enemy this election.
Proof is in the pudding, Obama voters like myself decided this election.
So in your opinion Clinton not Trump was the one calling everyone names? No, i'm referring to the people. The internet is a pretty liberal place and you literally couldn't escape the smugness. It was unbearable
So your vote wasn't based on the candidates; you voted based on which group of voters you'd rather be associated with... and you chose Trump voters over Clinton voters? Am I understanding that correctly?
|
I don't see the point in putting the result of this election on just rural America alone. Rural America is a minority,the majority lives in the cities yet was unable to give Clinton the majority. There are more problems then just rural America that led to the result of this election. The middle class in the cities is getting hammerd just as hard,living cost going through the roof while wages not rising. People have to work 2 jobs and 60 hours a week just to rent a very small apartment and pay of the credit card debt and untilities.
the main reason for the result of this election I think is the growing inequality. It has been growing since the late 70,s early 80,s past century and it now is at pre world war 2 levels again. The inequality got to big,the middle class and lower ended up with a to small slice of the pie. That is the core of the whole problem and that should be addressed. Lifting up a small part of the group who has been left behind (rural America for example) will not solve the problem I think.
The rich, they have to become a bit less rich and powerfull. But that seems a step to far for America to make,and not only for America unfortunately.
|
On November 10 2016 03:30 CosmicSpiral wrote: He wasn't part of the "establishment" in Washington, and so passed off his wealth as proof he wouldn't be paid off or influenced by lobbyists in Washington. Rural America doesn't hate the rich, more the social and cultural associations with having money + urban attitudes.
If any of the following is true, then this shortlist shows they have been completely duped.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071
Names as mentioned on the shortlist:
Newt Gingrich (possibly Sec State) Rudy Giuliani (AG???) Chris Christie (isn't this guy under investigation????)
like those three alone shoots the anti-establishment thing out of the water.
Sessions/Talent for DoD Sarah Palin for Interior (!!!)
Other possible candidates include former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer; Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin; Wyoming Rep. Cynthia Lummis; and Oklahoma oilman Harold Hamm.
More...
Agriculture secretary
There are several names being considered by Trump aides for agriculture secretary, according to multiple sources familiar with the transition. The president-elect has a deep bench to pull from, with nearly 70 leaders on his agricultural advisory committee.
The most controversial name on the transition’s current short list is Sid Miller, the current secretary of agriculture in Texas, who caused a firestorm just days ago after his campaign’s Twitter account referred to Hillary Clinton as a "c---." Miller said it was a staffer mistake and apologized.
Other names include Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback; Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman; former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue; and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry; as well as Charles Herbster, Republican donor and agribusiness leader; and Mike McCloskey, a major dairy executive in Indiana, according to Arabella Advisors, a firm that advises top foundations and closely tracked both transition efforts.
Bruce Rastetter, a major Republican donor in Iowa, and Kip Tom, a farmer who ran for Congress in Indiana this year but was defeated in the primary, are also among those being considered, Arabella said.
Other top Republican insiders expect that Chuck Connor, president and CEO of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives; Don Villwock, president of the Indiana Farm Bureau; and Ted McKinney, current director of the Indiana Department of Agriculture in administration of Gov. Mike Pence, are also likely to be in the running for the post.
Trump also looks to be scrapping Education and EPA but it may not happen right away. Other departments to be stocked with private sector folks. Goldman Sachs guy for Treasury.
Assuming a sizeable amount of this info is true, unless someone knows something about any of these people in terms of pro-manufacturing or pro small business (???????) I think people are going to learn the hard way re: populism tactics.
On November 10 2016 03:48 pmh wrote: I don't see the point in putting the result of this election on just rural America. Rural America is a minority,the majority lives in the cities yet was unable to give Clinton the majority. There are more problems then just rural America that led to the result of this election.
In a twist of irony, it also appears the final counts are done and HRC has won the popular vote by 135k, but I won't detail (edit) derail the thread with Electoral College talk...
Source
Just saying.
|
On November 10 2016 03:40 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 03:35 Acrofales wrote: It's still ironic that their hero was a smug cosmopolitan new yorker. Smug but never cosmopolitan. For decades, he was regularly mocked and belittled by the cultural elite for his lack of class and brazen egotism. Even during his initial forays into politics he was treated as a joke. I really don't expect this to change. He is going to be under sooo much scrutiny and criticism for the next few years. A clown sitting in the oval office is still a clown.
|
On November 10 2016 03:39 dAPhREAk wrote: not going to read 750 posts, but market has already recovered. not even sure i can tax loss harvest, or whether its worth it to buy stock outside my normal cycle. where are the doom and gloom idiots now?
If I understand most of the "doom and gloom" arguments correctly, they're mostly about the digression from social and economic progress once Trump actually becomes president (in January) and once all three branches of government are Republican-controlled. As in, the doom and gloom predictions aren't relevant yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|