The old crow is crowing about the two million popular votes. Funny how it maters now.

In 1992 Bill Clinton got 44,909,806 votes.

George Bush and Ross Perot got 58,848,371 votes combined.

Meaning the majority of voters DIDN'T want Bill Clinton to be president, to the tune of 13,938,565 votes. That's almost 7x's more votes than Hilary is crying about, but somehow it didn't matter then.

TRUMP: “I Am Working Hard on Thanksgiving Trying to Get Carrier AC Company to Stay in US”

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Not everybody going into Trump HQ for an interview is going to be offered any position, or will accept one if offered. How about waiting for and seeing actual results?

Nah, that makes far too much sense. All the speculating and armchair quarterbacking is so much more fun than being sensible.

Regardless of whom Trump picks to fill positions, we are +100000000 better off than if Hillary won. Romney may or may not be a good pick. Maybe Trump has a strategy we/I don't see. I voted for Trump to be my President. Now I'm going to let him be my president.

^^^
That would be great,guess carrier blinked,good thing to.
That trump train will mess you up

A Besieged Trump Presidency Ahead By Patrick J. Buchanan

After a week managing the transition, vice president-elect Mike Pence took his family out to the Broadway musical “Hamilton.”

As Pence entered the theater, a wave of boos swept over the audience. And at the play’s end, the Aaron Burr character, speaking for the cast and the producers, read a statement directed at Pence:

“(W)e are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir. But we truly hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values.”

In March, the casting call that went out for actors for roles in this musical celebration of “American values” read:

“Seeking NON-WHITE men and women.”

The arrogance, the assumed posture of moral superiority, the conceit of our cultural elite, on exhibit on that stage Friday night, is what Americans regurgitated when they voted for Donald Trump.

Yet the conduct of the “Hamilton” cast puts us on notice. The left neither accepts its defeat nor the legitimacy of Trump’s triumph.

His presidency promises to be embattled from Day One.

Already, two anti-Trump demonstrations are being ginned up in D.C., the first on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, by ANSWER, Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. A second, scheduled for Jan. 21, is a pro-Hillary “Million Woman March.”

While the pope this weekend deplored a “virus of polarization,” even inside the church, on issues of nationality, race and religious beliefs, that, unfortunately, is America’s reality. In a new Gallup poll, 77 percent of Americans perceived their country as “Greatly Divided on the Most Important Values,” with 7 in 8 Democrats concurring.

On the campuses, anti-Trump protests have not ceased and the “crying rooms” remain open. Since Nov. 8, mobs have blocked streets and highways across America in a way that, had the Tea Party people done it, would have brought calls for the 82nd Airborne.

In liberal Portland, rioters trashed downtown and battled cops.

Mayors Rahm Emanuel of Chicago and Bill de Blasio of New York have declared their cities to be “sanctuary cities,” pledging noncooperation with U.S. authorities seeking to deport those who broke into our country and remain here illegally.

Says D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, “I have asserted firmly that we are a sanctuary city.” According to The Washington Post, after the meeting where this declaration had been extracted from Bowser, an activist blurted, “We’re facing a fascist maniac.”

Such declarations of defiance of law have a venerable history in America. In 1956, 19 Democratic Senators from the 11 states of the Old Confederacy, in a “Southern Manifesto,” rejected the Supreme Court’s Brown decision ordering desegregation of the public schools.

Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, Mississippi Gov. Ross Barnett and Alabama Gov. George Wallace all resisted court orders to integrate. U.S. marshals and troops, ordered in by Ike and JFK, insured the court orders were carried out.

To see Rahm and de Blasio in effect invoking John C. Calhoun’s doctrine of interposition and nullification is a beautiful thing to behold.

Among the reasons the hysteria over the Trump election has not abated is that the media continue to stoke it, to seek out and quote the reactions they produce, and then to demand the president-elect give assurances to pacify what the Post says are “the millions of … blacks and Latinos, gays and Lesbians, Muslims and Jews — fearful of what might become of their country.”

Sunday, The New York Times ran a long op-ed by Daniel Duane who said of his fellow Californians, “(N)early everyone I know would vote yes tomorrow if we could secede” from the United States.

The major op-ed in Monday’s Post, by editorial editor Fred Hiatt, was titled, “The Fight to Defend Democracy,” implying American democracy is imperiled by a Trump presidency.

The Post’s lead editorial, “An un-American Registry,” compares a suggestion of Trump aides to build a registry of Muslim immigrants to “Nazi Germany’s … singling out Jews” and FDR’s wartime internment of 110,000 Japanese, most of them U.S. citizens.

The Post did not mention that the Japanese internment was a project of the beatified FDR, pushed by that California fascist, Gov. Earl Warren, and upheld in the Supreme Court’s Korematsu decision, written by Roosevelt appointee and loyal Klansman, Justice Hugo Black.

A time for truth. Despite the post-election, bring-us-together talk of unity, this country is hopelessly divided on cultural, moral and political issues, and increasingly along racial and ethnic lines.

Many Trump voters believe Hillary Clinton belongs in a minimum-security facility, while Hillary Clinton told her LGBT supporters half of Trump’s voters were racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes and bigots.

Donald Trump’s presidency will be a besieged presidency, and he would do well to enlist, politically speaking, a war cabinet and White House staff that relishes a fight and does not run.

The battle of 2016 is over.

The long war of the Trump presidency has only just begun.

quote:

Not that it matters. DT did not need MI to win 270 EV's.

It matters to me. I want the hag STOMPED in the election, not just barely winning.

Michigan is finally announced... Trump wins it.

http://www.freep.com/story/new...igan-votes/94360852/

Romney would do just fine as sec state. Actually anyone would.

Anyone who can say during a negotiation "would you rather deal with Chaos?" Has the upper hand

Are we still talking about who trump is interviewing and picking? Dear lord para put the kabash on this like 10 pages ago. Did you elect him to make the picks or did you elect him so you can make the picks and psychoanalyze it?

You have no idea what discussions have been had with any cabinet members, we have already seen trump will fire anyone (christie), so what makes you so qualified to choose his cabinet?

Sorry, rant off, but you are picking it apart as if hillary won... Para would have locked this thread if he wasnt enjoying the win so much.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Not that it matters. DT did not need MI to win 270 EV's.

It matters to me. I want the hag STOMPED in the election, not just barely winning.

Good point. Like combating a bacterial infection --- you want to stomp it so it never has a chance of coming back.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

Heard on the radio this morning that some of the anti-Trump forces are demanding recounts in PA, WI, and FL. They are claiming that they were the victims of voter fraud/and or tampering with voting machines by the Russians.

I heard this too. It's Nate Silver's last breath before he rides into the sunset of obscurity. Nothing will become of it. Oh, and Nate Silver, his fivethrityeight web site and his stupid predictions can go right to hell.

Could Nate Silver be any more of an ass? To think he made money for election predictions. The election is done, as is his career!

quote:

Originally posted by Tonyny:
The long war of the Trump presidency has only just begun.

The largest portion of this has little to even do with power. It has to do with protecting the gravy train. In the last eight years, the dems have protected and financed every special interest out there. Every "Hyphen American" group has gotten paid at the government hand, either through front door, bogus grants, or back door "Levies" from various regulatory agencies filing bullshit lawsuits against companies for huge amounts of money, and then extorting them for pennies on the dollar "voluntary" donations to the left's causes.

Now, those of us who only go back "American" without the hyphen are pissed, and supposedly in control.

And in the true nature of the liberal mindset, they can't just say "oops, we really have fucked up the last eight years and that is why we lost so bad". They have to follow their true path by saying that they lost because of various "-IST" groups that are vile and terrible. Instead of just admitting that the American middle class has had enough of their bullshit. Not calling radical Islam by its name. Letting BLM burn down our cities without as much as a "stop it" from the top. Letting the .gov go after political groups. .Gov employees taking the 5th after they get caught.

People that want to work, have their own little slice of heaven, and be left alone are tired of their shit.

But, the left will always attempt to call everyone racist, or whatever, to villianize those that won.

The liberals had better take notice. Those who voted for control in this country have a short fuse right now. Mind your manners.

I can understand some consternation over Romney SoS. However, when I picture Mitt in that role vs. the Kerry Creature or The Hag, there is no comparison. It's like getting the worst guy on the Pro all-star team vs. the best person in Jr. High.

Like Trump v. The Hag, no comparison in spite of his faults (which were also his strengths ) . All the talk about the cabinet picks to me just highlights how truly horrific the O administration is. Look at his cabinet. Concerns about the Nat. Security Advisor? How about Susan Rice?

I don't remember any vetting or discussion about O's picks...

I do have to give Romney some credit. Were it not for him, there would be no Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
I do have to give Romney some credit. Were it not for him, there would be no Trump.

That may give Romney too much credit. My feeling is that the possibility of Hillary made Trump inevitable.

If the Dems had favored someone else, Joe the Dumber, Warren, Bernie, some governor maybe, it seemed to me that people might not have been driven to Trump like they obviously were, including the GOP faithful who nominated Trump. It was Anybody But Clinton, and Trump looked like the only guy who could be counted on to do what was needed, running around the country hollering about that nasty woman, Crooked Hillary.

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:
Are we still talking about who trump is interviewing and picking?

Uhhh, yeah. That's the next evolution. Why wouldn't we talk about his picks? Between now and the inauguration, what else is there to discuss besides what the administration will be like?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:
Are we still talking about who trump is interviewing and picking?

Uhhh, yeah. That's the next evolution. Why wouldn't we talk about his picks? Between now and the inauguration, what else is there to discuss besides what the administration will be like?

You left out this part in Deqlyn's quote:

quote:

Dear lord para put the kabash on this like 10 pages ago. Did you elect him to make the picks or did you elect him so you can make the picks and psychoanalyze it?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:
Are we still talking about who trump is interviewing and picking?

Uhhh, yeah. That's the next evolution. Why wouldn't we talk about his picks? Between now and the inauguration, what else is there to discuss besides what the administration will be like?

Its not about who he picks as the discussion goes, its the arm chair quarterbacking about how xyz would have picked xyz person instead. Its been beaten over our heads that donald trump doesnt need our help yet people are still questioning him... for example Romney as a choice.

Donald knows what he is doing and has since 2015. Its like sitting in the crowd and telling your buddy you could have played that Slash guitar solo sooooo much better by adding xyz ....

Let the man work, enjoy the ride. Hes not even president yet.

quote:

Originally posted by EZ_B:
TRUMP: “I Am Working Hard on Thanksgiving Trying to Get Carrier AC Company to Stay in US”

Awesome, Trump is publicly shaming them to stay in the U.S., I must say that Mr. Trump is very un-orthodox and has some balls.

Sad thing is, most of these companies are leaving because of the over-reach of government entitities like EPA.

'We don't need the FCC': A Trump advisor's proposal to dissolve America's telecom watchdog


A top advisor to Donald Trump on tech policy matters proposed all but abolishing the nation's telecom regulator last month, foreshadowing possible moves by the president-elect to sharply reduce the Federal Communications Commission's role as a consumer protection watchdog.

In an Oct. 21 blog post, Mark Jamison, who on Monday was named one of two members of Trump's tech policy transition team, laid out his ideal vision for the government's role in telecommunications, concluding there is little need for the agency to exist.

"Most of the original motivations for having an FCC have gone away," Jamison wrote. "Telecommunications network providers and [Internet service providers] are rarely, if ever, monopolies."

The FCC declined to comment for this story, but its current leadership has disagreed strongly with that analysis. Its Democratic chairman, Tom Wheeler, has spoken of an Internet service "duopoly" in much of the country that limits competition. And he has compared telecommunications to the rail and telegraph networks of the 19th century, calling for new rules of the road as the Internet becomes the dominant communications platform of the 21st century.

Wheeler has used his agency to go after allegedly misbehaving companies, proposing record-setting fines against companies for slowing down "unlimited" data plans and for billing customers for content and services they didn't ask for. He passed proactive regulations such as net neutrality to prohibit anticompetitive behavior. And, in an unprecedented step, Wheeler made Internet providers obey the same privacy rules that legacy phone companies must abide by when handling customer data.

Read more: Trump's victory could spell the end of the FCC's net neutrality regulations »

Critics of the FCC have accused Wheeler of political favoritism, passing rules that appear to disproportionately benefit newer Internet companies and disadvantage big incumbent industries such as cable and telecoms. With Trump in the White House, Republicans are expected to roll back many of Wheeler's policies. In an interview Tuesday, Jamison said Wheeler has allowed politics to "infiltrate the FCC a lot more than is necessary."

"I teach regulation all over the world," said Jamison, who directs the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida. "The biggest fight is always to keep politics out of what's supposed to be an independent agency."

Jamison and Jeffrey Eisenach, the other member of Trump's tech transition team, both have ties to the American Enterprise Institute, an elite conservative think tank in Washington. As part of the transition team, the two men are expected to meet for briefings with the FCC's current leadership. Jamison declined to comment on his role in the transition team, which began its outreach to the FCC on Monday. Eisenach, whose previous clients have included Verizon, is viewed by policy analysts as an advocate of deregulation and a proponent of large mergers in the media and telecommunications industries.

"I think both Jeff and Mark envision a significantly pared-down agency," said Hal Singer, an economist at the George Washington University's Institute for Public Policy. "In their minds, proponents of regulation must demonstrate a market failure.... This is a 180-degree turn from Wheeler's FCC, which began with a presumption that markets failed."

Jamison has argued that the FCC could be replaced by a much smaller agency charged with handing out licenses for wireless airwaves — essentially acting as a traffic cop for the spectrum over which cellphone calls, mobile data and TV signals travel.

Many of the FCC's existing functions could be farmed out, Jamison wrote in the blog post. Subsidies for phone and Internet service could be handled by state governments, while the Federal Trade Commission could handle consumer complaints and take action against abuses by companies. There are some details that were not addressed in the blog post due to time constraints, Jamison said Tuesday, such as the possible need for new state-level powers to address broadband monopolies.

In another blog post last week, Jamison acknowledged that dissolving an entire federal agency probably would need "strong leadership" to overcome bureaucratic inertia and political opposition to the plan.

With the looming prospect of a 3-2 majority in favor of Republicans at the FCC, and in light of Republicans' many objections to Wheeler's tenure, it isn't hard to imagine the GOP moving swiftly to limit the FCC's authority in 2017, tweeted Berin Szoka, president of the right-leaning think tank TechFreedom.

Republicans at the commission "will absolutely rule 706 isn't a grant of authority," Szoka said, referring to Section 706, one of the FCC powers the agency used to justify its net neutrality rules.