Downton Gabby

I cannot express how upsetting the results of our election are. I literally have no words...other than fear, sadness, disappointment, shock, disillusionment,
disgust, disbelief, horror.

I just had to say that.

Rete

As an American I would have felt all those same things if the vote had gone the other way.

Downton Gabby

And that is part of why I feel the way I do....people like you who voted for this...person.

It's not only about him. It's the revelation that so many of my fellow Americans actually think he was the better choice and that he is qualified in any way to be the leader of the free world that depresses and scares the hell out of me. It's mind boggling. It's a travesty. It's dangerous. There is so much wrong with this man, it's beyond belief. It's stunningly INSANE that the host of "The Apprentice", the sexual assaulter, the tax dodging billionaire, is going to be our next President.

And by the way, Hillary won the popular vote.

Please, let's not argue.

verystormy

First, I can understand how you feel. I got up for work yesterday, switched on the TV and nearly dropped my tea.

But, I can understand why they voted for him.

They were given a choice, but the choice was asking which of two turds might be easier to polish.

There are many, many people in many countries who feel that the standard politicians and political system has failed them. Not just in the USA, but all over the world and there is a lot of truth in that. Look at the stats, America has just had 8 years of a "progressive" leader who promised to make everything better, yet twice the number of people are on food stamps, working classes are significantly worse off, middle classes are seeing their lifestyle squeezed, the largest growth in jobs has been for minimum wage roles while better paying jobs are disappearing. Then the democrats put forward a candidate who has been part of the system over seeing that.

The career politicians have sold the entire world the idea that globalisation means they can have more stuff and shiny things for less. We can make our new cars in Mexico and so the price of a new SUV with be 30% cheaper and that means you too can have a shiny new SUV. Sounds wonderful. Except they didn't bother to tell them that it means the jobs will also go to Mexico and you will now go from having that good job making cars to living on food stamps and won't be able to afford the new shiny stuff. People are now, just starting, to wake up to what this means and reacting to the career politicians that sold them this.

I will leave you with a positive though. I went through his policies and the reality is, there is barely anything that isn't a standard republican policy or hasn't been. Even the wall is an old one from the 90's. What you have actually elected is just a slightly dim, brash republican. Nothing unusual in that - Remember Ron R?

Pistolpete2

It's kind of ironic that you posted this on the MBTTUK section as there are 48% (or more*) voting Brits who felt very much the same the morning after the June 23rd Referendum and the true irony is that the vote seemed to go the way it did for almost exactly the same reason as it did in the US - nothing REALLY to do with the EU at all, so it seems. Politically (or greed-wise??), we'll hopefully find out what really motivates (down to the knitty-gritty) the Eurosceptics in Government when a couple more books come out.

The only difference of course is that there is a master of the domain in the US (and Congress supposedly on his side) who at this point is one huge unknown quantity while we have to deal with BREXIT and its many facets and all that entails. You could be better off where you are in many ways.

We've already had a chance to see the 'true' colours of the new Conservative Party at their conference and in their subsequent actions and decision-making and many do not like what they see (as UKIP-lite) one iota.

*some had almost immediate buyer's remorse

mikelincs

I was watching the BBC last night and they were giving to demographics of the vote, the only category where Trump got the highest votes was in the White Male over 45 category, in all other groupings Hillary got the most votes, and in votes by black people she got 88% of the votes.

Moses2013

You might be right. Depending how it goes with right of free movement, there cetainly won't be more better paid jobs available after Brexit and you'll still have unemployed people. Compared to the US, at least you'll still have social security in Britain.




Trumps idea is to stop importing cheap products from China and make sure that more jobs are created in the US, or let's say if people want to sell products to the US they'll have to pay higher taxes. Saying that, being unemployed/poor in the UK will still better than being paid minimum wage in the US.


The UK will still not be a bad place to live if you look at the rest of the world and I think the OP was interested in Scotland which is also not a bad place. Better move now before it's too late

Pistolpete2

Plus ca change - rien ca change

The only thing that can possibly change in due course, from where I sit, is that the developing nations become consumer economies in their own right and that they desire the sort of goods that WE make in sufficient numbers and for long enough to make a difference, in a world of disappearing competitive advantage. Isn't that the EU vision too? In America (and here), this will take, education, re-training, investment and TIME.

Theresa May had an instant dislike for immigration when as Home Secretary, after all she was the one who came up with the idea of income level requirements for UK citizens married to foreign nationals who wanted to reside. Her failings on the 'numbers' (in David Cameron's pre 2010 election promise) stood in the way of her political ambitions. Nobody seemed to want to mention that so much non-EU immigration was in respect of ECHR rulings on right to family life and not the EU or actual abuse in spite of Theresa May's say-so.


Even now, in spite of statistics showing student visa abuse is minimal, she is not prepared to take students out of immigration stats. This all could have a massive negative impact on UK universities and skill levels as well as, as we have seen with India, trade negotiations.


She was also complicit in the distortion of facts regarding the NHS health tourism level of perceived abuse.


One can only guess that it was her ministry that endlessly fed the hungry media the sort of garbage that got the electorate so riled up.


So her latching on to IMMIGRATION as the number one issue at the Conference comes as no surprise. This in spite of the fact that supposedly, from polling, immigration is regarded as acceptable and inevitable by the majority here.


In due course, when May and her Brexit ministers have knocked on enough doors and none have opened, she is likely to change course and loosen the pre-requisite of control over free movement on the QT in negotiations with the EU for however long the QT will last.


We did just find out that much of our manufacturing industry survives though access to UNSKILLED labour, mostly imported, as 'we' have precious little interest, today anyway, in filling vacancies in that area as they arise.


All of this means that all the hate-mongering from those of that ilk and all the immigrant bashing, now stoked by the Tories to steal ground from UKIP, is likely to serve no real purpose other than to divide this country further.


As you hint, the Scots seem to have a more honest and mature view on all of this but though they are going to have much more say in things APPARENTLY, it's unlikely to change things for the Scots in particular in the long run. I wouldn't be suprised if the English regions start to kick-up soon, as much as they are able to.


There is very good reason to be anxious on both sides of the Atlantic.

There is some smart money indicating that an immigration crackdown Stateside with mass deportations, as was aludded to in the election run-up will lead to a global recession at best. With the baggage of actual Brexit that doesn't sound good. There is plenty of room for moderation in rhetoric from here now that POWER has been achieved.

Rete

[QUOTE=Downton Gabby;12100843]
And by the way, Hillary won the popular vote.

Please, let's not argue.[/QUOTE

I do not disagree but of the two choices, honestly, I preferred a loud mouth smart business man than a woman who should have been in federal prison for the her acts against her country. Her Muslim bedfellows who fund her charities and campaign chest, benefit from the charities and hold places of importance in her office is one of the several reasons why I chose not to have her in the White House.

I can name you several Presidents with no regard for women, i.e. Kennedy, Clinton, etc.

As for the popular vote, it has never, ever made any difference in this country who the popular vote went to. The election is solely determined by the electorial college, who, btw, are suppose to vote the way of their constituents. But then again, when have constituents meant anything other than a means to get into office.

Americans and the world have to remember that the President does not hold absolute power. Yes, he has the veto power but that can be over ridden by Congress. He cannot launch a nuclear attack on his own.

The future has yet to unfold. It should be interesting.

robin1234

One useful thing would be to quietly abandon this "leader of the free world" nonsense. The U.S. president is just the U.S. president. He or she has never been "leader of the free world." What the hell is the free world, anyway? Totally meaningless.

Pulaski

You probably said the same thing 36 years ago. The public reaction at the time was similar.

I agree with Rete, America dodged a bullet.

Downton Gabby

[QUOTE=Rete;12101158][QUOTE=Downton Gabby;12100843]
And by the way, Hillary won the popular vote.

Please, let's not argue.[/QUOTE
From Rete:
I do not disagree but of the two choices, honestly, I preferred a loud mouth smart business man than a woman who should have been in federal prison for the her acts against her country. Her Muslim bedfellows who fund her charities and campaign chest, benefit from the charities and hold places of importance in her office is one of the several reasons why I chose not to have her in the White House.

I can name you several Presidents with no regard for women, i.e. Kennedy, Clinton, etc.

As for the popular vote, it has never, ever made any difference in this country who the popular vote went to. The election is solely determined by the electorial college, who, btw, are suppose to vote the way of their constituents. But then again, when have constituents meant anything other than a means to get into office.

Americans and the world have to remember that the President does not hold absolute power. Yes, he has the veto power but that can be over ridden by Congress. He cannot launch a nuclear attack on his own.

You're wrong.

"What would it mean to have Trump’s fingers on the nuclear button? We don't really know, but we do know this: In the atomic age, when decisions must be made very quickly, the presidency has evolved into something akin to a nuclear monarchy. With a single phone call, the commander in chief has virtually unlimited power to rain down nuclear weapons on any adversarial regime and country at any time. You might imagine this awesome executive power would be hamstrung with checks and balances, but by law, custom and congressional deference there may be no responsibility where the president has more absolute control. There is no advice and consent by the Senate. There is no second-guessing by the Supreme Court. Even ordering the use of torture—which Trump infamously once said he would do, insisting the military “won’t refuse. They’re not gonna refuse me”—imposes more legal constraints on a president than ordering a nuclear attack.

If he were president, Donald Trump—who likes to say he doesn't spend a lot of time conferring with others ("My primary consultant is myself," he declared in March)—would be free to launch a civilization-ending nuclear war on his own any time he chose."

SanDiegogirl

Quite agree...... also, the Presidential campaign has quietly abandoned the promoting of "American exceptionalism" in the last few months, with Mr. Trump actually saying in an early campaign meeting (April 2015, Texas) that he does not believe in this term; and thinking that America was not exceptional had nothing to do with your patriotism.

BritInParis

Lots of people trying to take comfort from the supposed fact that Clinton has won the popular vote but since three states have yet to declare the chances are Trump will win that too given how close it is.

What's really shocking is that these were the two best candidates that could be found in a country of 350 million. Little wonder the turnout was only 55 percent.

MidAtlantic

So you posted expecting everyone else to agree with you.. really?