Re: 2016 Election
 

I was referring to you once again posting unattributed material with no input of your own as opposed to the particular source of said material.

Re: 2016 Election
 

The fact that Trump is disputing the election results really tells me more than anything else possibly could.

Oh and the fact that he's sending Pence to the security briefings but won't be bothered to go himself? This is obviously way above his pay grade in that he's entirely too pig stupid to absorb profuse and complex information. But seriously? He won't even go and try to learn? That actually pisses me off even though it might be a good thing. Pence is two notches less insane than Trump but, truthfully, Trump is probably too crazy to actually let Pence run that shit.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Actually, Trump's too busy planning his next rally - he's apparently holding a 'Thank You' rally in Cincinnati on Thursday

Re: 2016 Election
 

I'm not sure. If that story about when Kasich was offered the VP slot is anything to go by. I can see Trump spending the next four years running round the country doing rallies while Pence and Jared Kushner are running the country.

Re: 2016 Election
 

He really misses those rallies. Apparently nobody told him that being president meant he would have to stop rallying and start adulting.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Because there's nothing suspicious about an unelected family member to be acting Commander in Chief. Not weird at all.

Re: 2016 Election
 

That covers a lot.

Actually I think I made the comment some time back that whoever won, I would prefer the other side to have Congress on the basis a do nothing Congress was better than a do all Congress.

There are 300 odd million people, Trump must be better for some that others, I have serious doubts that all that money paid to the Clinton Foundation was all altruistic. Just the way things work.

Most people get screwed, quite how much with the choices is complex.

Climate Change, well that covers a lot of possibilities, but lets assume you take a view it is happening a middle course on the various assumptions, then I would be prepared to wager a fairly significant sum that any messing around that Clinton may have done would be minimal and have no significant effect.

As I frequently say the US, the world do not work like that, people are more focussed on the now, just look around. Everytime the Guardian run a Climate Change story I seem to get an email from Guardian Travel about holidaying in Belize or wherever. Amusing. As was watching the Politicians zooming around in their jets.

Re: 2016 Election
 

I wouldn't be surprised at that approach, after all he's said that he plans to run the country as a business, and it's not unusual for businesses to delegate decision-making authority to subordinates (which is one reason why executive compensation is completely ludicrous right now). Apparently, some previous Presidents tried similar approaches (including Reagan), but found it created too much confusion and chaos.

What I don't think Trump understands is that the Presidency of the United States is deemed the hardest job in the world, not because of the long hours required, or the expectation of a broad range of knowledge, but because the blame for every single decision made by his administration is laid at his feet.

Re: 2016 Election
 

I just don't think Trump's desire to pull out of the Climate Change Accords is well-entrenched, It seemed to arise late in the campaign, but it seemed more directed toward pulling funding from the UN (of which the accords are part of that funding). Having prominent world leaders lobbying him with the reasons for continuing the funding could well sway his opinion.

Of course he'll tweet about it "Decided to save the liberals living on the coasts money. Now they'll no longer have to take swimming lessons #MAGA"

Just keep Trump and Duterte away from each other.

Re: 2016 Election
 

I agree.

True, the difference is you know how you'd be screwed by Clinton. But it's the unknown with Trump that is the big worry. Plus this isn't a zero sum game, so it's perfectly possible that pretty much everyone ends up getting screwed.

But Clinton wouldn't make things worse with climate change as she actually acknowledges it's a thing, unlike Trump who thinks it's a Chinese hoax.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Some well reasoned arguments from Silver on the pros and cons of auditing election results. A stark contrast to the Daily Fail's article:

Why I Support An Election Audit, Even Though It’s Unlikely To Change The Outcome | FiveThirtyEight

Re: 2016 Election
 

Hmm, well in my mind we are talking about such a small degree of difference, does it matter?

Let us say Clinton vs Donald delayed whatever you think is going to happen a week?

Re: 2016 Election
 

I did not read the DM article but I liked the Silver on, makes a lot of sense.

Obviously begs the question why people would want to pay for an audit, obviously more interested in changing the result.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Money doesn't grow on trees and US is 18+ trillion in debt. Maybe if the US would start acting like the broke nation it is the sooner it can get out of debt

Re: 2016 Election
 

The thing is, it's not a small degree of difference. If Trump tears up the Paris Agreement, then there is a good chance that India, China, Russia and others will follow suit. Another four (probably more) years of emissions at the current levels will mean literally degrees of difference in increased temperatures.