USA: Existential Crisis?

#1

I’m waking up this morning very cold, not just because my boiler stopped working last night but to the realisation that Trump is going to be the new US president.

What do we think about this?

To many of us in Europe and other parts of the world, myself included, this is seen as a major set back. I see Trump as a mentally unstable racist misogynist who would rather make up bullshit than examine the facts on any issue.

As I write Clinton and Trump appear to be very close in terms of share of the popular vote but due to the electoral college system Trump is looking a clear winner.

Are we as screwed as I think? Are am I being over pessimistic here?

I look forward to hearing your views.

European commedians are making a mock of Trump
#2

As an American, a lot of us are just as scared. The LGBT community is terrified right now, because we have a Republican president who will likely put anti-LGBT justices on the Supreme Court, a VP who tried to ruin his state’s economy in the name of “religious freedom”, and a Republican majority in both chambers of Congress. We stand a very real chance of every bit of progress we’ve made in the past 8 years being entirely and decidedly unraveled, including Obergefell.

To say nothing of his impact on other minorities. My boyfriend’s father is a second generation American (and has a Spanish name and a face to match) and he’s scared for what the next four years hold for him and his daughters (who both look very typically hispanic).

We can hope that he steps aside and generally lets people smarter than him make decisions… just so long as Pence isn’t the one calling the shots, that wouldn’t be so bad.

#3

I’m not terribly concerned.

If the winner were Hillary Clinton it would have, in my opinion, been worse. Her track record of crusading against same-sex marriage, her fight against raising the minimum wage, her strong support of using drones for assassination, her 100% anti-whistleblower stance, her desire to kill Snowden, her involvement in multiple government destabilization efforts, her support for enhanced (and warrant-less) surveillance, and her involvement in money laundering and fraud schemes… it’s a lot.

She’s basically all the bad stuff from 1984 and wrapped up into one package.

Trump ain’t great. Didn’t vote for him. But Hillary has such a bad record of things she’s actually done within government… that she would have been a certain disaster… Trump is merely a possible disaster. :slight_smile:

And, hey, there might be some good to come out of this. The DNC is now a burning wreck and will be forced to either fix itself or be replaced by something hopefully a little less corrupt. And Trump seems to have a hard time keeping his mouth shut… so hopefully that means he lets some juicy bits slip out here and there about government programs that we’d all like more info on. :slight_smile:

#4

I wouldn’t put too much credence in the doom and gloom we are seeing today. I didn’t want Trump for president, but I didn’t particularly want any of the other candidates either. Irrespective, just because Donald Trump says something it doesn’t mean it will happen - let’s see whether the nightmares that people are worried about will pan out.

One positive I think we can consider from this outcome is that the American people placed a very prominent middle-finger towards Washington and politicians. I hope this sends a very strong message that (a) Washington needs to change, and (b) maybe non-politicians are good candidates for president. Personally, I am hoping someone like Mark Cuban runs and knocks Trump out in the next election.

One final thought (again as a Trump critic). Every step of the way Trump has surprised us - no-one thought he would get into the debates, then no-one thought he would clinch the nomination, then no-one thought he would win the presidency, and those who thought he might win never expected the level to which he won. As such, let’s not assume he will completely balls up as a president - as with anything involved him, we may be surprised again, despite the buffoon he is.

#5

Bryan, Jono. Neither of you are Black, Hispanic, Muslim or Female. So no, the next four years probably aren’t going to be that bad for you.

But the KKK and European far right groups are celebrating. Ask yourself if you’re ok with that.

Hilary may have been against same sex marriage in the past, but Mike Pence who may well be running the show now, has as a congressman, tried to block a bill for HIV/AIDS treatment unless it included federal funding for a campaign of discouraging same sex relationships. Ask yourself if you’re ok with that.

Both Pence and Trump are on record climate change deniers. Can we really afford to be ok with that?

Frankly (taking my cue from the new POTUS to give my authentic view), “lets keep our fingers crossed that we don’t get a social division and climatic holocaust”, is a limp streak of piss of an opinion.

#6

You are misrepresenting my view here. I am not suggesting we cross our fingers and hope for the best…what I am suggesting is that we act and react based on what he actually does as opposed to what we think he will do.

Historically politicians in campaigns make a lot of promises, many of which never happen. This campaign more than most has been filled with rhetoric on both sides. All I am saying is let’s give the guy a chance to actually lead and then let’s deal with the reality of what he does.

If we don’t do that, what is the alternative?

Sure, we can complain about him winning, we can take to the streets with civil unrest, but that isn’t going to get us very far I don’t think.

I would rather we rise up as a nation for the right thing based on his action as opposed to what he says, particularly given his track record of verbal diarrhea. This is not a dictatorship, and while he has the house and senate, American’s are powerful in discourse and action.

#7

I think the strength of my feeling come from having visited Vimy and Auschwitz. (Vimy is a Canadian WWI memorial in Northern France. A haunting place which is kept as a barely healed scar demonstrating the reality of the concentrated murder and degradation of modern war).

When you’ve seen that mass murder of innocents can and does happen, and the people who only just survived it beg you to be on your guard against fascism, hubris, nationalism and hate, if you have any humanity, you take it seriously.

I hope I’m wrong, but what I’ve seen of the naked hate, the scapegoating, the gradual relaxing back into lazy thinking and political debate. It’s too many red flags to ignore that we’re sleepwalking into totalitarianism, both in Europe and the USA.

When the Allied forces liberated Dachau (and some others), They forced as many Germans as they could to go around the camps and even help clean up. And that thought chills me. I never want to get to that position. So I’m nailing my colours to the mast early. 1 Muslim beaten up is 1 too many, 1 Hispanic kid killed as a victim of racism will be one too many. 1 Trans person sacked and ostracised is one too many. 1 woman raped or forced into a dodgy abortion is too many. As soon as you tolerate it at a low level, you’ll find the horse has bolted. It needs to be opposed while it’s still rhetoric.

#8

I laughed all day over this one.

#9

I fully agree that Trump has expressed some very offensive views and I am worried that the Republican part have overall control of both houses - though thankfully most republican politicians views are not as excessive as his.

I am also concerned that Trump is a climate change denier. Climate change is the biggest threat we face and the evidence that we are the main cause is undeniable. The few scientific papers I have seen that try to cast any doubt on this are all from organisations that have a vested interest in spreading confusion in order to make big profits in the short term at the expense of all our futures. Tobacco companies used the same strategy for years to avoid compensating anybody

#10

I know I’ve expressed my irritation on this subject before. But…

First I will reiterate that I do not doubt that the atmosphere has been deeply affected by man’s activities. To what extent, unfortunately, only time will tell.

But what really irritates me as to those who promote the climate change agenda, is that, by definition, there is no science to it. When I hear a guy from NOAA saying on the radio, that since the temperature readings of ocean buoys are lower than expected, they will arbitrarily (my word) insert numbers that is more to what the expected as the real data, am I to take that as science? Or when it is found that “data” is inserted, not as data entries, but as part of the code for computer models that will affect the outcome in a way that is more to their liking, should I take that as science? How about when a climate professor, who is critical of it all, expresses that there are many, many papers submitted that are critical, but they are mostly rejected for peer review because the peer board is all in on this climate change ‘science’, should I feel reassured that it is all objective? Science should be all about attacking a thesis until it stands or falls. But, instead, when I see that there is a big monetary interest pushing this ‘climate change science’, it smells really bad. And, instead of these interests seeing to it that the ‘science’ is clean and true, when it is questioned, roll out the emotions. If one is a ‘climate denier’, he is worse than Hitler. Really???

Again, I really don’t doubt that man is polluting, to a negative effect, the atmosphere, to the harm of our home. But, personally, as one who loves science, calling all this ‘climate change’ fiasco science is insulting.

#11

Greg, I do not want to get into a stand up argument here but there is lots of science and very clear evidence to back up the argument that climate change is real and is predominantly as a direct result of human activity. I have read many papers on the subject, many by people who have no financial interest in promoting either side of the argument.

I will be more than happy to discuss the science on this if you or anybody else here is interested but it will require a detailed examination of the data so I suggest this should be a separate topic of its own.

Arguments always decline into farce when Hitler is mentioned with people becoming upset and good examination of the data and logical analysis going out the window so I won’t go there except to state that I have not made any such comparison.

#12

I’m sorry, I don’t want to seem like I’m looking for an argument. The climate change argument really pushes my irritation button. For all I see, on both sides, is the manipulation of people for the financial gain of a very few. I work with a couple of guys who would be labeled as ‘climate deniers’. They’ve learned not to bring up the science of it with me, saying that science is actually behind them. The very same points I make about those who support climate chance gets thrown at them too.

Wait, maybe I am a curmudgeon! Ok, no maybe about it. :smile:

#13

Civil unrest as often been the only way to achieve meaningful changes in society. Without the actions of Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, The Freedom Riders and others the USA would have had racial segregation for a lot longer than it did, we may still have had it today.

The LGBT community in the UK would almost certainly not had the rights it does now, including the right to marry without Gay Pride events for example. I won’t go on but I’m sure we can all think of several other examples around the world, apartheid in South Africa for instance.

Civil unrest does not have to be violent and usually works best when it isn’t but many the biggest improvements in our social, political and human rights would not have happened if people had not taken to the streets to protest. Politicians often do not want to hand power and control to the masses and may benefit financially by keeping us oppressed and limiting our rights and freedoms.

Greg, I get that you are sensitive on the Subject of Climate Change as we have had discussions on this before. I too get annoyed by some of the rhetoric around the subject as while there is a lot of sound science here there are people on both sides using misinformation to push their own ends.

#14

Agreed, one should ultimately be judged by their actions…and based on Trumps, I’m with b1acr0w on this.

Admittedly as a Canadian observing from the outside, yet I’ve seen enough of Trumps verified actions to judge him as a dangerous unbridled sociopath. We share a power grid, atmospheric currents, large bodies of water, etc…; He being in power is disturbing to us too :frowning:

#15

Yes, where’s the signal in the noise, eh? (I think of that analogy a lot since I’m trying, so far not too successfully, to design and build a tv antenna (you guys still have to pay a tax or fee to have an arial? Never mind WAY OFF TOPIC!! :smile: ))

#16

Sorry if this is upsetting to anyone but a Trump president makes me think of the worst of our history and this seams relevant.

#17

As a Jew that has received hundreds upon hundreds of death threats (for being a Jew)… I think you’re way (way) off base.

#18

Absolutely, 100% right.

#19

[quote=“oldgeek, post:10, topic:10932, full:true”]
When I hear a guy from NOAA saying on the radio, that since the temperature readings of ocean buoys are lower than expected, they will arbitrarily (my word) insert numbers that is more to what the expected as the real data, am I to take that as science?[/quote]

These are extremely serious allegations. Do you have any piece of evidence?

Dealing effectively with climate change, if even possible, would require extraordinary changes and limitations in our society, which is to the advantage of practically nobody. Correct me if I’m wrong on this, but any government/company/individual would highly benefit from a world without global warming where Earth could sustain virtually unlimited emissions of GHG, secondary product of our economy.

#20

I absolutely agree that civil unrest and being civilly disobedient are important in society. Things do indeed change when civil unrest as a tool is used. What I don’t know is what the patterns are that makes civil unrest succeed.

People all over the world go out and protest and in many cases those protests reap few rewards. Some protests though do work. I am curious what makes some work and others fail in terms of real tangible results. It would be easy to assume the size of the protest is one element, but I just don’t know.

Please respect our code of conduct which is simple: don't be a dick.