Understanding the United States of America (USA) - III

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 09 Nov 2016 21:56

Does Clinton Foundation have to return donations now?

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 09 Nov 2016 22:06

I live in PA and voted for Trump in both BRF and regular elections!! BRF as always is way ahead of the curve!!!

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 09 Nov 2016 22:11

Brar ji,
The only plan to reform Social Security is to Print money.

In 2017, SS will be in net deficit. It would have been this year, but to ensure Hillary victory they raided the disability fund and used money to fund SS. Based on the current level of funding, SS alone will take up all the money raised by government by 2025. No money will be left for running govt, running military or emergency services.

ManishC · Post by **ManishC** » 09 Nov 2016 22:12

Clinton foundation and emails cemented the perception of corruption, and nothing to enthuse the working class voter. Bigger problem for Dems is that they have no bench strength - unless the Red Congress and Orange POTUS totally blows it going forward!

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 09 Nov 2016 22:16

On a lighter note, how did they know?

A Chinese monkey and an Indian fish predict Donald Trump will win US Presidential elections

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 22:21

ManishC wrote:Clinton foundation and emails cemented the perception of corruption, and nothing to enthuse the working class voter. Bigger problem for Dems is that they have no bench strength - unless the Red Congress and Orange POTUS totally blows it going forward!

Exactly. Where are those that developed under Clinton or even Obama? There are a few if any national level democratic leaders in their 40's...Its just a bunch of known faces and elders. To their credit the republicans have built up a strong bench strength across states and even nationally aided no doubt by having a bag to punch at for 8 years

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Nov 2016 22:31

vera_k wrote:On a lighter note, how did they know?

A Chinese monkey and an Indian fish predict Donald Trump will win US Presidential elections

such ancient and dharmic creatures are always more plugged into the force than distracted humans...they sense all types of forces from asuric to geomagnetic

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 22:32

panduranghari wrote:Brar ji,
The only plan to reform Social Security is to Print money.

In 2017, SS will be in net deficit. It would have been this year, but to ensure Hillary victory they raided the disability fund and used money to fund SS. Based on the current level of funding, SS alone will take up all the money raised by government by 2025. No money will be left for running govt, running military or emergency services.

That is why it needs to be reformed to align with the current fiscal condition and why its better to avoid making promising that generations down the road will pay heavily for. Leaving it as is as trump has said won't get you there. This is the first thing that is likely to change if he can gel together with the house leadership. I'm all for entitlements being reformed to match the fiscal reality with proper protection of the vulnerable folks of course.

Sicanta · Post by **Sicanta** » 09 Nov 2016 22:33

https://twitter.com/BerenabasG/status/7 ... 6977131520

reminds me of jnu students. My way or highway.

LokeshC · Post by **LokeshC** » 09 Nov 2016 22:34

vera_k wrote:On a lighter note, how did they know?

A Chinese monkey and an Indian fish predict Donald Trump will win US Presidential elections

I am sure we are forgetting some or the other orangutan (no pun intended) or snake that predicted Clingon empire. They did not make the neuj for obvious reasons.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 22:35

Sicanta wrote:https://twitter.com/BerenabasG/status/7 ... 6977131520

reminds me of jnu students. My way or highway.

That's what all activism is both sides of the divide unless we forget what Cruz'ers and Tea Party have been doing for the last 8 years

.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 09 Nov 2016 22:52

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/201 ... tate-house

Following news of Donald Trump’s shocking victory over Hillary Clinton in Tuesday’s presidential election, anti-Trump protesters are planning to hold a rally against the president-elect outside the Massachusetts State House on Wednesday night.

The Facebook event for the “Boston Against Trump rally” had more than 2,000 confirmed attendees as of 10:45 a.m. Wednesday morning. The event, which is scheduled to start at 7 p.m., was created by the Boston Socialist Students, a self-described “student movement for the 99 percent.”

“Donald Trump is the next President of the United States. We need to immediately start fighting against him,” reads the event’s description. “We need to build a movement to fight racism, sexism, and Islamophobia!”

Skanda · Post by **Skanda** » 09 Nov 2016 22:53

Feminists treat men badly. It’s bad for feminism.

This gender antagonism does nothing to advance the unfinished business of equality. If anything, the fixation on men behaving badly is a distraction from more fundamental issues, such as changes in the workplace to promote work-life balance. What’s more, male-bashing not only sours many men — and quite a few women — on feminism. It often drives them into Internet subcultures where critiques of feminism mix with hostility toward women.

We are headed into an election with what is likely to be a nearly unprecedented gender gap among voters. To some extent, these numbers reflect policy differences. Yet it is not too far-fetched to see the pro-Donald Trump sentiment as fueled, at least in part, by a backlash against feminism. And while some of this backlash may be of the old-fashioned “put women in their place” variety, there is little doubt that for the younger generation, the perception of feminism as extremist and anti-male plays a role, too.

This article is interesting because off-late if you turn on the TV commentary on Trump, all you heard was how racist, mysogynist, sexist Trump really is. The entire case against Trump was just that.

These words are typically the words Feminists use in every other argument.

Part of the problem that future Women Presidents in the US (or the Western World) will end up having to face is trying to run a campaign without making themselves as a pivot through which Feminists continue to push their agenda. But then, atleast in the case of Hillary, she was so lost in the liberal crowd and their Feminist idealogy that she didnt realize perhaps how little Feminism actually matters to people.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 09 Nov 2016 22:55

sanjaykumar wrote: What does this do to Brand America? Hard to push those T-visas when the President is groping pussy; hard to lecture third worlders on inclusivity.

billclinton was doing much more than that raping, beating up women and then handing them over to hilary for pychological torture and threats...

Yet how sanctimonious he was to the world...

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 23:03

U.S. SENATOR, ARMY RESERVE VETERAN, MIGHT HEAD PENTAGON

An Army Reserve veteran who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee is a potential nominee to head the Defense Department when Donald Trump becomes president.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., who advised Trump on national security issues during the campaign, is chairman of the armed services subcommittee on strategic forces and a member of the AirLand and seapower panels. He also is a senior member of the Senate Budget Committee.

Sessions served in the Army Reserve from 1973 to 1986, assigned to the 1184th Army Transportation Terminal Unit for part of the time. He attained the rank of captain.

President-elect Trump has not indicated when he might announce his nominees for Cabinet positions, but Sessions was an adviser to the Trump campaign and spokesman on national security issues. Sessions told Defense News in an Oct. 30 interview that Trump “believes that the military has been degraded” and “it needs to be rebuilt.”

In particular, Sessions said Trump would increase Regular Army strength to 540,000 soldiers.

Sessions has been a strong advocate for bigger defense budgets. In a June 2015 debate on the Senate floor, Sessions argued for increasing 2011 defense spending caps, saying the world had changed.

Describing himself as a budget hawk, Sessions said, “We are going to have to spend some more money.”

“In 2011, we did not have the Russian invasion of Crimea. We did not have the continued vicious, violent fight in Syria. We did not have the chaos that is happening in Libya. We did not have the threat to the Iraqi Government's existence, we thought it was on the right path. We did not have the problem in Yemen. So this is just a different world.”

He also argued for slowing down troop cuts, especially for the Regular Army. “Maybe we will have to go to 450,000, but right now we need to slow down that reduction based on the world situation,” he said.

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 09 Nov 2016 23:05

SBajwa wrote:I live in PA and voted for Trump in both BRF and regular elections!! BRF as always is way ahead of the curve!!!

Thank you sir for electing Trump. You saved us from Clinton and terrorists as some of our votes in blue states were useless to overturn.

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 09 Nov 2016 23:11

[quote="Skanda"]Feminists treat men badly. It’s bad for feminism.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 23:14

Since I haven't seen it posted here before, below is the Republican Party's 2016 platform agreed upon recently -

https://prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazona ... 872234.pdf

Some NatSec excerpts -

We should abandon arms control treaties that benefit our adversaries without improving our national security. We must fund, develop, and
deploy a multi-layered missile defense system. We must modernize nuclear weapons and their delivery platforms, end the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction, and rebuild relationships with our allies, who understand that as long as the U.S. nuclear arsenal is their shield, they do not need to engage in nuclear proliferation..

U.S. Leadership in the Asian Pacific

We are a Pacific nation with economic, military, and cultural ties to all the countries of the oceanic rim and treaty alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand. With them, we look toward the establishment of human rights for the people of North Korea. We urge the government of China to recognize the inevitability of change in the Kim family’s slave state and, for everyone’s safety against nuclear disaster, to hasten positive change on the Korean peninsula. The United States will continue to demand the complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program with full accounting of its proliferation activities. We also pledge to counter any threats from the North Korean regime.
We salute the people of Taiwan, with whom we share the values of democracy, human rights, a free market economy, and the rule of law. Our rela- tions will continue to be based upon the provisions of the Taiwan Relations Act, and we affirm the Six Assurances given to Taiwan in 1982 by President Reagan. We oppose any unilateral steps by either side to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Straits on the principle that all issues regarding the island’s fu- ture must be resolved peacefully, through dialogue, and be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China were to violate those principles, the United States, in accord with the Taiwan Relations Act, will help Taiwan defend itself. We praise efforts by the new government in Taipei to continue constructive re- lations across the Taiwan Strait and call on China to reciprocate. As a loyal friend of America, Taiwan has merited our strong support, including free trade agreement status, the timely sale of defensive arms including technology to build diesel submarines, and full participation in the World Health Organiza- tion, International Civil Aviation Organization, and other multilateral institutions.

China’s behavior has negated the optimistic language of our last platform concerning our future relations with China. The liberalizing policies of recent decades have been abruptly reversed, dissent brutally crushed, religious persecution heightened, the internet crippled, a barbaric population control two-child policy of forced abortions and forced sterilizations continued, and the cult of Mao revived.

Critics of the regime have been kidnapped by its agents in foreign countries. To distract the populace from its increasing economic problems and, more importantly, to expand its military might, the government asserts a preposterous claim to the entire South China Sea and continues to dredge ports and create landing fields in contested waters where none have existed before, ever nearer to U.S. territories and our allies, while building a navy far out of proportion to defensive purposes. The complacency of the Obama regime has emboldened the Chinese government and military to issue threats of intimidation throughout the South China Sea, not to mention parading their new missile, “the Guam Killer,” down the main streets of Beijing, a direct shot at Guam as America’s first line of defense. Meanwhile, cultural genocide continues in Tibet and Xinjiang, the promised autonomy of Hong Kong is eroded, the currency is manipulated, our technology is stolen, and intellectual property and copyrights are mocked in an economy based on piracy. In business terms, this is not competition; it is a hostile takeover. For any American company to abet those offenses, especially governmental censorship and tracking of dissenters, is a disgrace.

The return to Maoism by China’s current rulers is not reason to disengage with the Chinese people or their institutions. We welcome students, tourists, and investors, who can see for themselves our vibrant American democracy and how real democracy works. We caution, however, against academic or cultural operations under the control of the Chinese government and call upon American colleges to dissociate themselves from this increasing threat to academic freedom and honest research.

Most of the nations of Southeast Asia have set aside crippling ideologies and sought material progress in free enterprise and democracy. We congratulate the people of Burma on their emergence from authoritarian rule and urge their respect for the rights of their country’s minority populations. Our improved relations with Vietnam — including arms sales — must advance efforts to obtain an accounting for, and repatriation of the remains of, Americans who gave their lives in the cause of Vietnamese freedom. We cannot overlook the continued repression of fundamental rights and religious freedom, as well as retribution against ethnic minorities and others who assisted U.S. forces during the conflict there.
India is our geopolitical ally and a strategic trading partner. The dynamism of its people and the endurance of their democratic institutions are earning their country a position of leadership not only in Asia but throughout the world. We encourage the Indian government to permit expanded foreign investment and trade, the key to rising living standards for those left out of their country’s energetic economy. For all of India’s religious communities, we urge protection against violence and discrimination. Republicans note with pride the contributions to our country that are made by our fellow citizens of Indian ancestry.
Conflicts in the Middle East have created special political and military challenges for the people of Pakistan. Our working relationship is a necessary, though sometimes difficult, benefit to both, and we look toward the strengthening of historic ties that have frayed under the weight of international conflict. This process cannot progress as long as any citizen of Pakistan can be punished for helping the War on Terror. Pakistanis, Afghans, and Americans have a common interest in ridding the region of the Taliban and securing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. That goal has been undermined by the current Administration’s feckless treatment of troop commitments and blatant disregard of advice from commanders on the ground, particularly with regard to Afghanistan. A Republican president will work with all regional leaders to restore mutual trust while insisting upon progress against corruption and the narcotic trade that fuels insurgency.

Renewing the European Alliance

With bipartisan support, President Truman forged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as an alliance of the western democracies. Its continued effectiveness is vital, especially in light of recent military challenges in Eastern Europe. With the American people spending on defense, per capita, four times the amount spent by Euro- peans, we demand, as we have in the past, that our fellow members of NATO fulfill their commitments and meet their need for greater investment in their armed forces.

Our historic ties to the peoples of Europe have been based on shared culture and values, com- mon interests and goals. Their endurance can- not be taken for granted, especially in light of the continent’s economic problems and demographic changes. We recognize with regret the increasing trend among many of our allies to move away from rights and liberties that Americans hold dear, espe- cially freedom of speech. It would be a tragic irony if the nations of Europe which withstood Soviet repression were to now impose a form of it upon themselves.

We honor our special relationship with the people of the United Kingdom and are grateful for their staunch support in the fight against terrorism. We respect their decision concerning their nation’s relationship to the European Union and pledge that, however much other international relationships may change, those who were first to our side in our hour of loss will always rank first in our policies and our esteem.

We thank the several nations of Europe that have contributed to a united effort in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Their support and sacrifice in the fight against Islamic terrorism will not be forgotten. We applaud the ongoing reconciliation in Northern Ireland and hope that its success might be replicated in Cyprus. We urge greater coordination in economic and security affairs between the United States and the republics of Eastern Europe. We urge that Poland be granted visa waiver status and we support placement of NATO troops in Poland.

For the people of Russia, we affirm our respect and our determination to maintain a friendship beyond the reach of those who wish to divide us. We have common imperatives: Ending terrorism, combating nuclear proliferation, promoting trade, and more. We also have a common problem: The continuing erosion of personal liberty and fundamental rights under the current officials in the Kremlin. Repressive at home and reckless abroad, their policies imperil the nations which regained their self-determination upon the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will meet the return of Russian belligerence with the same resolve that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposedby force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere, and will use all appropriate constitutional measures to bring to justice the practitioners of aggression and assassination.
We urge greater attention in U.S. diplomacy, trade, and strategic planning, to the nations of Eurasia, formerly parts of the Soviet Empire. Caught between their two authoritarian neighbors, their path toward democratic institutions has been uncertain. We urge our government and our allies to work toward the integration of the Central Asian republics into the global economy through foreign investment, which can bring with it market and political reforms and a firmer establishment of the rule of law. Those developments will not only improve the living conditions throughout that vast area but are likely to reduce the lure of the radical ideologies that already threaten the region.

On Iran

We consider the Administration’s deal with Iran, to lift international sanctions and make hundreds of billions of dollars available to the Mullahs, a personal agreement between the President and his negotiating partners and non-binding on the next president. Without a two-thirds endorsement by the Senate, it does not have treaty status. Because of it, the de- fiant and emboldened regime in Tehran continues to sponsor terrorism across the region, develop a nuclear weapon, test-fire ballistic missiles inscribed with “Death to Israel,” and abuse the basic human rights of its citizens. A Republican president will not be bound by it. We must retain all options in dealing with a situation that gravely threatens our security, our interests, and the survival of our friends.

On Assad

The dictator of Syria, Bashar Assad, has murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people and created millions of refugees, and an American president has been unable to rally the world against him. Understandably, our allies fear for their future in a region far more dangerous than it was eight years ago.
A Republican administration will restore our nation’s credibility. We must stand up for our friends, challenge our foes, and destroy ISIS. Hezbollah, controlling over 100,000 missiles in Lebanon, must be isolated and Lebanon’s independence restored.

We will support the transition to a post-Assad Syrian government that is representative of its people, protects the rights of all minorities and religions, respects the territorial integrity of its neighbors, and contributes to peace and stability in the region.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 09 Nov 2016 23:20

brar_w wrote: Describing himself as a budget hawk, Sessions said, “We are going to have to spend some more money.”

“In 2011, we did not have the Russian invasion of Crimea. We did not have the continued vicious, violent fight in Syria. We did not have the chaos that is happening in Libya. We did not have the threat to the Iraqi Government's existence, we thought it was on the right path. We did not have the problem in Yemen. So this is just a different world.”

He also argued for slowing down troop cuts, especially for the Regular Army. “Maybe we will have to go to 450,000, but right now we need to slow down that reduction based on the world situation,” he said.

huh...how does that square with the isolationists and the 'let them pay their share' arguments..

it is easy to be outside and piss at everything. trump is going to have lot of trouble managing expectations. look at how fast ombaba aged and he was a chilled out guy. good luck for trump.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 09 Nov 2016 23:20

Skanda wrote: This article is interesting because off-late if you turn on the TV commentary on Trump, all you heard was how racist, mysogynist, sexist Trump really is. The entire case against Trump was just that.

Except Islam the feminists lable every ideology, religion and culture as racist, mysogynist, sexist....

Only face with peacefuls the go in doggy posture and offer there mushy to be whipped... in complete surrender.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 23:23

huh...how does that square with the isolationists and the 'let them pay their share' arguments..

What isolationist argument? Did Obama end all wars as was his rhetoric pre 2008? The official GOP position would be close if not exactly the one described in their own platform created by all with input from the Trump team.

As I had said, the FP and NatSec positions would be closer to Tom Cotton or Marco Rubio with perhaps higher defense spending both of those could manage. Their campaign promised $50 Billion increase in annual defense spending in its campaign promise. That $50 billion wasn't random, it was actually a long wish of congressional republicans and the only thing holding this back was that Obama had to be negotiated with since the Dems had a social spending match requirement for any spending above the budget caps. If the republicans tried to ignore democratic demands to match defense increase with proportional increase in social spending, Obama would veto the NDAA.

This problem goes away now. The GOP can either keep the budget caps and just keep funding higher defense levels and getting it stamped by Trump or they could simply repeal the budget control act. It would depend on the position adopted by the fiscal hawks and the freedom caucus.

GOPPlatform wrote:
The U.S. defense budget has suffered a 25 percent cut in real dollars in the five years since sequestration. We support lifting the budget cap for defense and reject the efforts of Democrats to hold the military’s budget hostage for their domestic agenda. Congress and the Administration should work together to approve military spending at the level necessary to defend our country.

The Market agrees! Defense stocks up today -

Lockheed : +6.5%

Northrop : +5.9%

Raytheon : +7.8%

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 09 Nov 2016 23:28

I think it is time to abolish this electoral vote system nonsense, this should have been done right after the 2000 debacle. It is mockery of democratic process where the person getting the majority of the vote is not declared winner. I am not surprised if majority of the Americans are not pleased today and some are protesting.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 09 Nov 2016 23:34

electoral system ensures that the winning candidate has a broad based support from more states.

if it was only popular vote, then candidates would be polarized more in trying to extract all votes out of some states...and this would pit states against states..a civil war like situation.

trump won not only with 'red states'...he did flip some blue leaning states and that is credit to him and gives his presidency a legitimacy that he will not have if he squeezed some more votes out of deep south and got the popular vote method to presidency.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 23:36

Gus wrote:electoral system ensures that the winning candidate has a broad based support from more states.

if it was only popular vote, then candidates would be polarized more in trying to extract all votes out of some states...and this would pit states against states..a civil war like situation.

trump won not only with 'red states'...he did flip some blue leaning states and that is credit to him and gives his presidency a legitimacy that he will not have if he squeezed some more votes out of deep south and got the popular vote method to presidency.

Correct. The system works for the most part and would any day be better than a pure referendum.

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 09 Nov 2016 23:39

Atmavik wrote:
Skanda wrote:Feminists treat men badly. It’s bad for feminism.

This photo should be shared far and wide. Nexus of the Evils. Makes me puke. These two alone can destroy dharmic India. With proper Puja that was done in Bombay the Witch has lost the election

and Shemale Burkha has lost the erection.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 09 Nov 2016 23:43

I would tend to think that broadest support is enjoyed by highest vote getter as the counted votes are from all the states.

On the contrary the electoral system disenfranchises those states who end up on the voting for the losing candidate. All votes are not treated equally, some become more equal than the others violating the basic principle of democracy.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 09 Nov 2016 23:49

you are not thinking through.

'disenfranchisement' would still happen to the loser of any system that does not have proportional representation.

yes, all votes are not equal. That is the design to make sure the winning candidate has more broad based support from more states.

like i said, trump or clinton could not win without winning states from other side. This they can only do by appealing to voters in states leaning other side.

a popular vote system can lead to candidates abandoning that and focusing only in turnouts in their base states. that would be a worse situation than the 'disenfranchisement of states' in electoral college system.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Nov 2016 23:49

Meet Trump's Cabinet-in-waiting

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 10 Nov 2016 00:15

When all votes are counted equally, victory comes from contribution from all states, I see this broadest possible support. Counting votes from all states also makes all states battleground states not just those which are more or less evenly polarised. Having 50 battleground state is better than just having a dozen or so. I don't see merit is these dozen odd states deciding the fate of the entire nation. Electoral system also leads to indirect vote suppression. A red voter living in a blue state may not be too excited about voting as he/she knows his/her vote is not going to count for much and vice versa. In a truly nationwide election people are going to be keen about voting irrespective of the color of the state they live in. Let the voters of all 50 states decide not just a handful. That is my opinion, feel free to agree/disagree.

GShankar · Post by **GShankar** » 10 Nov 2016 00:36

Talking about secret Trump supporters, I had a doctor's appointment. Asked the doc if everyone showed up for work Today? He was puzzled and I clarified with another question - Did anyone in his staff / colleagues moved to Canada in a jiffy.

He laughed and said he just goes by the playbook and leaves out other chatter. Also volunteered that him and his wife voted for Trump. He already knows I am on a visa here.

He is also Jewish and his wife is from England and got naturalized last year.

Very interesting

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 10 Nov 2016 00:41

Must Watch

Sicanta · Post by **Sicanta** » 10 Nov 2016 00:42

Hollywood and other celebrities seem to be in shock, while calling for holding the line against the coming 'storm'. Why is it that them and their ilk in other countries always find it fashionable to furnish their liberal credentials and drum up hysteria at every point of time?

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 10 Nov 2016 00:54

Several Indian Americans won their races. Lets celebrate them as well.

1. Kamala Harris
2. Ro Khanna

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 10 Nov 2016 01:06

on an interesting side note, paul ryan speaker of the house did not actively support the donald in the election,

this will be interesting to see if speaker ryan (eddie munster) starts groveling............

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Nov 2016 01:33

I am going to unban Hkumar.
Lets start the reconciliation here.

TSJ, I understand your pain. many of my colleagues have gone through that fire and are very much charred.

Good luck and may the force be with you.

Keep the faith in the system.
And change it when it needs to be changed.

LokeshC · Post by **LokeshC** » 10 Nov 2016 01:43

I guess I learnt one thing from all recent elections:

"Liberals" lose their liberal qualities when faced with a legitimate outcome of a game which is not in agreement with what they want. They will be completely OK with the rules of the game before they play the game, but if they lose they will claim that the game is rigged (re: electoral college)

Trump did the opposite. He complained of rigging BEFORE he played the game. We on BRF complained of EVM rigging before NaMo was elected.

LokeshC · Post by **LokeshC** » 10 Nov 2016 01:54

I think I have also come to believe that there is indeed a "deep state", not such a tin-foil thing anymore.

I think the true wild-card in this election was Bernie, he was a deep-state outsider and the deep-state could not game him properly and had to get him eliminated from the race. If the deep-state was not ok with Trump, they would have figured out a way to take care of him as well.

Now for the tin-foil hat (CT):
HRC was the real winner deep state wanted, they roped in DT to eliminate the Republican wild-cards and misfortunately the whole thing backfired. But they must have a plan B for the case where DT becomes brezident.

The only issue with that CT is this:
DTs policies (as someone noted above) are very similar to those of Bernie and that would only serve to divide away HRC votes. Someone did miscalculate somewhere, that person maybe getting his or her 72/retirement package now.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Nov 2016 02:05

Meanwhile some flabbergasted folks are calling for California to exit the US.

Californians are calling for a 'Calexit'

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Nov 2016 02:07

nachiket wrote:Meanwhile some flabbergasted folks are calling for California to exit the US.

Californians are calling for a 'Calexit'

That's like texas every friday night

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 10 Nov 2016 02:08

LokeshC wrote: Trump did the opposite. He complained of rigging BEFORE he played the game. We on BRF complained of EVM rigging before NaMo was elected.

That reminds me, the folks who told me EVM rigging was a fact and 'deep-state' or whoever would undoubtedly do it to stop Trump, what happened? Are you willing to accept that the EVM rigging stuff is nothing more than a CT? Or did Trump/Putin rig more machines than Hillary/deep-state?