ScottN wrote: 
Are you trying to snark at Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama with that comment? It may not really matter because either in terms of past events or future possibilities, your statement doesn't apply to reality. 

The Soviet Union is not reconstituted nor will it likely ever be even partially. Russia revived in the aughts mostly due to the rising price of oil and its hydrocarbon reserves. Outside of the petrochemical sector it does not have a robust economy, hence its struggles with falling oil and gas prices.  

Russia has defended its traditional territorial interests with interventions in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria (a longtime client state and home to a strategic Russian naval base in Tartus), but it has nowhere near the military might of the former USSR. The People's Republic of China is a far, far greater economic and military power.  

And if you blame the US for the decline of NATO, you'd be better off looking at the lack of contribution and cooperation from its European member states. As for the "renewed arms race" bit...what are you basing that on?

But here: let's turn the tables on you, Scott. Do you seriously think Trump has the background knowledge, advisors or detailed policy to counter any increase in Russia's influence over Europe? Beyond making noises about forcing European partners to contribute to NATO, what are Trump's plans for the organization? Is Trump seriously going to hang Estonia out to dry as he suggested in his campaign comments?

Hope you don't mind waiting for answers to those questions from the incoming administration because right now Trump has no f#$^ing clue. This emperor doesn't even have a loincloth when it comes to foreign policy. 


 

 kcar wrote: 
Howzabout the reconstitution of the Soviet Union in light of a weakened NATO, followed by a renewed arms race?  Would that qualify?

 islander wrote: 
Trump talked a lot of smack about building a Wall and bringing jobs back, but I think some of the more outlandish promises were so much hot air. Trump figured out that he could say crazy, reckless things and not lose supporters. Kurtster also has a point: Trump hasn't been sworn in yet. He's already waffling on issues like adherence to environmental agreements. He may not be as disastrous as his campaign rhetoric indicated simply because he'll walk towards more moderate positions. 

But I agree with you, islander. Trump's promises to areas hit by declines in the manufacturing and coal industries are not going to be kept. Presidents have a tough time protecting industries since governmental actions like tariffs don't work long-term and generally don't save that many jobs. Manufacturing and coal production have become much less labor-intensive due to market forces, not government regulations. 

It also appears that Trump isn't interested in guarding against the influence of lobbyists and the prevalence of cronyism. The rich are definitely going to get richer. I'm sure we'll see a lot of flag-waving and fear-mongering to keep populist anger at bay.

I see the biggest risks from Trump flowing from his lack of preparedness and attention to detail. WaPo is reporting that he's already blown off many daily intelligence briefings. Dubya and his advisers refused to believe that Al Qaeda was a serious threat and allowed Islamic terrorists to kill Americans on US soil. Rather than secure Afghanistan, they invaded Iraq—a family-run dictatorship with no real attachment to Islamic fundamentalism or terrorism. We are still paying the price for their mistakes. Trump is so ignorant of international affairs and so lazy that we're bound to see another foreign policy disaster.  

 aflanigan wrote: 
Perfect.
Ayup, as dragon might say.

 kurtster wrote: 
Well, he has done some things. He is rewarding people who have been his yes men and early supporters (so much for "won't owe anything to anyone"). He has hired lobbyist and insiders (so much for "drain the swamp"). He is discussing Petraeus for Sec. State (the horrors of being careless with classified information). He is already using his position to lobby foreign governments on behalf of his business interests (get rid of corruption...).

I'm still waiting to see what he actually does with policy stuff, but so far just based on his appointments he's pretty much doing what I expected based on his previous behaviors. I really don't think he has the ability to "ruin the country", but I do expect we'll have to do a little reputation repair. And I really expect the poor and working classes to really take the big hits when he gets around to policy.  I'm planning on moving some investments around and reducing a lot of my liabilities, but I'm going to wait until Jan. 1 when I'll get a nice tax break from him.  Hopefully we'll still be in the stock market honeymoon at that point, but I expect the tax benefits to be the real winner for me there - I'll probably be ahead at least the 3.8 % I paid extra last year for Obamacare. 

 kurtster wrote: 
In betting, smart punters don't bet their money in ignorance and then "wait and see". They size up the horse, seek information on how the horse has done in training, and basically find whatever clues they can to give an indication of how the horse will actually run once the gate opens and the bell rings.

You're touting a horse that has looked very bad in training and is foamed and sweating in the paddock.. 

 Skydog wrote: 
Yes, it has.  No denying that.

 islander wrote: 
Nothing I've wanted has changed.  What has Trump done so far to dissuade me ?  Nothing yet.  He's putting his team together.  Got to wait and see what he does before I can judge.  

Everyone else is judging before he has actually done anything.  He's already ruined this country just by being elected is what I'm seeing.  Funny how everyone has been wrong so far.

No buyers remorse yet.  I'll wait and see.

 Skydog wrote: 




True to the dat.

 kurtster wrote: 
actually 16 years, the last 16 years have been rough

 kurtster wrote: 
What happened to "drain the swamp", and "change washington" and "he may not be the best, but I'm ready to blow things up" (that last one is a paraphrase of stuff you put out over the last year)?  Do you not care now that "your guy" has won?  

I can't wait to see what comes about this time next year or 2019, when you are realizing that you got played. You'll have more of the same - people in power enriching themselves while the little guy continues to get screwed. I'm sure you'll find a way to say you are better off, but in your heart you'll know that nothing really changed. 

There are those of us who had to suffer through 8 years of Obama.

Turnabout is fair play.  As Obama famously said, elections have consequences.

If y'all don't like him now before he even gets started, I can't wait to see what comes once we get to January 20th.

 

 Coaxial wrote: 
pretty much

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
Saw something recently that said this more or less: "We should be more concerned with respecting humanity, than respecting a flag."

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
he's on a path to impeachment,....the down side is Rev. Pence will replace him

 Kaw wrote: 
I couldn't agree more.

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
Saudi Arabia (the people behind 9/11 and worse 'democracy' than Russia) funded Clinton. No one is complaining there either.
The USA should have a system like our country: A fixed amount of money (that's the same for everybody) from the government to do your campaign and that's it.