SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
And the winner of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, as reported by the major mainstream media outlets is Donald Trump. It has also been reported that Hillary Clinton called President-elect Donald Trump to concede.
Electoral vote count (so far): 279 for Donald Trump, 218 for Hillary Clinton. 270 electoral votes are needed to win.
Popular vote: 57,227,164 votes (48.0%) for Donald Trump, 56,279,305 votes (47.2%) for Hillary Clinton. Update: Now it is closer to 59,085,795 votes (47.5%) for Donald Trump and 59,236,903 votes (47.6%) for Hillary Clinton.
Yell, scream, gnash teeth... but please keep it civil.
Results at CNN, NYT, FiveThirtyEight, Wikipedia.
takyon: Republicans have retained control of the House and Senate.
Here's some market news:
Dow futures plunge nearly 750 points as investors warily eye electoral map
Asian markets plummet on likelihood of Trump victory
Bitcoin price soars as Trump pulls ahead
Opinion: How to profit from a Donald Trump victory
Ballot measure results will be covered in an upcoming story. Some initial results can be found at Ballotpedia and CNN.
[TMB Note: Stop breaking stuff, cmn32480]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @09:04AM
There's an important point to consider here: those people in the Republican majority in government are Establishment picks. They hate Trump as much as Hillary did. They said as much, and many of them publicly said they'd refuse to vote for him. That means that they'll fight Trump as hard as they fought Obama. The only way anything changes on a policy level will be if Trump runs a slate of candidates in the mid-terms that win.
He would need to do a lot of things in the meantime to make that happen, such as cleaning house at the RNC to make sure they're backing Trump-friendly candidates in the mid-term primaries. He would need to craft a ready-made, turnkey "Contract with America" that people could sign onto and that voters would understand. All those things would be second nature for a politician leading an ideology-driven movement. Trump is not that.
Trump does not have a grand plan. He's channeling his own ego and a deep well of anger in America at the elites. He might have skill in the tactical, but he's not strategic. He will be played by deeper strategic thinkers like Putin. But he does have virtues, which carried him: he cares about America, not a trans-national elite. He struck a blow against the economic elites who have been rigging both parties and every avenue of society against America's people for 40 years. Those people can now be afraid, and that makes my heart glad.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @09:18AM
Nah, what you are likely to see is a streamlining of the few things Trump and the GOP can agree on (like repealing the ACA, perhaps replaced with something worse, but time will tell), and with any luck a bit of soul-searching from the GOP about how they got here.
In many respects, this is just like the ghost of the Tea Party lingering in halls. The GOP survived that, and they will most likely survive this too, albeit with some changes.
Trump is little more than a figurehead for the dissatisfaction with the GOP and limousine liberals alike.
(Score: 2) by BK on Wednesday November 09 2016, @06:09PM
Doubtful. Dems in the Senate can block whatever and Rep senators won't want to change the rules because they know they'll need 'em some day.
Dem senators will insist on a replacement before any repeal. Rep congress will never agree on a replacement that will appease Dems ( to avoid a filibuster ) AND be able to pass with just Rep votes... so ACA is here to stay.
What is likely is that when this happens, Trump will issue an exemption for 'everyone' and order the IRS to not keep track... and there is precedent for this. Obama was handing out exemptions like candy for a while...
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @10:46AM
> he cares about America
You've got to be joking. Trump cares about Trump. He doesn't give a damn about the country beyond what it can do for him. Sure he says things about loving america. But how many times does the man have to tell bald-faced lies before you stop taking his words at face value?
> He struck a blow against the economic elites who have been rigging both parties and every avenue of society against America's people for 40 years.
Have you read anything about his tax plan? [vox.com] Its the biggest dick-suck of economic elites in recent memory. He's revised it 3 times now, and each time it ends up even more favorable to the rich.
The man is literally a trans-national elite, with properties in foreign countries (remember that golf resort in Scottland that he traveled to in the middle of campaigning?) and over-seas manufacturing of his schwag (not to mention Ivanka's stuff is nearly all off-shored).
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @11:05AM
OK, you win, AC. Everybody else is wrong. You're the genius. That's why Hillary won the election. Oh, wait, she didn't.
I hate to play that card, but it's also true. Hillary intended to perpetuate the economic warfare the elites have been waging on the American public for 40 years, and everyone knew it. Trump has stated he will do different. Trump promised a different policy tack. He may, or may not, follow through on that. Hillary, though, had already proven that she was blowing smoke up everyone's ass.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @11:25AM
I'm not disputing he said those things and that people who wanted to believe it did so - that's how con men work.
I'm disputing your analysis that he meant those things.
Clinton didn't lose because she's proven anything. Name one concrete way in which she "blew smoke up everyone's ass."
She lost because hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent over the last couple of decades blowing smoke up the public's ass to convince them there must actually be a forest fire.
Benghazi -- bullshit
Hates coal miners -- bullshit [politifact.com]
email server -- bullshit (as Comey has now said, twice)
etc
Also, she's a woman and we have no cultural touchstone for imperfect women in charge, so lacking a box to fit her into, she made people uncomfortable.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @12:35PM
"people who wanted to believe it did so - that's how con men work."
You understand that, but you still back Clinto? Jesus H. Christ, you've been conned.
The Clintons have been con artists since they sat is a shack in Mena Arkansas, divvying up money from the sale of marijuana flown in from Mexico. And - you have FAITH in them?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:21PM
Where did the AC stated they supported Clinton? Being anti-Trump does not make one pro-Clinton you fucking moron. Stop seeing the world in black and white tribalism. There is no "For us or against us", there's a billion different shades of gray in between. Benghazi was bullshit (the Sec of State can't deploy troops!), and the email thing was total bullshit too. Defense of these facts does not make one pro-Clinton, it makes one pro-fucking-reality and not fucking delusional or so far fucking gone into tribalism that they're denying reality itself.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:47PM
Sigh. It's a curious fate, to agree with Runaway so many times in a day. The Clintons are grifters. It is who they are. It is in their nature. I ran digital for Bill Clinton's Foundation for 2.5 years. I sat in the meetings where they worked those deals out. I've seen it happen. All the "we want to help the people" stuff is a smokescreen. It is their con.
They haven't been convicted for doing that because they pass their corruption through at least one point of indirection. Our anti-corruption laws were designed for 2-party, direct quid-pro-quo, and as such cannot address the 3rd party corruption the Clintons practice. But what they do is thoroughly corrupt.
Most Americans, in their hearts, know that's true. I know it's true because I had access to the hard data of who supports the Clintons. Their contributors stem mainly from the Upper West Side of Manhattan, with another cluster in Hollywood and Silicon Valley, and a smattering elsewhere besides. No regular people give them money. It is because they sense on a visceral level that the Clintons are on the take, and they themselves don't want to be played for patsies. And why? They know that the Clintons don't give a crap about them and would never countenance a quid-pro-quo for them.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday November 09 2016, @07:27PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @11:25AM
After DECADES of telling rural folk that they were too stupid to vote in their own self interests, they were all racist (especially in the South where they don't have gated communities to isolate them from racial tensions), and after watching their communities fall apart and troves of assistance being planted in the inner cities...
It may be that Republicans aren't much help, but at least they aren't openly hostile.
Less than Trump, this was open notice for the GOP to get their shit together.
Because it's not like the liberals are gonna help.
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Wednesday November 09 2016, @01:38PM
Maybe there is already such a "Contract with America" written -- just not by Trump.
I remember about 9/11 that there was this big P.A.T.R.I.O.T. law already written, just to be shoe-ed into legislation at the right time.
It would be interesting if the Project For a New American Century has already written an A.P.P.L.E.P.I.E. law, 400 pages, which Trump will sign as first act as president, to cement the powers behind the throne. The Republicans won all three, presidency, senate and house of representatives, so anything goes. Only Commies don't appreciate applepie!
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 09 2016, @01:48PM
Love him or hate him, Trump just got elected, and he did so owing virtually no one in the establishment and with a massive "mandate" from those who voted for him. The DNC and RNC, along with the media, got told to fuck off last night and it's going to take them both some time to figure out just how in the hell the world works now. I know I'm certainly trying to figure it out this morning.
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:04PM
(Score: 3, Touché) by tangomargarine on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:52PM
Yeah, fuck those people trying to make the world a better place.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 09 2016, @05:02PM
They are living in a bubble and that bubble got burst for a lot of them last night. These kids have been sheltered from the real world for too long. A loss like this is inescapable, there is no trophy for participation, no safe place to run and hide. This is their new reality and they can deal with it or go bury their heads in the sands and repeat it in 4 years. These kids need to learn how to lose so they can learn how to win.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday November 09 2016, @05:15PM
Many of these millennials seem to think that bullying and throwing the adult equivalent of a temper tantrum is the way to get what you want.
Well, the young'uns are hardly the only ones who seem to think that. You remember the government shutdown? :P
Whose side are you saying the millennials were on? Clinton's? Bernie's? You talk about "bullying and degrading" but there was a fair amount of that on both sides. I'm not sure how to interpret your comment.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @08:34PM
Also, one might think that Trump's political campaign was one year-and-a-half-long temper tantrum by the biggest bully in the country. Unfortunately, the biggest takeaway appears to be that shameless, bullying, temper tantrums sometimes win. :-(
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday November 10 2016, @04:23AM
No no fuck those people who are trying to make the world a better place.
Or did you mean that millennial ideologues are better in caring about the world than others? Because I think we, on the other side, just know better.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday November 10 2016, @02:51PM
I can care harder than you! ;)
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday November 10 2016, @07:55PM
I care softly :D
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:05PM
FWIW, I wrote "Establishment picks." Your formulation doesn't not work, though.
It's not just the RNC and DNC and media who lost last night, but every other Establishment constituent. Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Wall Street, and all the rest who made common cause with Hillary just had their legs cut out from under them. That's epic.
Now, most rational actors among those would look at those results and think, "gee, we ought to change our ways and get right with the world." But all of us plebes know they won't. We all know they'll double-down and try to co-opt Trump the way they do everyone and everything else. It's in their nature.
Trump may or may not hold true to the people who put him in office. He is a businessman, and will likely do what businessmen do and cut deals for preferential treatment.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 09 2016, @05:06PM
FWIW, I wrote "Establishment picks."
So you did. It was a long night, just woke up when I wrote that post. People keep saying election day should be a federal holiday. I think the day after should be one. Election hangover day.
Still, I kind of like my misinterpretation better :)
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @05:32PM
Me, too.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RamiK on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:16PM
How do you know Trump doesn't have an ideology or a strategy? The only thing we know about Trump is that he has almost no political debts keeping him from doing whatever he wants to win the next elections.
whose to say Trump isn't a closet national socialist? A Sanders in hiding?
Sure he'll take down Obama-care... Only to replace it with a real health-care system.
Yeah he'll build a wall... Right before nationalizing everyone left over at the US's side of the wall.
True he'll clean DC from corruption... By breaking apart 3 letter agencies and moving funds and personal to border control as he legalizes Marijuana.
That's the thing: Trump kept all his cards to himself. We can look at what he said and twist it any way we'd like. He too, can align with short-term or long-term party interests the way he sees fit since everything he promised can be turned around as either. He's not indebted to one corporation or the next so so long as he ends up with enough big projects for contractors, the party will get their funds from somewhere.
Really, anything can happen now.
compiling...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @02:52PM
You know what? I can't argue with you. You could be entirely correct. All I have to go on is what the guy has said and done. He is a wild card. He could do anything. What he does could wind up being something truly awful. For the moment, though, can we enjoy the chance of possibility in the uncertainty? Hillary was warmed-over dogshit and we all knew it.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @08:27PM
I've read a number of your posts. Agreed for the msot part, but just had to comment on this one and say...I like you. Clear, concise, to the point. Can I nitpick?
Warmed over? He shit smells to the point of being a fresh drop on a Texas Highway in the middle of summer...in a drought.
Thank you for the smile.
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday November 09 2016, @09:27PM
I already reached the conclusion it's better to have a random candidate over a corrupt one when Obama compromised over a proper health care bill instead of quitting the office to force new elections.
So in this run, when the gory details regarding Hillary's campaign against Sanders leaked, I concluded it's better to dice roll with Trump then take another run with the same kind of politics.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 10 2016, @12:43AM
I already reached the conclusion it's better to have a random candidate over a corrupt one when Obama compromised over a proper health care bill instead of quitting the office to force new elections.
Not sure where you got that idea about how things work. If the President quits, the Vice President becomes President, and serves until the end of the original President's term. There are no "new elections" involved.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have done something different (IMO, the ACA is an abomination where everybody loses except possibly the insurance companies), but resigning from office would definitely not have helped.
(If we're looking for things he could have done instead: one lever the President has, but never seems to use, is to simply veto everything until such time as Congress passes his agenda. I'm not saying the solution to our problems is even more obstructionism, but it is a powerful threat that could probably be deployed to good effect once every decade or two.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 10 2016, @09:07AM
Nah a president can force snap elections in the US through a presidential order to disband & quit the office\government. This returns the ball to the house and sente who have to decide on a date for new elections since they can't appoint officials.
It's been considered in the past as well as done in other presidential systems.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday November 09 2016, @04:27PM
Sure, he's gonna burn shit down. But when the smoke clears, we all know who will have maneuvered their way back on top. You said yourself that "[h]e will be played by deeper strategic thinkers". Putin is his own thing; what about Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and their ilk? The Democratic elite is about as down-and-out as the Republican elite was in 2008 or 2012; there will be blowback from that corner. And that still ignores the massive array of power players outside of the political spotlight: CEOs, hedge fund managers, real estate developers, weapons dealers, drug traffickers...the list of powerful people goes on, and none of them stand to lose from a Trump presidency.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @04:39PM
You're right. But could you maybe give us a 48 hour grace period to imagine something else might happen before you say this? Thanks be a pal bye.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 09 2016, @07:57PM
This is the perfect example of a False Dichotomy.
Trump or Clinton we get basically the same shit. Trump being a con man can't be trusted, and his viewpoints shifted based on who he was talking to and what they wanted to hear. The only "establishment" that got pissed off are basically the political parties. The GOP got infiltrated by an ex-democrat who has made them look really bad, and the DNC lost to a buffoon and had their dirty secrets aired to the world.
The elites? They don't give a shit, Trump is one of them and will hand them everything they ever wanted because *hint* that is what HE has always wanted. And he will get extremely nice kickbacks for it.
FALSE DICHOTOMY, make the people think they're doing something that matters. What blows my mind is that people think there is much of a difference between HRC and DT, I guess time will tell if I am mistaken.