5 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

We have objective metrics to determine the health of an economy. But we found out that understanding those metrics is too high a bar for a majority of Americans. 

There are objective measures like low unemployment and decrease in inflation. Those metrics may be a high bar for some but people only know what they feel and see on a daily basis. 

For some average every day people groceries are still high for, rent is continuing to increase, and their income isn’t keeping. So seeing unemployment low and the stock market doesn’t do anything to quell stressors in their daily life. 

1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

Biggest questions going forward, in my mind

1. Who is going to serve in this cabinet? Trump basically chased away experienced, temperate and qualified Republicans from his administration last time; by the end, it was made up primarily of Trump loyalists. Putting aside the insane ideas like RFK Jr. as head of he FDA, who steps into these roles? I'm guessing Vance will be heavily involved in the transition (likely runs it), so I'd expect a lot of his people in cabinet positions. The most intriguing question to me is... 

2. Does Lina Khan survive as head of the FTC? Under a traditional GOP administration, she'd be the first one fired. But Vance seems to be a fan of hers (https://nypost.com/2024/10/15/us-news/j-d-vance-hints-elon-musk-and-lina-khan-could-be-in-trump-admin-i-agree-with-them-both-on-some-issues/), and her focus on breaking up big tech will be appealing to Trump. Dumping her is what Wall Street wants, but guys like Thiel want her attacking big tech. This one will be fascinating.

3. Does he really do the tariffs? I think he clearly wants to, and the question will be can responsible adults stop him? If he does enact the tariffs, the resulting inflation and economic slowdown will be painful. Just have to hope those around him keep this to bluster only.

4. How screwed is Ukraine? Trump will likely try and force Zelensky to give up material territorial concessions by threatening to cut aid. It's simply a question of how much territory Russia gains. I'd expect this to happen fast.

5. Does Israel get more of a green light with Iran? I'd expect Trump to back Bibi in getting more aggressive with Iran, including targeting nuclear facilities.

6. NATO? Who the eff knows.

1) it’s going to be a combo of Heritage, Vance and Peter Theil being the puppet master (you probably know the guy, put in a good word so I can make Mike do hard labor)

2) I think she stays. The banks went hard for Dems recently. Trump will want payback.

3) Yes, but not on the scale and scope he talks about. They’ll target specific industries and countries like China. Probably get some concessions late in his term so China can get their hands on more dollars and Trump claims victory.

4) Agreed. I’d expect this to happen relatively quickly… 6 to 12 months, 18 tops. Though I also think he’ll go stick and carrot with Putin and threaten to open up the arsenal to Ukraine if Putin isn’t reasonable.

5) Talked to some friends in DC about this who have some insight. The running theory is Trump gives Israel the biggest green light they could possibly want, but it comes with a timer. Basically they’ll have a set amount of time to go medieval but he’ll want peace made eventually so he can take credit. 

6) Pacific pivot but we aren’t leaving NATO. It’s what the pentagon wants anyway. Germany and France re-arm. The US takes a smaller (but still leading) role and forces Europe into some self dependency.

2 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Trump winning the popular probably means the GOP was doing the cheating

Have you ever seen someone so broken by a single man? It's Fing hilarious.  

3 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

Hey don’t get it twisted. Murr is an Eagles fan!

A Giants fan wearing Eagles gear?

 

Always the cross dresser....

2 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

* The amount of nonsense created by his haters led to a kid taking a shot at him and missing his brain by millimeters 

 

- People might be forgetting one of the biggest eye openers for some 

There is no brain in that head

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

Have you ever seen someone so broken by a single man? It's Fing hilarious.  

Yup. You since biden won

Walz was a ridiculously bad choice, and had she selected Shapiro or Cooper, they probably would have helped, but I'm not sure it would have been enough. Once Michelle 0bama refused to run the Democrats were practically guaranteed to lose. They had no choice but to run Kommie and she was never popular, was never even liked, and no amount of gaslighting was ever going to change that.

 

 

2 minutes ago, pisceschica said:

There are objective measures like low unemployment and decrease in inflation. Those metrics may be a high bar for some but people only know what they feel and see on a daily basis. 

For some average every day people groceries are still high for, rent is continuing to increase, and their income isn’t keeping. So seeing unemployment low and the stock market doesn’t do anything to quell stressors in their daily life. 

Problem being the readouts/metrics are consistently manipulated. Its politics more than economics, because that what morons eat up eagerly

51 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

You joke until you're forced to do some hard labor

You seem to really be having a hard time today.  I'll toss some extra beef jerky in your care package when I send it.  

   

20 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

it really is. most people don't pay attn to the crap we post on here every day. they go by grocery prices & gas prices....that's it. 

Those idiotic regular people, going off of how expensive it is to feed their kids and drive back and forth to work every day!  

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

There is no brain in that head

Yeah some of you wish that was the case but unfortunately for you "that no brain” whooped you and your candidate’s arse.  
 

Toodles. 

so, are the libs coping?

Good strat for the dems going forward.

And if that doesn't work maybe they can call the blacks and hispanics notzees?

I thought I remember trump imposing tarriffs on certain foreign goods last time he was a president. Like electronics. I never remember paying attention to things like Samsung appliances and never seeing the price shoot up like I expected it to. 

There were certain cell phone brands like Xiaomi and OnePlus that supposedly were making great products rivaling Samsung's flagships, and bettering Apple products that never came to the US, or have failed to establish a strong foothold. I know one person who had a Huawei laptop. Supposed to be a great brand. You dont really see them in the US.

Nothing got more expensive.  Options were maybe kept more limited to the usual brands we have seen here for years. 

As with most things, this is likely much adieu over nothing from this fear mongering Harris campaign. 

7 minutes ago, TEW said:

1) it’s going to be a combo of Heritage, Vance and Peter Theil being the puppet master (you probably know the guy, put in a good word so I can make Mike do hard labor)

2) I think she stays. The banks went hard for Dems recently. Trump will want payback.

3) Yes, but not on the scale and scope he talks about. They’ll target specific industries and countries like China. Probably get some concessions late in his term so China can get their hands on more dollars and Trump claims victory.

4) Agreed. I’d expect this to happen relatively quickly… 6 to 12 months, 18 tops. Though I also think he’ll go stick and carrot with Putin and threaten to open up the arsenal to Ukraine if Putin isn’t reasonable.

5) Talked to some friends in DC about this who have some insight. The running theory is Trump gives Israel the biggest green light they could possibly want, but it comes with a timer. Basically they’ll have a set amount of time to go medieval but he’ll want peace made eventually so he can take credit. 

6) Pacific pivot but we aren’t leaving NATO. It’s what the pentagon wants anyway. Germany and France re-arm. The US takes a smaller (but still leading) role and forces Europe into some self dependency.

I hope you're wrong on Khan. She's just awful.

1 minute ago, mikemack8 said:

Those idiotic regular people, going off of how expensive it is to feed their kids and drive back and forth to work every day!  

It makes me wonder if they even got the government chart that said the economy has never been stronger. 

 

so no riot?   

1 minute ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

so, are the libs coping?

Bro is going to pretend he wasn't full in the bag for dems for the last 8 years now lmfao

2 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Those idiotic regular people, going off of how expensive it is to feed their kids and drive back and forth to work every day!  

i didn't call them idiotic. we're the idiots for posting about politics all day every day in here. 

7 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I definitely didn't have Mike90210 being the one having the biggest meltdown in here today  Then again, Van and Toast and some of the others just aren't here.  Maybe someone should check on them. 

5 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I thought I remember trump imposing tarriffs on certain foreign goods last time he was a president. Like electronics. I never remember paying attention to things like Samsung appliances and never seeing the price shoot up like I expected it to. 

There were certain cell phone brands like Xiaomi and OnePlus that supposedly were making great products rivaling Samsung's flagships, and bettering Apple products that never came to the US, or have failed to establish a strong foothold. I know one person who had a Huawei laptop. Supposed to be a great brand. You dont really see them in the US.

Nothing got more expensive.  Options were maybe kept more limited to the usual brands we have seen here for years. 

As with most things, this is likely much adieu over nothing from this fear mongering Harris campaign. 

Exactly.  What naysayers do not understand about tariffs is that they are never a "direct tax”.  For example, a 25% tariff on certain goods (against a specific trading partner)  WILL NEVER equal certain goods costing 25% more.

 

They are as clueless about capitalism as their ignorance shows them to be.

 

 

9 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

This wasn't really about anything Trump did, as he has no actual solutions to the problems people say they care about (inflation, illegal immigration). This was a rejection of the Biden administration. When 2/3rds of the country thinks you're on the wrong track, it should be impossible for the incumbent party to win. That's Jimmy Carter territory. The only reason it was competitive was because of Trump's...baggage. Any sane Republican wins bigger.

Agreed mostly.

But I think you give the public too much credit. Policy? Come on dude…  

Americans had Trump/Biden back to back. What they know is things were good under Trump and bad under Biden. It’s that simple. Policy, circumstance, let alone nuance, doesn’t enter the equation. One good, one bad. Throw in that Harris was already one of the least popular candidates before she was VP and here we are.

Not sure another Republican wins bigger. Not that they shouldn’t, just that they wouldn’t. Name recognition matters, celebrity status matters. It shouldn’t but it does. I don’t see Romney or McCain or Jeb or whoever else in recent memory winning bigger at all. They’d be lumped into the same "status quo” class, unlike Trump, and without Trump’s name brand. The turnout wouldn’t be there.

Or maybe I just have a lower opinion of the public than you.