Lawlight said: Ka-pi96 said: umm... was Trump not a bully and a bigot? Yet people voted for him didn`t they? I don't think Trump bullied anyone into voting for him. Clinton did though. She's a bully and a bigot. Trying to shame people into voting for her.

Like these supporters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpECPCb3480

Feel the Bern....

As a Canadian who grew up on a mid sized family farming operation, it doesn't surprise me one bit that Trump won. Just look at the electoral map and the overwhelming rural vote speaks volumes.
Not just agriculture, but most sectors in North America, where people work physically hard and long hours, have been getting absolutely nowhere for a long time now. Instead of just staying optimistic and going with the flow, these people have finally said enough is enough.
If a vote for Trump is a vote for true change, fantastic. If he cripples the system, not as great, but at least it can be rebuilt from "scratch" and get it right going forward.

For anyone who's only ever lived in the city, or only ever worked in an office, etc, get in your car and go for a drive out to the country and have a GOOD look at a bunch of the farms, and you'll see why they all voted for Trump. The houses, the barns, the tractors, the pick up trucks. What you will find is the majority is all WAY outdated and in poor condition. This isn't because those people are stupid or lazy, its because the rules now, made by people in the city, demand the highest quality food, for an unreasonably low price. Since most farmers have to deal with an open market, they can't just "charge" more for their food. Which truthfully leads to farmers making pennies extra every year, which slowly leads to less farmers, less food, and a growing monopoly of corporations who buy the land and control the food supply.
When I talk to people from the city, they either don't get it, or do get it, and just don't want to hear about it. One time I mentioned the new iphone and the person went nuts about how great it was going to be and how they would buy it no matter what the cost. That same person complained to me about how the food wasn't very high quality in the store and how expensive it was. Makes me sick to think that people are that lost in terms of their priorities and can't see and understand what's really going on. Then again, these are the same people who seem to believe everything the media says, and even the media can't figure out how Trump won.

I wish America the best, and I don't think Trump will really be as bad as some think, but I do see him re building infrastructure like he says he will, creating more debt initially. As long as he can create plenty of new jobs in America, and keep the money within the Country, and potentially bring money back in, he should be able to at least offset the initial debt.

What killed Hillary in my opinion the most was Obama. The affordable health care act was terrible. Premiums are off the charts and insurance companies are going under left and right. Obama failed with this policy.

Hi guys, I found this video and I wish I could translate this for you but don't have the time right now, i'll be out for a few hours, but maybe someone could help me, it's in Spanish. This guy has a YouTube channel and knows a lot about politics. He speculated what could happen if Trump won the election back in October and sadly a part of his predictions have already happened. I'll be honest with you, this looks very grim not only for America, but the entire world too.

Basically, America is not going to be great again. It's going to start not so bad but gets worse as the time goes on. The wall is going to be a reality and Mexico and other countries will "pay" for it by creating taxes for immigrants who send money outside of the country. Deportation and harsh migratory issues causes the harm of economical relations with Canada and Mexico, and will increase unemployment rate from originally 5% to a 12% and possibly getting worse at the end by 22%. Recession is around the corner with the Dollar on crisis, the euro will become the strongest currency, not to mention the US isolation from other international affairs will cause indirect but equally dangerous situations for you and the rest of the world. If US doesn't support rebels in the Syria War, they will lose and very likely would want revenge for their treason. Terrorist attempts are going to be very common after that in Global Power countries, and if it happens again on the US, Donald Trump would very likely warrant a Nuclear attack on the terrorist lands but that will kill a lot of innocent people in the process. Not to mention, Trump's decisions will fragment the senate, to the point that people from his party would not agree with him anymore, he will question the senate and say that they are against him and the popular vote he got, so in order to ensure his re-election, he could create his own political party.

It's too long to describe it all but hopefully some of you will understand it because it's very well explained in the video.

I will pray for you, my friends...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTZNSDoO6i8

The worst thing is that Clinton won the popular vote. I know that if I say that the electoral system is flawed (something Trump also said in 2012, he called it a disaster for democracy) people will say I'm only saying that because Trump won, but I just don't understand why the current system is better in any way than a system where the candidate with simply the most votes across the entire country wins. Having to reach 270 of 538 electoral votes to win the elections also means that voting on 3rd party is simply throwing your vote away because everyone on Earth knows no 3rd party candidate will ever get 270 or more electoral votes.
I could somewhat understand the current system if you had a federation of multiple former sovereign state (for example a possible European Federation) to make sure that every country is represented properly, but having such a system for a single country? I just don't understand it.
The current system also means that a lot of votes are completely irrelevant and might as well have ended up in the garbage can. Looking at the results now you see that for example in D.C. Clinton won by 248.670 votes. Simply put, that means 248.669 votes in just D.C. alone were completely irrelevant to the elections. You then also have Wyoming where Trump won by 118.299 votes. Again, that means 118.298 votes might as well have been tossed in the garbage can.

Any Americans, regardless of if they're Pro-Hillary, Pro-Tump or Pro-3rd party who feel the same way?

IMO: get rid of the Electoral system so you open the way for parties other that the Republicans and Democrats and to ensure that the most popular candidate across the entire country always win. You win if you get 50%+1 of the vote, if nobody gets 50%+1 of the vote have a 2nd round where the top 2 most popular candidates from Round 1 go head-to-head.

I also saw a map today how an electoral system would work here (The Netherlands), it's absolutely pathetic. Currently 11 Dutch parties share all seats, if we switched to an electoral system it would be just 2.

poklane said: The worst thing is that Clinton won the popular vote. I know that if I say that the electoral system is flawed (something Trump also said in 2012, he called it a disaster for democracy) people will say I'm only saying that because Trump won, but I just don't understand why the current system is better in any way than a system where the candidate with simply the most votes across the entire country wins. Having to reach 270 of 538 electoral votes to win the elections also means that voting on 3rd party is simply throwing your vote away because everyone on Earth knows no 3rd party candidate will ever get 270 or more electoral votes. I could somewhat understand the current system if you had a federation of multiple former sovereign state (for example a possible European Federation) to make sure that every country is represented properly, but having such a system for a single country? I just don't understand it. The current system also means that a lot of votes are completely irrelevant and might as well have ended up in the garbage can. Looking at the results now you see that for example in D.C. Clinton won by 248.670 votes. Simply put, that means 248.669 votes in just D.C. alone were completely irrelevant to the elections. You then also have Wyoming where Trump won by 118.299 votes. Again, that means 118.298 votes might as well have been tossed in the garbage can. Any Americans, regardless of if they're Pro-Hillary, Pro-Tump or Pro-3rd party who feel the same way? IMO: get rid of the Electoral system so you open the way for parties other that the Republicans and Democrats and to ensure that the most popular candidate across the entire country always win. You win if you get 50%+1 of the vote, if nobody gets 50%+1 of the vote have a 2nd round where the top 2 most popular candidates from Round 1 go head-to-head. I also saw a map today how an electoral system would work here (The Netherlands), it's absolutely pathetic. Currently 11 Dutch parties share all seats, if we switched to an electoral system it would be just 2.

The United States was designed with a pseudo-federation concept of State and Federal power balance.  As the founding fathers put it, the country was intended as a "sovreign nation of many sovreign states."  The Electoral system is there to make sure the interests of the States are represented in the Presidential elections, not just the interests of the masses.  If the popular vote was all that mattered, the interests of the top 10 states would be hugely disproportionately represented in Presidential elections.  And the size of our country, the diversity of demographics in each State, the variation in economic strength and resources, etc etc. means those interests can be very different.  With a straight popular vote, if a candidate won the top 7 or so states by a land slide, it's entirely possible they could lose in every other state but win regardless.  That means 43 states' interests are completely dumped in the bin. 

Also, not only can 3rd parties and new parties win, in the past it has happened numerous times.  The 20th century was really the time of the rise and fortification of strict bipartisanism.  Before then, there had been 3rd parties and new parties to win.  There is reform that needs doing, but the big issue is not the EC, it's the regulation of funding.  The fact is that as it stands, the two major parties just have so much more money than third parties do.  The spending just needs to be more tightly regulated so that more parties can be competitive. 

Hmm... Maybe im so disconnected from murica politics but what's actually trump's plan for this "change"?

Nuvendil said: hershel_layton said: I wonder why it's so hard to make taxes fairly for everyone- as you get a bigger salary you pay more taxes. it shouldn't be so hard.   We should also close loop holes for taxes. it's disgusting how apple and other corporations have billions of avoided taxes But percentages mean that you already *pay more*.  And btw, the top tier individual tax rate is far higher than the average American's.  As for loopholes, some are intentionally put in to encourage recovery from bad times - carry forward losses being the main one - while others are indeed unfortunate failures to adapt.  I would fix the former, certainly.  But the billions that companies never move into the country comes down to the international tax rate.  We are the only developed country that taxes you just for bringing the money into the country so why would any company do that if they don't have to?  Honestly, the class warfare narrative is so tired and a lot of it is smoke and mirrors.  The reality is, the overwhelming majority of federal income taxes come from the top tier people that leftists are determined to say don't pay their "fair share".

 

I hope you don't seriously believe the government policies favor the poor over the rich: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf The USA is not a democracy, it's an oligarchy. That's not going to change with Donald Trump, it will probably only get worse. Oh and which leftists are you talking about? There is no left wing party in the USA. The only presidents candidate that could be considered a socialist was Bernie Sanders (and his own Party worked against him because they favored Hillary Clinton). The USA would be better off if their actually was a big left wing movement. Now there's no balance to the right wing politicians. You basically have normal right wingers and extremist right wingers (most of the Republican Party) in the USA.

Blester said: Hi guys, I found this video and I wish I could translate this for you but don't have the time right now, i'll be out for a few hours, but maybe someone could help me, it's in Spanish. This guy has a YouTube channel and knows a lot about politics. He speculated what could happen if Trump won the election back in October and sadly a part of his predictions have already happened. I'll be honest with you, this looks very grim not only for America, but the entire world too. Basically, America is not going to be great again. It's going to start not so bad but gets worse as the time goes on. The wall is going to be a reality and Mexico and other countries will "pay" for it by creating taxes for immigrants who send money outside of the country. Deportation and harsh migratory issues causes the harm of economical relations with Canada and Mexico, and will increase unemployment rate from originally 5% to a 12% and possibly getting worse at the end by 22%. Recession is around the corner with the Dollar on crisis, the euro will become the strongest currency, not to mention the US isolation from other international affairs will cause indirect but equally dangerous situations for you and the rest of the world. If US doesn't support rebels in the Syria War, they will lose and very likely would want revenge for their treason. Terrorist attempts are going to be very common after that in Global Power countries, and if it happens again on the US, Donald Trump would very likely warrant a Nuclear attack on the terrorist lands but that will kill a lot of innocent people in the process. Not to mention, Trump's decisions will fragment the senate, to the point that people from his party would not agree with him anymore, he will question the senate and say that they are against him and the popular vote he got, so in order to ensure his re-election, he could create his own political party. It's too long to describe it all but hopefully some of you will understand it because it's very well explained in the video. I will pray for you, my friends... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTZNSDoO6i8

Sounds like a load of BS to me.