Trump just won the election

[Carborendum]

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I have thought about the election (which did not turn out as I expected).  I am not sure what will happen next.  I think Trump is mistaken about a lot of things, but I will begin with the economy.  I believe that Trump believes that the key to the economy is energy – in particular fossil fuels.  I am quite sure increasing our use of fossil fuels through drilling will take longer than Trump realizes.  Unless old drilling methods are used.   That would be a quick solution but could backfire before the next presidential election.

I think it was an ambitious idea.  But the reality is that 50% reduction in "oil prices" is not going to happen.

So, can he cut "energy costs" by 50%?  Yes.  But it cannot happen overnight.  It will take 5 to 10 years of each administration agreeing to allow nuclear to flourish.  This is really the only way.

Now, another aspect of what he's talking about is using domestic oil for domestic use/sale.  That will take about three to four years to begin working.  But it may be a few more years to have it really impact the economy.  But I don't see how that will reduce it by 50%.  It can be a part of the overall plan.  But this alone will never give us a 50% reduction.

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Can Trump bring back the Abraham accords?  Maybe – I think that is the best hope to settle the Middle East.  Ukraine, I believe, is a bridge too far for Trump.

I agree.  He's got the right idea in the Middle East.  He doesn't really understand Ukraine.  And there is a lot of history with the US/Ukraine relations that he just doesn't get.  Hopefully, he will have competent people in his administration to guide him on that front.

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

My biggest concern is internal the opposition to Trump.  There has been an effort to stop Trump by extreme methods – including murder.    The left has demonstrated that when upset they can be hazardous to life, property and the rule of law (lies before a FISA court).

And that is why I have predicted many violent protests and riots burning cars and houses and businesses.

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

My biggest hope is that Musk will be put in charge of optimizing government operations and weeding out waist.

Musk's waist size aside, I think he will be very capable of reducing waste in government spending and policy.  But I don't see how he can do this without a conflict of interest.  SpaceX is a primary government contractor.

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

In summary, I thought Harris would win

Until just this past week or two, no one knew.  Polls and ever-changing narratives were all up in the air.

11 minutes ago, Traveler said:

– now I have to take a serious look into my political opinions.  When white water rafting, I live by the philosophy that what ever has happened is in the past and the most important thing is to get ready for what is coming next.  I have no idea what is coming next.

Here's what to expect:

It's going to be a bumpy ride.

[Ironhold]

The big thing that people need to be confronting, but likely won't, is the fact that Harris and her people fixated on niche issues that the moderates & undecideds considered lower priority and then tried to use shaming tactics to keep the discussion from drifting away. 

Prices are up by levels that are making it hard for the lower and middle classes to get by. There are fears that any further US involvement in Ukraine would lead to war with Russia. An entire generation of young men feel left behind because of the intense push for DEI and often radical feminism in the name of "equality" that isn't. Entire sectors are underperforming. These issues, and more, are key concerns for everyday people, but Harris wanted it to be about abortion and how anyone who didn't vote for her was a bigot. 

That's not how these things work.

[laronius]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

Not near the problems that supposed mandates cause in a divided electorate.

 

The Traveler

Supposed mandates just provide a cloak of legitimacy to do what they were going to do anyway. Years ago it may have mattered when national interest was actually a factor. Now it's "Let's see what we can force through before the next election."

[Phoenix_person]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Hopefully, he will have competent people in his administration to guide him on that front.

Therein lies my single biggest issue with Trump: he almost never surrounds himself with competent people. He surrounds himself with people who would shoot a dog in a gravel pit for a seat at his table, people who won't tell him no. If he actually DID show a willingness to bring competence to the table, I'd be far less stressed about a second Trump presidency. 

And unlike you guys, the thought of the richest man in the world in a Trump administration terrifies me. Musk fooled an entire electorate into thinking he cares about anything other than proximity to power. And now you gave it to him. I'm old enough to remember some conservatives freaking out because they thought Bill Gates was conspiring with the government to implant microchips in our brains. Now the richest guy on Earth, who is *actually* in the brain microchip industry, is cozying up to the most powerful guy on Earth (who's also a wealthy businessman) and may get a place in our government. I can't think of any other combination of elites that could fool the masses so thoroughly into thinking they cared about them. It would almost be impressive if it wasn't so dystopian. You didn't drain the swamp. You sold it to the billionaire class. 

Edited November 6 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

13 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

he almost never surrounds himself with competent people

He does, they just don’t stick around. Who wants to work for a boss that demands blind obedience and loyalty that he doesn’t give back? 
 

Rex Tillerson comes to mind. 

[Phoenix_person]

8 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

He does, they just don’t stick around. Who wants to work for a boss that demands blind obedience and loyalty that he doesn’t give back? 
 

Rex Tillerson comes to mind. 

And Mattis. It's very telling how fast they washed out of the administration. At a certain point, you have to wonder why anyone with more than three brain cells to rub together that gets close to Trump ends up falling out with him.

Edited November 6 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

16 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

And Mattis. It's very telling how fast they washed out of the administration. At a certain point, you have to wonder why anyone with more than three brain cells to rub together that gets close to Trump ends up falling out with him.

Yup, and that what makes him winning even more scary for democrats/never trumpers. Look how little power they have. Yikes. 

[Carborendum]

47 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Therein lies my single biggest issue with Trump: he almost never surrounds himself with competent people.

Funny thing that.

Trump wanted Pence to refuse the validation of the 2020 election.  But Pence, being the cool head told him that he couldn't do that without further evidence.  Trump accepted that.  

This type of dynamic happened a lot in his administration.  He's used to managing a business.  But he was unfamiliar with the constraints of political power.  But he tried to get people who would tell him what he couldn't do.

The message I was intending before was that many of those same people who were happy to tell him "You can't do that," were also the same people who were deep state puppets trying to thwart his agenda to drain the swamp.

So over the past couple of years, he's been looking for people to both constrain him as well as support him.  I don't know all the people in his circle.  But those who are prominent appear to be the folks to do the job.

Quote

And unlike you guys, the thought of the richest man in the world in a Trump administration terrifies me.

Yup.  You're right.  It doesn't terrify me at all.  I'm not sure why it does you.

Quote

Musk fooled an entire electorate into thinking he cares about anything other than proximity to power.

Well, count me a fool then.  I have no idea what kind of power-grabber encourages free-speech for everyone, including his enemies.

I also don't know how a power-grabber spends $100s MM/yr to supply free internet service to Ukraine in their time of need.

Quote

I'm old enough to remember some conservatives freaking out because they thought Bill Gates was conspiring with the government to implant microchips in our brains.

I knew that was just a conspiracy theory when I was a kid (I use that term loosely).

Quote

Now the richest guy on Earth, who is *actually* in the brain microchip industry,

I'm actually on your side for this point.  I don't think brain chips are a place where technology needs to send us.  And, yes, that spooks me out even if it is from Musk.

Quote

is cozying up to the most powerful guy on Earth (who's also a wealthy businessman) and may get a place in our government.

I've stated elsewhere that my biggest concern here is how he can avoid a conflict of interest for SpaceX government contracts.

Quote

I can't think of any other combination of elites that could fool the masses so thoroughly into thinking they cared about them.  It would almost be impressive if it wasn't so dystopian. You didn't drain the swamp. You sold it to the billionaire class. 

Well, you'd have to prove that this was what they said or that they are actually "fooling" us.

Dystopian is in the eye of the beholder.  You see a rich person and instantly think they are evil.  I see a billionaire, and I think, "Hey, he's got a lot of money."

You'd have to explain why this is a bad thing when the vast majority of billionaires were rooting for Kamala.

Edited November 6 by Carborendum

[mikbone]

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm actually on your side for this point.  I don't think brain chips are a place where technology needs to send us.  And, yes, that spooks me out even if it is from Musk.

The brain chips will be tested mostly on patients with spinal motor disabilities.  It will be a godsend for these patients to have direct control of computer input devices.  

I would sign up for a brain implant if it allowed me access to the information on the internet and control of computers / robots.  

I can imagine doing surgery, having immediate access to hospital information, CT scans with 3D reconstruction of fractures with holographic overlay of the patients pathology and an additional robotic arm or two to assist in surgery.  Assuming that the implant is safe.

[Just_A_Guy]

53 minutes ago, mikbone said:

The brain chips will be tested mostly on patients with spinal motor disabilities.  It will be a godsend for these patients to have direct control of computer input devices.  

I would sign up for a brain implant if it allowed me access to the information on the internet and control of computers / robots.  

I can imagine doing surgery, having immediate access to hospital information, CT scans with 3D reconstruction of fractures with holographic overlay of the patients pathology and an additional robotic arm or two to assist in surgery.  Assuming that the implant is safe.

As I understand it, the Chinese are heavily investing in researching the military implications of this sort of thing (together with genetic enhancements of soldiers).

I suspect that eventually, as a matter of security/military expediency, we are going to have to accept the notion of chip implants/genetic modifications of soldiers; and once they revert to civilian life and begin out-performing non-veteran workers there will be demand to make those sorts of enhancements available to everyone.

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

Assuming that the implant is safe.

And privacy as well.  I don't trust this technology.

I'm normally all for technology advancing us into the future.  But I have a hard enough time accepting cochlear implants for the deaf (my SIL is such a recipient).  But to actually go into the brain itself???

It may be an emotional response instead of a logical one.  But the idea gives me the creeps.

[NeuroTypical]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

I'm old enough to remember some conservatives freaking out because they thought Bill Gates was conspiring with the government to implant microchips in our brains.

Yeah.  "thought".    

In other news, I saw this book at Walmart the other day and sent the picture to @LDSGator as a laugh:

[LDSGator]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Yeah.  "thought".    

In other news, I saw this book at Walmart the other day and sent the picture to @LDSGator as a laugh:

https://www.amazon.com/Are-Scaring-Ourselves-Death-Pessismism/dp/0312150563
 

Read this one first and we’ll talk. 

[JohnsonJones]

21 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

 

Dems have no one to blame but themselves. They didn't take dissent over Gaza seriously and they thought "Orange man bad" would be enough to sway moderates who care more about grocery prices than reproductive rights. They got what they paid for. At least I can take solace in the fact that we won all of our local races.

 

I think they didn't take into account how many independents would simply be extremely upset with how they selected Harris as the candidate.

I've seen them so busy pointing fingers and blaming things such as racism and mysogyny, to the idea that Biden would have done worse (I disagree.  What I saw after that debate was Biden being absolutely backstabbed by his own party so hard that they didn't even go after Trump as hard.  It was a concerted effort between the elites and the media to take Biden down.  They lost the votes of Many independents because it was so flagrant and obvious, it turned a ton of them off.  I imagine that they won't see this as a talking point or even a true consideration, but I think that moment [or more like two weeks] was where they lost the vote of many independents, enough to actually lose the election).  It was as if those who were the actual party were absolutely inconsequential as well in regards to choosing a candidate, as opposed to the elites of the party who chose instead.   This is a double whammy in regards to garnering support.

That combined with what you mention, the absolute ignorance of the plight of many Americans, who were being chastised repeatedly in the media that their complaints were of no weight in regards to the economy also lost them a lot of votes that may have also been able to win the election.  Being told the economy is going well doesn't matter to someone who can't afford housing, has lost the dream to ever be able to own a house due to how expensive it's gotten, and is worried about how expensive food is these days.  The idea that this was to continue as it was, and being told all was fine with the food market, was probably a deciding factor for many young people (if not older people stuck on a budget).

I know that of independents I know, as well as some young people, it wasn't that they liked Trump.  In fact, some of them would never vote for Trump.  However, they also couldn't convince themselves to vote for Harris.  So, they chose not to vote for either.

I think the numbers may show that fewer people voted in general, and it isn't necessarily that Trump got more votes than expected, but that Harris got fewer due to many choosing simply not to vote period, or at least vote for Harris or Trump. 

With the fingers pointing at each other and blaming people that it was misogyny, racism, or other foolish talking points instead of what I see as the very real reasons (I listed above) it may be that no one is going to change in the Democrat party.

I think Bernie Sanders pointed out recently it isn't that the Working class left the Democrats, but that the Democrats left the Working class.

Until they address issues like what I pointed out above in regards to the working class and their concerns, I think the Democrats may be in a tough spot...saying we ever get to have another election of course. 

 

PS:  I also think JD Vance, as perhaps the youngest appearing individual probably appealed to a lot more people.  His age may have been a factor, and that also countered how old Trump is. He served as an active duty (as opposed to Guard) in a War zone, and despite how much the Democrats decried what he said, he also is married to a wife that most would see as a minority.  This has appeal across multiple spectrums as well, and probably made it that Vance was a wise choice as a VP selection.

Walz was a particularly poor choice in my opinion.  He didn't bring anything to the picture.  Shapiro would have been a far superior choice and may have even brought in those crucial Midwestern votes.  Harris had lost the palestinian vote (and it wasn't enough to really account for the losses she had this election anyways, they are a smaller group) in any case, and the selection as Shapiro as a Running mate as VP probably would have brought a LOT more to the table than choosing Walz.  [edit:  No offense intended in this.  I know Walz is loved by you and Minnesota, but lets be honest, Minnesota wasn't ever going to be lost to Harris, and overall, didn't bring anything that she absolutely needed from elsewhere, such as PA, WI, and other locations].

Edited November 7 by JohnsonJones

[JohnsonJones]

19 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Until just this past week or two, no one knew.  Polls and ever-changing narratives were all up in the air.

Regardless of whether he would win the election or not (and I have to admit, I wasn't positive he would, but I felt he would), I felt Trump would end up, one way or the other, as the next President.  I have been saying it for months.

In fact, I felt it could even be fulfillment of prophecy, so it meant Trump had to be the next President somehow and in someway. 

17 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

And unlike you guys, the thought of the richest man in the world in a Trump administration terrifies me. Musk fooled an entire electorate into thinking he cares about anything other than proximity to power. And now you gave it to him. I'm old enough to remember some conservatives freaking out because they thought Bill Gates was conspiring with the government to implant microchips in our brains. Now the richest guy on Earth, who is *actually* in the brain microchip industry, is cozying up to the most powerful guy on Earth (who's also a wealthy businessman) and may get a place in our government. I can't think of any other combination of elites that could fool the masses so thoroughly into thinking they cared about them. It would almost be impressive if it wasn't so dystopian. You didn't drain the swamp. You sold it to the billionaire class. 

I'm not so sure Trump is being foolish in this.  I think he has some people advising him, and I think they may be pretty smart on this one.

They are creating a new task force of sorts, with Musk in charge.  Musk will have no real power to do anything.  He can say whatever he wants, and suggest whatever he wants, but the Trump team doesn't have to do anything with that.

I feel that they may have offered Musk this position to appease Musk's pride, but it's a position of no value in the long run.  There is nothing of power or value, it's just a position that they can tell Musk he can have, that's it's important, and then lead him on without ever actually having to do anything about it or with it. 

If that's true, than Musk was just foolish enough to buy the ploy, hook, line, and sinker.  The question is how long (if he ever does) it will take him to figure out that he's been had.  It's a position in name only, he won't have the power to actually do anything with it except brag (or maybe that's all he really wants anyways).  Trump Might use it as a scapegoat later on, if his plans for tariffs and other economic ideas go south.  Musk would make a decent scapegoat in that case, someone to blame and take the flame off of Trump. 

Musk may get burned really bad by this deal.  I'm not sure Musk has considered this.  Musk is more of a stock manipulator than a political schemer.

Edited November 7 by JohnsonJones

[Carborendum]

15 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

As I understand it, the Chinese are heavily investing in researching the military implications of this sort of thing (together with genetic enhancements of soldiers).

I suspect that eventually, as a matter of security/military expediency, we are going to have to accept the notion of chip implants/genetic modifications of soldiers; and once they revert to civilian life and begin out-performing non-veteran workers there will be demand to make those sorts of enhancements available to everyone.

Lee Majors will be jealous.

[NeuroTypical]

Riley Gaines entered the chat.

[Phoenix_person]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

They are creating a new task force of sorts, with Musk in charge.  Musk will have no real power to do anything.  He can say whatever he wants, and suggest whatever he wants, but the Trump team doesn't have to do anything with that.

I feel that they may have offered Musk this position to appease Musk's pride, but it's a position of no value in the long run.  There is nothing of power or value, it's just a position that they can tell Musk he can have, that's it's important, and then lead him on without ever actually having to do anything about it or with it. 

So draining the swamp means creating a new arm of government and putting the richest man in the world in charge of it? Cool.

And why do/should we care about his pride? Is he really that fragile?

[NeuroTypical]

15 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

So draining the swamp means creating a new arm of government and putting the richest man in the world in charge of it? Cool.

If Elon ends up heading some stupid bloated bureaucracy with functionaries wielding unelected and unlegislated power, I will join you in the glorious revolution. 

Until then, I'm sort of hoping Trump will take his unprecedented mandate and agreeable congress and do stuff like 

- Extend the Trump tax cut and make them permanent

- build the Wall and reform immigration

- reform federal education spending to do things like require states to do robust school choice

- pull an Argentinian "afurera" moment and slash the size of the federal bureaucracy.  For example, shrink and combine  departments of Interior/EPA/Agriculture into one guy with a typewriter and maybe a secretary.

- end subsidies for left-wing government operations like NPR, CPB, PBS etc.

- Evolve 'drill baby drill' into robust support for our growing nuclear industry.  Sell it to everyone as a way of powering AI in the cleanest, greenest, most renewable way possible.

 

[Vort]

12 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

'm sort of hoping Trump will take his unprecedented mandate and agreeable congress and do stuff like 

- Extend the Trump tax cut and make them permanent

- build the Wall and reform immigration

- reform federal education spending to do things like require states to do robust school choice

Amen to all.

12 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

- pull an Argentinian "afurera" moment and slash the size of the federal bureaucracy.  For example, shrink and combine  departments of Interior/EPA/Agriculture into one guy with a typewriter and maybe a secretary.

LOL.

I hate to admit it out loud, but the EPA performs a vital function that is well within the scope of reasonable governmental power. Protecting the commons has always been a vital function of government. It's a form of public policing. I dislike the EPA; it's corrupt, inefficient, and utterly lacks impartiality. But the role it plays (or is supposed to play) is something we don't want to do without.

12 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

- end subsidies for left-wing government operations like NPR, CPB, PBS etc.

- Evolve 'drill baby drill' into robust support for our growing nuclear industry.  Sell it to everyone as a way of powering AI in the cleanest, greenest, most renewable way possible.

Shout AMEN, Brother! Amen amen amen amen.

[Ironhold]

18 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

- pull an Argentinian "afurera" moment and slash the size of the federal bureaucracy.  For example, shrink and combine  departments of Interior/EPA/Agriculture into one guy with a typewriter and maybe a secretary.

This is actually what he's saying Musk's purpose will be, to evaluate various government agencies in order to determine what is or isn't still needed as a federal-level function, what can be transferred to the states, and what is basically obsolete. 

When Musk took over Twitter, one of the first things he did was to go over the company's rosters and determine who was actually working. He discovered that a large percentage of employees were basically hiding out in the company's recreational areas rather than actually doing their duties, and got rid of them. IIRC he slashed the headcount in half this way. Things were a bit rocky at first because a small number of these people were specialists who were only needed intermittently, but past a certain point Twitter got sorted. 

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

When Musk took over Twitter, one of the first things he did was to go over the company's rosters and determine who was actually working. He discovered that a large percentage of employees were basically hiding out in the company's recreational areas rather than actually doing their duties, and got rid of them. IIRC he slashed the headcount in half this way. Things were a bit rocky at first because a small number of these people were specialists who were only needed intermittently, but past a certain point Twitter got sorted. 

As one who has worked at such companies, I think I know exactly what Musk was referring to. I mean, I never worked anywhere that went to Twitter-level excesses, but I worked at large software firms where the so-called FTEs had access to private gyms, saunas, massages, food 24/7 including good-restaurant-quality food from 6am to 8pm, and so forth. Many of those amenities were available to some degree to contractors and such. It made for a weirdly comfortable work environment. For the most part, employees did not seem to take unfair advantage of such perks, but they did often stay at work very late. Which was probably the point.

But I worked primarily with engineers, and such people tend to be high productivity types, like Musk himself. I had heard tales of marketing groups and bureaucrats engaging in the types of behavior that Musk found so appalling, though none of my groups was ever like that. Having known many marketing individuals and having worked with several, I find it utterly believable.

[zil2]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

one guy with a typewriter

Can it be a gal?  Cuz I really want a typewriter - an old, totally manual typewriter.  But not one of the big heavy ones - a portable.  They're so expensive though (the good ones, fully restored)....

 

[mirkwood]

I'm trying to remember which elitist left wing millionaire/billionaires the left was shrieking about the last four years.  Anyone?  Bueller?  Bueller?

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

- pull an Argentinian "afurera" moment and slash the size of the federal bureaucracy.  For example, shrink and combine  departments of Interior/EPA/Agriculture into one guy with a typewriter and maybe a secretary.

LOL.

I hate to admit it out loud, but the EPA performs a vital function that is well within the scope of reasonable governmental power.

I absolutely agree.   Perhaps a mitigation of my zealous mischaracterization is in order. 

Current yearly budgets for the mentioned departments: 

Interior: $94.5 billion
EPA: $85.2B
Ag: $467B

I don't know a lot, but I know that when you have 3 large entities doing things with a lot of overlap, there's, well, a lot of overlap.   Here's hoping Elon can identify and eliminate redundancy.   Gold star to him whenever he finds stuff that shouldn't be happening in the first place.