Could we not put these ''emails'' to bed now? If you had a dollar for every time you have mentioned them you would be a millionaire!
I kinda think everyone knows about them, realises the damage done.......

That is an actually possibility - especially in the states that swung decisively for him this time round. They're exactly the places that will likely suffer when his rescinding of ACA, tax breaks for the wealthy with none for the poor, and the continued disappearance of jobs he promised would come back to their areas takes hold.

The Democrats are now the opposition/protest party - and it's out of office, weirdly enough, that they motivate supporters far more than when they are governing. The DNC need to stop acting like an amateur operation (good grief, if those emails have done anything positive, it's to shed light on the complete shower of ineptitude that populates the professional political operative world!) and they need to find a unifying candidate within the next 2 years, and get behind them very early on. They really do need 'Obama Mark 2' - and I suspect the next election will be very winnable, if Trump continues to govern in the same vein as he's managed his transition!

BTW, I don't think anyone (partisan or not) could possible call this election a landslide, using any criteria, when the popular vote didn't match the EC one. I know the GOP seem determined to ignore the popular vote results as much as they possibly can, but it's still there - and will grow to a near 3 million advantage for the losing candidate. IMO, that precludes any elevating of Trump's victory to anything near a 'landslide'!

That was Andrey Illarionov who was an advisor to Putin over 10 years ago and is now a Putin critic, going around saying anything to damage him. Putin has never said anything about wanting to take over Finland or the Balkan states. It's just more anti-Putin propaganda.

I don't think he has claimed that has he?

i thought you would be an avid follower of trump's twitter account ...

Yes, he has:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...illary-clinton

Yes he did, claiming that he won the popular vote because the votes that took Clinton over the 50% were illegally cast.

The Democratic Party, need to find someone to run who is in the age range of 50-65 I would say, and not someone who had either run before, or been part of a White House staff previously (so not for example Joe Biden).

If they could do such a thing, then they might very well have a good chance of winning the next election, but at the moment, they ate in complete dissary, and need to admit defeat fully to Trump, and move on from this election, and find a suitable candidate to put up against Trump for the next election.

All of this moaning and complaining, and trying to delegitimise this election just comes off as sour grapes, and reflects on them very badly.


As for your second point, again, why bring up the popular vote, has zero meaning, as it had no influence on anything to do with this election, or any other election.
The only numbers that do, and have ever had on an American election, are the numbers to do with the electoral college votes.

Not even I can keep up with everything he tweets, and you have to ask, quite how serious he is when tweeting these things, as obviously joking about is hard to comes across on Twitter.

if you think Trump is joking when he posts things like that then you really haven't been paying attention for the last 18 months ...

When you believe as many conspiracy theories as Donald Trump does, it's not much of a stretch to add one more.


So when it looks - to the untutored observer - as though Donald Trump is blatantly lying out of his arse on Twitter, he is in fact merely "joking about", and we should all just have a chuckle at his incisive wit? How much of his copious output should we now consign to the humour bin?

Do you think this is an appropriate way for the President-elect of the United States to behave? Do you think he will modify his behaviour once in office?

that poster seems to think the whole thing is some sort of reality show writ large being played out for his entertainment rather than something that could have real global consequences

so i wouldn't expect a sensible answer to that question about whether its appropriate for the president-elect to behave like a 7 year troll on twitter

In terms of winning state by state, 50 separate popular vote figures do count - they just don't get collated into a single figure that determines the winner of the election.

Talking about 'zero meaning' is wrong, because a president without a popular mandate, no matter how the EC system worked in his favour, starts his time in office at a certain disadvantage. Now, in this case, Trump has the strong advantage, which offsets this, that both Senate and Congress are in GOP hands, but (and I think this is important), the GOP hasn't operated as a single entity for quite some time, especially in Congress.

There are political factions - and this will become increasingly pertinent, when you consider just how many elected GOP officials actually disavowed Trump during the campaign. The critical thing is that some of these senators and representatives are from states that didn't give Trump the popular vote, or they vehemently disagree with his political positions. I suspect that Trump not winning the popular vote will give parts of the GOP the excuse they need to oppose some of his actions.

Hang on a minute, there is no need whatsoever for insults or put downs here,we are having a good political talk here.

I have just been reading a book about Trump, and I think this passage sums up his Presidential bid for office, and it wasn't anything to do with politics at all:-

"One thing I've learned about the press is that they're always hungry for a good story, and the more sensational the better.......The point is that if you are a little different, or a little outrageous, or if you do things that are bold or controversial, the press is going to write about you.
I've always done things a little differently, I don't mind controversy...."

Towards the end of this piece there is another interesting tidbit, ".......The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people's fantasies. People may not always think big themselves, but they cam still get very excited by those who do. That's why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest and greatest and the most spectacular.
I call it truthful hyperbole. It's an innocent form of exaggeration - and a very effective form of promotion."

I think that passage right there, sums up Trump and his mind set perfectly, he was talking about his business, but you could very easily see this in how his Presidential campaign was run and put together.

Will this change now his is in office, who knows, but if that passage is anything to go by, then he might continue to do things his way.

so you think telling blatant lies and exaggerations to provoke reactions is a good thing for someone that is going to have the sort of power Trump will in 4 weeks time ?

a position where the slightest incorrect remark or action can have global consequences ?

if someone behaved on here like Trump does no-one would take them seriously and write them off as a WuM, but its ok for the man who will have the so-called most powerful office in the world to do it ?

Hang on, where I have said what he is doing is a good thing??

Why do you think I think like that??

All I have posted is what his methods have been, and how he thinks, why does that make me a Trump supporter all of a sudden?

Whether I like it or not is irrelevant, as I have zero control over him acting the way that he does, so I, just like you and others, will have to live with how he acts.
He seemingly only listens to his family, so I don't really see the point in shouting and moaning on here or elsewhere about how he acts.
Is it wrong, most probably yes, but what really can I do over here in the UK about it?
Not much, if anything at all, so why get so worked up over something that I have no control over?

because any time someone criticises for doing it you have defended him

good thing for you the search feature doesn't work properly given how often you change the goalposts on a subject

And Donald Trump is the oldest president-elect - it has got bugger all to do with age. Remember the majority voted for Clinton - so what they need to do is broaden the appeal of the Democrats into other states.

yeah i think it just needed a swing of something like 0.7% in three states and clinton would have won

so writing the democrats off as being "in disarray" and having to get their act together before 2020 doesn't really tally with reality

at the end of the day its what Trump does over the next 4 years that will end up deciding the next election almost regardless of what the democrats do between now and then or who they stand against him

I don't defend him, I only put forth a different side of a debate, that does not equal me being a rabid Trump supporter.

The reality is that there is no clear candidate to follow Hillary from a Democratic point of view, they were seemingly all in with her, there was no plan B to speak of, as they seemed to be really against Bernie.

Even if Trump messes up, then they will still need to put forth a good candidate that the people would be willing to vote for, all this talk about Joe Biden, and others that have already been around the block a few times, will just not cut it I think.

So they have two years really to figure out, just who can they put forward to challenge Trump as the next President of the USA.

4 years ago no-one would have ever thought trump would be the republican nominee or get elected

there is plenty of time for contenders to come forward and it will be Trump's performance over the next 4 years that will be the key factor in the next election, which is what usually happens when you have an incumbent president standing

assuming he makes it that far of course

They (the Democratic Party) will still need to put forward a credible candidate to challenge Trump, no matter how well (or not) he does in office.

The process to find that person, really should be beginning sooner rather than later, so that they can get that person up to speed with things.

The next few years will be very interesting to watch, as both sides try and sort themselves out, as there were plenty of people on the Republican side that were against Trump.

i dont think i was suggesting they pick some homeless guy off the street to challenge trump, as usual you take everything too literally and dont understand nuance

regardless of who the democrats put forward the key factor in the next election will be how Trump does over the next 4 years

surely that cant be too a difficult concept to understand

That shouldn't be hard, as long as the name isn't Hillary Clinton