All Hail God-Emperor Trump

[CopperLily]

We cannot keep sending money to other countries and keep our own citizens safe.

I would suggest, for many aspects of foreign aid, these are not as mutually exclusive as you think.

[HannibalBarca]

This reminds me of similar discussions of NASA's budget. When polled, most people believed it was several percentage points of the U.S. GDP, and should be cut.

When they asked what it should be cut to? It ended up being double what NASA's budget currently was.

I remember reading that some time back.  Assumptions based on faulty data or no data at all are one of the primary difficulties we face in getting people to make well-considered decisions.  Somehow getting rid of all the fake news stories online would help.  That, however, will be a tough genie to get back in the bottle.

[Cassandra LeMay]

The worst thing we all do is to make generalizations. ...

This country is on the brink of some disasterous economic situations. We cannot keep sending money to other countries and keep our own citizens safe. The trade imbalance will drain us if it is not balanced. We spend billions of dollars helping other parts of the world. The manufacturing is now being almost totally done in other countries. The American businesses who do this are making huge profits, while the jobless people in this country are adding up. Homeless people are in every major city.

I would suggest, for many aspects of foreign aid, these are not as mutually exclusive as you think.

CopperLilly summed it up far better than I could have.

Correlation does not equate causation.

Foreign aid is not the cause of problems in the US.

[MiraMirror]

As someone who lived in Lousiana and got to experience Katrina firsthand, I'm far more grateful to foreign aid than I am towards our own government, seeing how them dragging their feet is a large part of what made the damage done by Katrina so much worse than it could have, and should have, been.

[Valerian]

You may have heard that Trump's been having a hard time finding people to perform at his inauguration. 

The so-called "A" list celebrities are all wanting tixs to the inauguration, but look what they did for Hillary, NOTHING. I want the PEOPLE!

Okay, so now we know he's willing to settle for the B to D-list of the entertainment world, since people like Elton John have already turned him down flat.    For the longest time, he had only 16-year-old America's Got Talent contestant Jackie Evancho signed up to perform.  Now he's found a way to force the Rockettes to perform even though many of them have said they don't want to.  Their billionaire boss says that any of the full-time dancers will be fired if they refuse.

Finding out that it has been decided for us that Rockettes will be performing at the Presidential inauguration makes me feel embarrassed and disappointed. The women I work with are intelligent and are full of love and the decision of performing for a man that stands for everything we’re against is appalling. I am speaking for just myself but please know that after we found out this news, we have been performing with tears in our eyes and heavy hearts. We will not be forced!

[Mithlomwen]

You may have heard that Trump's been having a hard time finding people to perform at his inauguration. 

Okay, so now we know he's willing to settle for the B to D-list of the entertainment world, since people like Elton John have already turned him down flat.    For the longest time, he had only 16-year-old America's Got Talent contestant Jackie Evancho signed up to perform.  Now he's found a way to force the Rockettes to perform even though many of them have said they don't want to.  Their billionaire boss says that any of the full-time dancers will be fired if they refuse.

That's horrible. 

[Verasaille]

I hear this group might like to perform...(tongue in cheek)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLECBCD09F7DAFDA8C&v=JZIVmKOdrBk

[HairyHeretic]

This might be suitable

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

[Outlaw Fallen]

My heart is so heavy right now. This is a dark time and the future of our nation terrifies me to the core. As someone put it...

It’s not just Trump.
It’s Trump with a Republican House.
It’s Trump with a Republican Senate.
It’s Trump with anywhere from 1-3 Supreme Court nominees.
It’s Trump with all three branches of government on his side and no one to hold him back
That is what we’re facing.

I grabbed this because it was the first relevant post to my question, so this is in no way directed at Elysian Radiance.

This question is for everyone, actually. Elliquiy is certainly a very liberal society, and if you are a member here, it's something you have to be okay with. Hell, I think there a great many conservatives that could stand a membership here if only to learn some tolerance and broaden their horizons a bit.

However, with that liberal nature comes some things that I have seen that I either don't understand or outright don't agree with. Such is the nature of these sorts of things, right? For all that I disagree with, though, it is the right of the individual to believe and speak as they wish so long as it does not impede the basic rights of others. The only beliefs in this era that I outright cannot abide are those that simply believe that just because you do not think the way someone else does, your opinion/argument/belief is automatically and completely invalid. And sadly, these are the beliefs that are gaining momentum among certain groups that are fast becoming more and more influential.

But I am getting off track of where I was going with this, which is to say that... there has been a lot of hand-wringing and dark-times talk since Trump's election. And, most of the time, I certainly see where certain people might feel that way, especially concerning the way Trump conducted himself on his campaign and, (this is key, now) the way he was portrayed in the media leading up to the election. I see a lot of vilifying of Trump and Trump supporters, and I can only stand back and ask myself... were the people who felt the same way about Hillary not also justified in their fears and concerns?

Since as far back as the first Obama election, there was conduct that I would have certified as completely unbecoming of a political side that prides itself on being sensitive and open-minded. Where I'm going with this is... When Obama was first elected, there were many people who felt the same way about the future of the country in the hands of a candidate who had all but been outed as having a socialist agenda. There were republicans and libertarians who were afraid for the future of the country and the world their children would be raised in... an America that could turn socialist.

Bear in mind as I say all of this that I straddle the fence on many issues, and lean one way or the other on many others. I have some very conservative beliefs as much as I have some very liberal beliefs. I think many of us can agree that... in no way, shape, or form were either of the two candidates possibly the most two fit individuals in the country to become the leader of the free world... much less runner-ups. And that's before you look at tax returns and accusations of treason and all that mess. Not to mention the plethora of theories surrounding both sides...

So here is my big question, and I thank all who got this far for your patience. I know I took the long way to it. But there were people, when Obama was elected, who felt very much the same way many of you do. No one could say anything or speak out against it without being labeled as a racist or some other garbage. There were no support groups... no posts talking about 'these are dark times' and all this other stuff. Those that did not vote for Obama were simply told to deal with it. Why was it okay for Obama to win and to disregard the worries of those who were against him (worse, outright label them as this or that for their feelings)?

I ask this question, not because I want to start another argument, but because I want a legitimate, thought-out response that doesn't get boiled down to 'well, obviously, the conservatives are bad and the liberals are good.' Because, if we are honest, this is the way it was regarded compared to the reality now, where it isn't okay to be on the winning side, because you obviously stood for the axis of evil. And the feelings then where the same as they were now... just on the other side of the fence.

I am sympathetic to anyone who feels threatened by the turn of events in this nation. Believe me. And I will be the first to be there for anyone who feels that way. This is simply a question that has bugged me for a time because it is has presented such a glaring double standard, and the WORST part to me was... it came from people that I knew claimed to be better than that... that I honestly believed to be better than that. I suppose the political cloak has a way of altering things, though...

[Vekseid]

Aside from conspiracy theories - some of which are even repeated in this thread - in what ways do you feel Obama disregarded those who did not vote for him?

[Silk]

I grabbed this because it was the first relevant post to my question, so this is in no way directed at Elysian Radiance.

This question is for everyone, actually. Elliquiy is certainly a very liberal society, and if you are a member here, it's something you have to be okay with. Hell, I think there a great many conservatives that could stand a membership here if only to learn some tolerance and broaden their horizons a bit.

However, with that liberal nature comes some things that I have seen that I either don't understand or outright don't agree with. Such is the nature of these sorts of things, right? For all that I disagree with, though, it is the right of the individual to believe and speak as they wish so long as it does not impede the basic rights of others. The only beliefs in this era that I outright cannot abide are those that simply believe that just because you do not think the way someone else does, your opinion/argument/belief is automatically and completely invalid. And sadly, these are the beliefs that are gaining momentum among certain groups that are fast becoming more and more influential.

But I am getting off track of where I was going with this, which is to say that... there has been a lot of hand-wringing and dark-times talk since Trump's election. And, most of the time, I certainly see where certain people might feel that way, especially concerning the way Trump conducted himself on his campaign and, (this is key, now) the way he was portrayed in the media leading up to the election. I see a lot of vilifying of Trump and Trump supporters, and I can only stand back and ask myself... were the people who felt the same way about Hillary not also justified in their fears and concerns?

Since as far back as the first Obama election, there was conduct that I would have certified as completely unbecoming of a political side that prides itself on being sensitive and open-minded. Where I'm going with this is... When Obama was first elected, there were many people who felt the same way about the future of the country in the hands of a candidate who had all but been outed as having a socialist agenda. There were republicans and libertarians who were afraid for the future of the country and the world their children would be raised in... an America that could turn socialist.

Bear in mind as I say all of this that I straddle the fence on many issues, and lean one way or the other on many others. I have some very conservative beliefs as much as I have some very liberal beliefs. I think many of us can agree that... in no way, shape, or form were either of the two candidates possibly the most two fit individuals in the country to become the leader of the free world... much less runner-ups. And that's before you look at tax returns and accusations of treason and all that mess. Not to mention the plethora of theories surrounding both sides...

So here is my big question, and I thank all who got this far for your patience. I know I took the long way to it. But there were people, when Obama was elected, who felt very much the same way many of you do. No one could say anything or speak out against it without being labeled as a racist or some other garbage. There were no support groups... no posts talking about 'these are dark times' and all this other stuff. Those that did not vote for Obama were simply told to deal with it. Why was it okay for Obama to win and to disregard the worries of those who were against him (worse, outright label them as this or that for their feelings)?

I ask this question, not because I want to start another argument, but because I want a legitimate, thought-out response that doesn't get boiled down to 'well, obviously, the conservatives are bad and the liberals are good.' Because, if we are honest, this is the way it was regarded compared to the reality now, where it isn't okay to be on the winning side, because you obviously stood for the axis of evil. And the feelings then where the same as they were now... just on the other side of the fence.

I am sympathetic to anyone who feels threatened by the turn of events in this nation. Believe me. And I will be the first to be there for anyone who feels that way. This is simply a question that has bugged me for a time because it is has presented such a glaring double standard, and the WORST part to me was... it came from people that I knew claimed to be better than that... that I honestly believed to be better than that. I suppose the political cloak has a way of altering things, though...

The main thing I want to add to this is that, at least as an outsider view, your falling into the trap that Liberalism is intrinsically a left only aspect, it's perfectly possible and acceptable to be a conservative (largely center right leaning comparison) Liberalist. For the most part I account myself as largely in this bracket. If anything the far left is one of the most un-liberal stances one can take (actively opposes fundamental liberal foundations like intellectual discourse, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and free markets. same with the far right. Liberalism often finds itself very much tied in central alignment, since by foundation it's meant to be open to both sides and new ideas.

Which is also in part where your question comes in. It's very much about celebrity/identity politics in the US from what I can see from the outside. It doesn't matter if your right, doesn't matter if you have the passion, all that matters is that your popular, which is something Obama milked massively, with meeting delegates on skateboards, or rage kicking doors. He was with the "hip young crowd" who quite frankly has been brought up in a time where only the loud are heard. He certainly had people who opposed him, like every politician in existence, because that's just the nature of us or them which is especially prevalent in the two party system the US has going. But the difference between Trump and Obama are that the people who don't like Trump tend to be very loud and in your face, while those who didn't like Obama are more likely to be quiet and stew.

Only somewhat related

Not to say that the UK is all that much better, but even things like Brexit, as much as people would like to think "Zomg this was so unexpected" Well... It wasn't UKIP as a political party has been getting more and more votes for the better part of a decade, not enough to secure them that many seats granted but it was a very clear sign of changing views that the UK populace had in the run-up to Brexit, which the larger political parties continued to say "Nah it's not that big a deal, don't worry, your concerns are unwarranted" So instead of addressing these concerns in a proper manner, they disregarded them which in my mind played the largest part in Brexit winning. The same lessons could've been learnt before Trump, but once against it was disregarding concerns of a silent majority, while catering only to the loud minorities which ultimately lead to Trumps win, with the  loud minority now blowing a gasket after realizing that by demonizing the bulk of the voter base as they have done, doesn't really prompt them to support you on their issues.

[Outlaw Fallen]

Aside from conspiracy theories - some of which are even repeated in this thread - in what ways do you feel Obama disregarded those who did not vote for him?

Sorry, Veks,I should have been a little more specific. The question wasn't regarding the candidates, themselves, more the attitude of the followers. And Silk made a pretty accurate point. I think my post was a bit of a vent for my frustration over the whole ordeal.

[Vekseid]

It was the part you bolded.

Why was it okay for Obama to win and to disregard the worries of those who were against him (worse, outright label them as this or that for their feelings)?

Most legitimate concerns about Obama were bipartisan - in the sense that the media tended to brush those issues under the rug whether Fox, CNN, Viacom, Disney, or NBC. No one cared until they were forced to by the likes of Snowden.

I am not sure where Silk gets people not liking Obama being quiet about it. I remember effigies, monkey dances, mock lynchings, 'messages for Obama' that contained very specific threats on his life, complete with automatic weaponry, 'Barack the Magic Negro', the LaRouchie fascism claims (ironic as they are fascists themselves)...

I could go on for ages.

Hell, we had members here blame Obama for gun control laws he had nothing whatsoever to do with.

Meanwhile, the 'right' is aping Nazi propaganda in its anti-intellectualism. Not only that, this article is only the tip of the iceberg in the right's attempts at dehumanizing the 'left', 'liberals', and scientists - openly rejoicing in threatening their lives.

Some of these people that Breitbart wants dead are members here. They don't get paid nearly enough, and what they are doing, is striving to make the world a better place. At great personal cost and in the face of a new and terrifying sort of bigotry.

Bigotry not against a race, but bigotry against knowledge. Bigotry against wanting to make the world a better place.

Anti-intellectual movements that gain political dominance eventually start murdering people.

So yeah. People are worried.

They have every right to be.

[Outlaw Fallen]

No, I knew what you meant. *grumbles* Writes on a writing forum... poorly structures a simple question...

But yeah, I could have worded that sentence better to indicate I was speaking of followers, not Obama or Trump. My bad.

That aside, you are right in that disapproval of Obama certainly manifested in certain parts of the right. Extremist actions on either side are never justifiable, though. I can't speak for Silk, but in this sense, I was more speaking of the average person like you and I... not someone that is going to propagate hate speech and the like to make their points. That said, I don't know if one can say that an entire party would rejoice, much less openly, in threatening anyone's lives. Anti-intellectual movements actually murdering people might have been something to worry about in the past, but this is a free and forward thinking country now. And I know I, and many others would not stand for such things, regardless of who supported who in the election. I am certain it is safe to say that if it even came close to that sort of horror, we would already be immersed in civil war.

But that's just the way I see it. Thank you for the civil discourse.

[gaggedLouise]

What's the latest news about who will be playing at his inauguration? Heard about the Rockettes (hardly a major act, are they?) and the rift within the Mormon Tabernacle Choir - but are there any well-known pop, rock, jazz or soul acts that have committed to perform for him? Is he really going to have to bring in - Ted Nugent? 

[Valerian]

Other than the Rockettes and the MTC, there's only Jackie Evancho, a teenage opera singer from the TV show America's Got Talent.  If Nugent is interested, he isn't saying so yet as far as I can tell.

There will also be plenty of protesters performing, but that's unofficial.    And sadly, they're being denied permits to protest in the usual areas -- I suspect someone realized they would overwhelm the supporters if they were allowed access -- so they'll probably all be jammed onto the public sidewalks.  It's going to be a logistical nightmare no matter what, and should be an interesting test of Trump's nonexistent patience. 

[Oniya]

Rebecca Ferguson has been asked - and gave a conditional yes that I doubt Trump will take her up on.

There are also rumors of an anti-inaugural concert at some other venue, with the express purpose of driving down the TV ratings.

[gaggedLouise]

The anti-concert sounds like a good idea...Amusingly, the same thing happened in Sweden in 1975 when ABBA had made their first big break and won the Eurovision with Waterloo. By the rules of the contest, the country of the winning artist gets to host the next year - but at the time ABBA and their music were considered "not our kind of music" by a big part of the rock and folkies scene here, so the "alternative scene" organized their own festival and even got some serious assistance from the state tv network.

As for Ted Nugent, well...

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

[Oniya]

The anti-concert sounds like a good idea...Amusingly, the same thing happened in Sweden in 1975 when ABBA had made their first big break and won the Eurovision with Waterloo. By the rules of the contest, the country of the winning artist gets to host the next year - but at the time ABBA and their music were considered "not our kind of music" by a big part of the rock and folkies scene here, so the "alternative scene" organized their own festival and even got some serious assistance from the state tv network.

As for Ted Nugent, well...

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

I was thinking 'Stranglehold', myself...

[DominantPoet]

Personally, if that rumor of there being only 12 Rockettes being full time is true, I'd love to see every single one that is not obligated to do it refuse. See how that act works with only 12 of them and what that company does then. There's doing something that you don't want to do, then there's doing a job that flies in the face of everything you are as a human being. If anything, there should be a campaign online to raise money for those women, so they can all give that company the middle finger and the Rockettes can be no more.

That idiot who jumps into water and narrowly missed pretty much every time, finally shattering his ankles recently, has a money raising campaign online for pete's sake.

And of course he's (Trump) been wishy washy on the whole hacking thing, but apparently, after actually listening to intelligence, he now admits it might have been a possibility. It's like watching a stubborn child be worn down, dragged through the mud, kicking and screaming, being told again and again the reality of something and flat out dismissing it because they just want to be a brat, only to eventually sit down and huff a bunch while reluctantly admitting that, yes, fine, whatever, you were right the whole time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/donald-trump-wall-hack-russia.html?_r=0

The man has routinely been mocking his own country's intelligence agencies since this became blatantly obvious to them, and now he's admitting that it's at least a possibility. Every time I hear about Trump these days, I'm doing two things - laughing my ass off while raising my hands to my head and asking "What the eff?" aloud.

[Doomblade403xxx]

First of all I will say I voted for Trump....

It was not because he was my first choice to lead the Republican Party, nor because I want a wall, or any of that nonsense. I voted for him as a sign of protest against Hillary Clinton and all of her cronies. I walked into the polling booth knowing full well my side was going to lose and that Hillary come January 20th 2017 would be the first female president every liberal felt they were entitled too. When I woke up and began watching those electoral votes come in it was the usual shit we see every election. It was about 2300 my time when I realized that many in America feel the same way I do about the Clinton's and she could lose. By 0130 Trump was giving a victory speech.

The next day it was like the world lost it's mind completely. Protests and a bunch of sky is falling nonsense that ranged from women losing the right to vote, gays being re-educated, and Illegals being put into camps. None of these things have happened and most assuredly will not happen. Trump has already stated the supreme court ruling on gay marriage will stand. Immigration reform will be fair and well regulated. Alot of feminists turn their noses up at Kellyanne Conway but she broke the glass ceiling. She is the FIRST FEMALE CAMPAIGN MANAGER to ever win an election. To me that says women will be afforded the same opportunities as men on an equal playing field.

I'm not saying he's going to be the best president ever, nor am I saying he will be perfect. He's gonna make mistakes, there is going to be scandal like with every other president, and we are gonna have a few laughs and get mad at him sometimes. But wanting him to fail is like being a passenger on a plane and wanting it to crash.

[Verasaille]

I certainly do not want Trump to fail, but I do not see him as anything but a figurehead, as most presidents are. I voted for Hillary, and I will give my reasons. Not because she is a woman, as that is irrelavant. Not because she is a part of the established Democratic machine, because that is a given as well. She had plenty of support, and I do not think the ones who do not like her are really dissing her for any reason besides the fact she is Bill's wife and has some clout they don't like.

I do not consider myself a bleeding heart liberal, nor do I think the world will end if Republicans are in control. I am concerned about some things that did not hit the public eye until very recently.

The Russians are interferring in the election? I am sorry, but I am not sure what that means. Did they cause some of the ballots to be invalid? Did they influence some of the Electoral College members? I am confused. I was under the impression that we are not at war with Russia, neither are we fighting them on any significant level for control of some country. I know that there are a lot of things they don't tell us, for security reasons, but what the hell is going on?

Russia is not as powerful as it used to be. Communism is not the enemy itself, it is a way of life for a lot of people in the world. At it's core is a good way to insure all people are given equal opportunity to develop outside of class boundary. Socialism is not something to fear so much as it is something to explore with moderation. Any time there is a shift in power and government, the old ways are always going to have to give way to new ideas and implementation.

The world needs to unite in many ways to help people, there is still too much disease, poverty and war that plagues us. Instead of getting all paranoid and  pointing fingers at this politition or that one, it's time to look at what the world's population is doing to the planet. I think our biggest problems are going to be overpopulation and lack of clean water. It's time to unite and fight these problems instead of people.

Will Trump do that? Who knows? I do know we have a huge resource in the way of education and skills that is going to help the world, but only if we start thinking of ourselves as citizens of the planet and not just the country we live in.

[Silk]

The world needs to unite in many ways to help people, there is still too much disease, poverty and war that plagues us. Instead of getting all paranoid and  pointing fingers at this politition or that one, it's time to look at what the world's population is doing to the planet. I think our biggest problems are going to be overpopulation and lack of clean water. It's time to unite and fight these problems instead of people.

The issue with Globalization is that it needs everyone to be on board. Unfortunately were not in a Star Trek style universe where everyone just wants to play happy families. But it's the same idea of removing nukes, it's great if everyone does it, but if your in a knife fight, putting your knife down and saying "Ok I don't wanna fight you" is likely to result in you getting stabbed.

[Cassandra LeMay]

The issue with Globalization is that it needs everyone to be on board. Unfortunately were not in a Star Trek style universe where everyone just wants to play happy families. But it's the same idea of removing nukes, it's great if everyone does it, but if your in a knife fight, putting your knife down and saying "Ok I don't wanna fight you" is likely to result in you getting stabbed.

"Globalization" is a big word, and one so ill-defined sometimes that everyone can find something in it to dislike, or outright hate.

But "globalization" is something we all happily deal with each and every day, the moment we sign on to Elliquiy. I have met people here from all corners of Europe, Russia, Singapore, Indonesia, Australia, Brazil, the US, Canada, and the list goes on and on.

I get my news from Germany, the UK, Canada, the US, and about every other country I want.

Most of us deal with "globalization" day in, day out, in ways our parents might have thought the realm of science fiction. We just don't call that "globalization", but perhaps it is time we did.

[Verasaille]

Indeed we are dealing with globilization here and it is monitored. There will always be those who are against it. The people who only want their country/city/nationality/race/or gender given preferential treatment. We are human, and humans are not always nice or rational.

We can each of us do what we can to make things better. That is all we can do.