ok, so did Donald Trump win or lose in this election?

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Retaining control of the Senate is a huge win for Trump. He can continue appointing judges. The Supreme Court could easily be 7-2 by 2020; Ginsburg is on life support and Breyer is 81. And the lower Federal courts count too. He can continue to appoint Cabinet members without the Democrats obstructing them for months, especially the AG. And the Senate will block any impeachment proceedings.

Losing the House is definitely not a win, but it's not a huge loss either. Remember, the Democrats have literally no vision other than attacking Trump. If they spend all of their time trying to impeach him and look into his tax returns and such without success, all they will do is alienate the more moderate parts of their party. And if their only message is attacking Trump, and they fail to do that, then what purpose do they serve? On the contrary, now that the midterms are over and Sessions is out I think it's likely Trump goes harder in the paint with the FISA declassification and the Democrats are the ones that are hit with scandals - not to mention all of this voter fraud that is coming out.

I think at this point the Democrats' primary plan is to have Powell crash the stock market by raising interest rates to stop Trump 2020. But will it work? Somewhere in the 2000s the Democrats became the party of the rich. Most Trump voters probably don't have huge amounts of stock, and Trump may well succeed push the blame onto the Democratic House and the Fed. And crashing the American stock market will crash the Chinese stock market as well, and that will only be good for American manufacturing.

Verdict: I wouldn't call it a victory for Trump, but it's certainly not a loss either. The k-ification of American continues.

So you’re hoping for a stock market crash? The trump loyalty is ridiculous bud, America first means the country before Trump

hope this helps

[Raev]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So you’re hoping for a stock market crash? The trump loyalty is ridiculous bud, America first means the country before Trump

hope this helps

I am not hoping for a stock market crash. I own stocks!

But think of it this way: if everyone agrees that the widening inequality between the 1% and Main Street is one of America's biggest problems, and a stock market crash would significantly reduce the wealth of the 1% while barely touching Main Street Americans, might it not actually be a good thing?

All of the communists here like to pile on Trump for the Republican tax cuts which hit the wealthy and corporations, but the reality is that the Fed's asset bubbles during the Bush II/Obama presidencies are the real driver of inequality in America.

[misterbonkers]

Originally Posted by ScaringChildren [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Democrats in Broward County were court ordered to submit ballots by a certain time (because a judge found them guilty of election tampering in 2016).

They failed to do so.

They were also filmed stuffing ballots into various vehicles in a dimly lit alley.

And yet you continue to defend these people.

i'm feeling generous today, so i'll bite the bait for once and say [citation needed]

eagerly awaiting a link that isn't from a biased source, because all i can find is one where she destroyed preserved ballots early. and if you argue they were tampered (your words) with, where's the evidence? she wasn't found guilty of tampering, so please, enlighten me

[ScaringChildren]

Originally Posted by misterbonkers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i'm feeling generous today, so i'll bite the bait for once and say [citation needed]

eagerly awaiting a link that isn't from a biased source, because all i can find is one where she destroyed preserved ballots early. and if you argue they were tampered (your words) with, where's the evidence? she wasn't found guilty of tampering, so please, enlighten me

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/br...514-story.html

https://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...otts-campaign/

And the video:

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/mobil...nty/77-8309018

[misterbonkers]

Originally Posted by ScaringChildren [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/br...514-story.html

https://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...otts-campaign/

And the video:

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/mobil...nty/77-8309018

ctrl+f finds exactly 0 mentions of the word "tamper" or "tampering" on either link you posted (one of which i linked directly, which i found while googling your claims), and the video proves 0 tampering as well. you said she was guilty of tampering, and there's no mention of it. strange. really swirls the neapolitan

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But think of it this way: if everyone agrees that the widening inequality between the 1% and Main Street is one of America's biggest problems, and a stock market crash would significantly reduce the wealth of the 1% while barely touching Main Street Americans, might it not actually be a good thing?

The widening inequality is due overwhelmingly to:

1. Changes in workplace culture, including declining union membership and a spineless thankfulness for employers as "givers" of jobs, rather than a job being a bilateral agreement exchanging labor for capital.
2. Globalization replacing low-medium skill, medium-high wage white collar jobs with Indian mathematicians living in shitstained teepees.
3. Tax cuts and tolerance of tax-avoidance strategies for the ultra-wealthy.

The 1% were barely affected by the recession and recent stock market crashes. They increased their share of the aggregate wealth of the United States. This is because they don't just have all their money sitting around in stocks. They are owners of real revenue-generating assets. It doesn't matter if the valuation of your S&P funds have temporarily dropped by 13% if you own the New England Patriots who netted you $74 million last year, and rents at the thousands of apartments you own nationwide have skyrocketed because none of the proles can afford housing.

[JurisDictum]

Originally Posted by Nikkanu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Trump wasn't on the ballot.

This.

So the MSM tells you this is an election about Trump and you all just believe that? It really never was going to be anything but a backlash election. Whether Hilary won or Trump.

And this is why Trump winning has actually been great for progressives. Hillary would have set us back 20 years at least.

Now Trump gets the midterm and next election hate instead.

And make no mistake, the hate is coming. As some have noted, "the economy" predicts how the party in power will be viewed....this was a lot more accurate back in the days before Reagan and the neo-liberal order.

Ever since we started caring more about inflation than workers and employment, the MSM definition of how "the economy" is doing, has had very little impact on most Americans.

They all own stocks and have good jobs so they don't understand this. When they finally figure it out -- they just get defensive and act like its the other party's fault.

[ScaringChildren]

Originally Posted by misterbonkers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

ctrl+f finds exactly 0 mentions of the word "tamper" or "tampering" on either link you posted (one of which i linked directly, which i found while googling your claims), and the video proves 0 tampering as well. you said she was guilty of tampering, and there's no mention of it. strange. really swirls the neapolitan

And there's more...

She destroyed ballots. Is that not tampering?

There is so much misconduct here that it's essentially tampering with ballots.

[Raev]

Lune, I barely know where to start. As you read this post, please forget everything you 'learned' from your Marxist professors.

First, a company (and therefore stock in said company) is the definition of a 'real revenue generating asset' as most companies pay dividends, or buy back shares which increases the stock price and is functionally equivalent.

Second, when the Fed increases its balance sheet, it increases the amount of money in circulation. In a bull market, no one wants to have cash when they could own real assets that are appreciating. But every sale just transfers this 'hot potato' money from one owner to the next. This drives prices up for all assets, whether it's stocks, real estate, bonds (remember for a bond a higher price is a lower interest rate), artwork, you name it.

Third, are you not aware that the S&P has completely recovered, and is in fact at nearly twice its peak at the dot com boom? And **30 times** higher than it was at the start of the 1980s bull market? According to Gallup only 20% of the bottom quintile own stocks. Even people like me that do relatively well still earn most of our money from our labor. But the 1% see their wealth change directly in proportion to the value of real assets. It doesn't take a genius to see that pumping all of those assets by a factor of two with low interest rates 'because we need to stimulate the economy' will massively favor the ultra wealthy. And this, ultimately, is why Trump is president.

[Wonkie]

is today qmas eve?