It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
We have something similar in Switzerland. The majority of the people may vote for something but as long as the majority of Cantons (States) don't vote for it either, it will not happen. There are some exceptions where the majority vote of the people will be enough.
Just saying. Every system has its advantages and disadvantages.
Drawing parallels is an easy thing to do, you just have to look for them. Especially when comparing two incredibly controversial politicians. Bottom line, in knowing that one committed mass genocide and the other possessing a dumb, bigoted loudmouth, it becomes increasingly difficult to draw comparisons between the two.
And what about Tory? Are you comfortable with him?
Thats the legend that is DD..thanks pal !
I absolutely agree. In Germany, everyone is shocked by the result and hardly anyone can understand the extreme support for Trump in the oldest democracy in the world. In fact, only 4% of the German population would have voted for Trump....
The voter modelling information was probably completely off as well.
This reminds me very much of the failures that led to the Financial Crisis. Financial Institutions had Mathematics PhD's running complex scenario models of potential failure points in the financial system. They missed the subprime mortgage crisis and systemic spillover effects that led to the catastrophic collapse of the global financial system in 2008. So did the big three credit rating agencies. What do we pay these idiots for?
These scenario models are only as good as the assumptions that are built into them.
It reminds me of the discussion between M, Bond and Tanner in GE about analysts and whether the Goldeneye satellite actually existed.
Next time out, watch the IBD/TIPP and the USCA/LA Times polls. They have been right in the past and nailed it this time as well.
I'm doubtful he'd have particularly liked Clinton, considering that the only female authority figure in his books is Rosa Klebb. Furthermore, his cavalier side would hardly take to a stolid technocrat.
On the other hand, there's almost no way he'd have liked Trump. If there's one thing Fleming despised, it was vulgar American millionaires, as exemplified by Milton Krest (or the Spang twins). If that wasn't enough, the Russian connection would have enraged him (remember that the majority of villains in the books work for Russia). The idea of Russian espionage interfering with western elections would be anathema to an old cold warrior like him.
What Fleming might have thought about the election is not a matter of importance, but it does hint at the changes in class and politics that have occurred in the 52 years since his death.
Sanders & Trump represented change. Sanders represented better change. No Sanders? Then they (the poor & disenfranchised sick-of-the-game) picked the change they could. Yes, Hillary was a shitty status-quo candidate. And now we're rid of her. At the price of a POTUS who drags the office down to a gutter level, and a First Lady you can Google for nude pictures of. Still, this presents an opportunity. In four years we can try like Hell to reverse the mess TrumPence will no doubt entangle us all in. Unfortunately, any crappy Supreme Court picks will be with us for decades (not TOO many though, really crusty old white dudes with drinking problems & poor health records in general are the targets I expect).
@bondjames I appreciate your optimism here. I pray your opinions are more on target than my own.
Let's see how he conducts himself over the next two months. I think that as long as people keep an open mind, they will be pleasantly surprised.
My big concern is the Republicans in Congress and the Senate. They had a decent night on his coat tails, and are unlikely to be open to bipartisan agendas. Ryan was visibly excited today. It will be up to Trump to make the case that bipartisanship is necessary. He has already spoken with Schumer and Pelosi about an infrastructure bill. He has to get that one done.
On the foreign policy side, my big concern is the Iran Nuclear deal. I hope he doesn't scrap that, as he's threatened to do. It's not perfect and it lets Iran off the hook some years out, but for the time being it's the best that can be done. Trying to renegotiate it now will be folly, because Iran's help is critical to solving the Syrian fiasco and taking on ISIL. So Trump will have to stand up to Bibi.
Finally, some of these hacks on tv who are stoking the fires of division (Van Jones I'm talking about you) have to STFU. This election is done. Get to work on healing the divide.
First and foremost, I was shocked to learn while watching the returns that Clinton hadn't even bothered to visit Wisconsin. They took it for granted that the state would show up for her. What Trump lacked in organization on the ground in these states, he made up with by actually going to the states and talking to the people. The Democrats will no doubt want to try to pin this on an uninformed electorate or on whatever else that they may like, but the fact of the matter is that they blew it. They blew it by not reaching out enough to their own base and, going back even further, they blew it by having the heavy-hitters sit out the primaries so that Clinton could have a field mostly to herself before Sanders came from nowhere to give her a serious challenge. It was clear that the coronation was on from the get go, and Americans generally don't take well towards being told that they must support something that is inevitable like that.
I'll say this for Trump. I hope he succeeds. America right now cannot afford to waste the next four years, and hopefully Trump will look at himself in the mirror and realize some of the harm his comments and Tweets have caused since the beginning of this campaign. I sincerely hope that he can continue the tone that he set in his victory speech, which was actually the best he's sounded during the entire process (a small bar to clear, no doubt). He needs to do some serious outreach to a great number of minority constituencies to try to mend the fences that he bullrushed through during the primaries. If he were smart, he'd put his Obamacare repeal on the back burner and go right into his infrastructure rebuild, and begin that initiative in Flint and then work his way out from there.
Regardless, though, it's time for Trump to grow up and realize that he's now one of the most powerful men on the planet. Hopefully he takes that responsibility seriously and tries to actually do what he said he'd do in his speech, which is to be a president for ALL Americans, not just the Trump coalition that swept him into office.
Hope is all we have now.
Err, and maybe civil suits against Trump... I mean, he may be in serious trouble...
D'oh, what am I even thinking???? He's still RICH! :))
The thought of that jackass in the oval office was too insane to comprehend and here we are. The religious right who preach family values supported a horse's (arse) and rode him into the White House. A man who has three wives (two divorced and living) a man who cheated on wife 1 with wife 2 and wife 2 with wife 3. A racist, mysoginist, xenophobe and homophobe asshole.
Now the finger pointing: Clinton had that "machine" and she couldn't beat Donald Trump? Hell back in 2008 Obama, a relative newcomer to the scene left that machine bankrupt and shattered. It looked like the Japanese Task force at Midway after our bombers worked them over.
Now eight years later they lose a national election. All I learned from the Clinton machine is that it was arrogant, over confident and just a bunch of half assed loosers.
Trump has been labeled a "winner" while Clinton (at least in my eyes) will go down as the biggest looser.
She now resembles a lumbering St Bernard running from a scrappy terrier after getting its ass whumped.
Bernie was the true weapon that was sheathed.
Just like a dumass; bringing a Clinton to a Sanders fight. [-(
You're young @CASINOROYALE. You're forgiven. And since you likely attended a Texas public high school, it also means you have gone on to college with little grasp of U.S. History, certainly that which has occurred since WWII.
You seem to think that all of the problems of the world began just 8 years ago. Fact is, they didn't.
First of all, the borders have always been a sieve, and the problem worsened not when Obama took office or even when Bill Clinton took office. Nope. The President who first signed legislation that opened the doors to amnesty and further immigration was the Lord Ronald Reagan, champion of the Conservative cause, that mythic man of Liberty himself. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/01/30/in-1986-congress-tried-to-solve-immigration-why-didnt-it-work/
Furthermore, the fact that illegal immigrants (really, those who have been brought to the country since they were very young) get free college tuition is a state issue. Not a federal issue. So you should take that up with your governor and state legislature. Don't you think?
To continue on this point, you really contradict yourself here in a way that exposes your racism. At one point, you complain that America is no longer great because people don't want to come here anymore. Yet you also bemoan the fact that people are coming here--or, are you saying the "wrong" people? The ones with brown skin? You've really backed yourself into a corner with this.
As for healthcare, the ACA needed to be fixed. Most laws do, especially enormous pieces of legislation like the ACA. The fixes were simple, but as you may or may not know (hard to tell because of that Texas thing), the legislative branch is where laws are written. So any fixes to the ACA have to start there--and, well, that branch of government is controlled by Republicans who refused to help on that matter. So they let the ACA fall apart to score political points, while at the same time forcing you to suffer financially. How does it feel to be a pawn in the Republicans' "war of ideology" against Democrats? Well, I hate to tell you, it's only going to get worse. It might be harder to afford all of those things you mentioned if Trump and the Rs do away with minimum wage--which they might try to do. Trump keeps wavering back and forth on this issue. And your college tuition keeps rising because states are cutting their (required) funding for them. But I am sure you will somehow find a way to blame Democrats for the budget cuts to education.
And then there's this: at age 22, didn't you know that you qualify to be on your parents' insurance?
Trip, don't be like that. When I was 22 I was a stupid idiot too. It comes with the lack of mileage. =))
That is why I forgave him. ;)
In many ways he had the advantage going in because in the face of a Clinton presidency-which too many blindly saw as inevitable in face of the alternative (including myself)-he and his team had to really put in the extra effort to make an impression while the Clinton camp got far too comfortable. Not going to Wisconsin post-primary is just one of the big mistakes of the Clinton camp that really would have made the race closer or more "winnable" than it was last night.
At this point, who knows what's possible or impossible any more. Up is down, left is right, green is blue and fear is now a lifestyle for millions of Americans from this day forward who feel in danger of losing all the rights that make them a human being.
To newbies on the intellectual firing range?
We need a political buffet. THEN competition comes into play.
Precisely, the Unity Party with a minimum of 4 to 6 choices with the best qualifications and intentions possible.
Perhaps I am sensitive to losing a campaign, because my mother ran in a local race in this election as an independent candidate. She lost to the republican candidate. It's hard to lose a race because you sell yourself that you're going to be the best candidate and win. But there is always only one winner and that's life. I just hope that people can be civil (I hate sore winners just as much if not more than sore losers). This country needs unity.
So yes, to put it lightly, she's crestfallen, dejected and chronically melancholic this day, and will be for a long, long time, as will be any progressive and compassionate voices that found hope in her message.
I'm here in the U.S. and am still feeling a bit of the shock, surprise, and total shakeup that's accompanied the election result (I'm a moderate Democrat). I think Trump will be an unknown quantity in office--I think he has some good plans, but also obviously some very provocative ones--so it feels to me like we're about to enter uncharted territory. The handbrake is off. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about "the great American experiment in democracy", and it feels to me like we're embarking on another chapter of that. Experiments contain a great degree of the unknown. But Americans have been and still are a courageous people--not that we have much choice now, since the results are known. A few of my Facebook friends wondered, "How could this happen, Trump being elected, a man with no political experience?" But as Adlai Stevenson said, "In America, anybody can be president." Of course, he followed that up by saying "That's one of the risks you take." But with risks and the rolling of the dice ("Always a double six when you need it") can come rewards, and it might change aspects of how the federal government works for the better and might even--hopefully; that's the point--improve the lives of Americans and people in other countries, rather than (God forbid) damaging them. Of course, we'll be watching closely! I think there's no doubt that this upheaval in the U.S. is connected in some way to the European 'populist' movement and even the Arab Spring, a churning in the bellies of people who want change.